Welcome to NIMBY Night at the Council…

So, NIMBY #1, our two Councillors in Camberley, by Southwell Park Road, Dougal  and McClafferty , called this in because they can’t cope with an increase of a couple of children at a day care centre close to their home.

Noisy children? Shock and horror… No, no, no… Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY)… So these two Councillors are voting to build out 500 new flats within 100 metres from their homes. And do you think that any of those new residents will have any children? Apparently they don’t think so. Just exactly where are those children going to be taken care of?

And the result of the vote? Carried against the NIMBYs 11-4…

This matter was followed by NIMBY #2 The Dance Studio on Lightwater…  The proposal is for the shocking use of this dance studio for 1-to-1 tuition on nine Sunday mornings during the year. What? We can’t have this sort of nefarious dancing going on in Lightwater.  Classical ballet on Sunday morning? Highly disturbing that this is even considered… Why on earth would we want to inspire these children to be great dancers?  We can’t do that, we need to get them on back on their iPads instead, there just aren’t nearly enough socially deviant children…  This one was called in by His Highness former mayor Winterton.

And the result? Matter carried against the NIMBYs 8-7

The blame game, a tale of 2 Councils…

So what can we tell about the House of Fraser closure announcements?

Well, let’s look at how Epsom is handling it:

So, they are going to fight to keep the store open, they are going to do whatever it takes to keep the store open and save the jobs of their employees and residents.. And the response from Surrey Heath?

Blame the store and House of Fraser for not spending more money on upgrading it, as if that would have made any difference. The House of Fraser Managment has accurately assessed the willingness of the Council to assist them in their problem… The bizarre thing is that the “joint statement” makers, Whelan and Gibson are clueless as to why blaming the House of Fraser might not work. Further, they are applying this logic to the whole of the development in Camberley.

Epsom: fight to make it work. SurreyHeath: blame the management. What is wrong with this picture???

Why I voted as I did planning meeting 14.09.15

 

Development: 14/0925 Little Heath Nursery

  • Planners Recommendations: was grant, now refuse
  • Issues of Contention: character, drainage, need for this housing, most important issue is flood risks
  • How I voted: for refusal, refused by unanimous
  • Why: this application needs to be completely re-thought…

Development: 15/0175 Camberley Police Station

  • Planners Recommendations: grant, put in 35 houses
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to

Development: 15/0272 Orchard Cottage, Windlesham

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: drainage, greenbelt
  • How I voted: for approval, matter overturned by 10-4, with 1 abstention
  • Why: much needed facility, no real harm to the greenbelt

Development: 15/0433 4 Frimley Road

  • Planners Recommendations: grant
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development: 15/0455 80 Verran Road Camberley

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: they still have not sufficiently changed the plans
  • How I voted: for refusal, matter refused by 6-2
  • Why: no reason not to go with officer recommendation

Development: 15/0568 Former Cheswycks School

  • Planners Recommendations: Grant
  • Issues of Contention: ecological grounds
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Why I voted as I did planning meeting 27.05.15

 

Development: Krooner Park and land at Crabtree Park: applications 1-4
• Planners Recommendations: grant subject to conditions
• Issues of Contention: long history of contention
• How I voted: for, matter carried by 10-5
• Why: the main issues have been addressed and it is being sent to the Secretary of State for consideration

Development: Whitehill Farm, Kings Ride
• Planners Recommendations: grant subject to conditions
• Issues of Contention: several people objecting, but not on planning grounds, there is extant permission already for a 64 bedroom facility
• How I voted: for, matter carried by 10-4-1
• Why: this was hard to decide on as there was already an extant approval on a 63 bed facility, but the other one had approval for 1600 members which would have been a nightmare

Development: Frimley Park Hospital Car Park
• Planners Recommendations:
• Issues of Contention: only addition of 118 space deck
• How I voted: for, unanimous
• Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this, an informative has been added to compel a master plan addition for any future additions

Development: Land to the rear of 4.6, 8 Macdonald Road
• Planners Recommendations: refuse
• Issues of Contention: this was refused previously, and now the applicant has returned with no material change. T Dodds appearing on behalf of 28 residents supporting the refusal
• How I voted: for refusal, refusal carried by 14-1
• Why: there is no reason to allow this further

 

Why I voted as I did planning meeting 17.11.14

Development: 19 Queens Road Bisley

  • Planners Recommendations: approve based on agreements
  • Issues of Contention: entrance on Snowdrop Way is unacceptable, there were several residents speakers, most having to do with the access
  • How I voted: against, refused by 11-2
  • Why: in order to use the Queens Road access, the only thing necessary is a signature from the Secretary of State, which should not be an issue with the current endorsement of Michael Gove. So far, I have never seen an applicant be so disingenuous in making his case. His case entailed destroying the lives of all the people on Snowdrop way in Bisley, everyone saw his case for what it was…

Development Frimhurst Farm Development

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: access points
  • How I voted: against, carried 9-3
  • Why: no reason to turn this down

Development: Brick Makers Arms, Chertsey Road, Windlesham

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: retrospective
  • How I voted: for deferral, by11-1
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development Brook Green Waverley Close

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for refusal
  • Why: no reason to have this

Development: Alenia Marconi Electricity Plant

  • Planners Recommendations: approval
  • Issues of Contention: noise, time of use
  • How I voted: against, carried by 9-2
  • Why: I am concerned about the noise and long term issues

Development: Burwood House and Hotel in Camberley

  • Planners Recommendations: defer and delegate to planners
  • Issues of Contention: none, breach of CP5 for affordable housing
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development: Pembroke House Pembroke Broadway

  • Planners Recommendations: defer and delegate to planners
  • Issues of Contention: none now, was with us before…
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development: 45 Deepcut Bridge Road

  • Planners Recommendations: Grant
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development: 29-29a Portesbery Road

  • Planners Recommendations: grant
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development: 22 Worsley Road

  • Planners Recommendations: refuse
  • Issues of Contention: none
  • How I voted: for refusal
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this

Development the Sun Inn, 45 High Street Chobham

  • Planners Recommendations: grant
  • Issues of Contention: none, want them to use Heritage Lighting
  • How I voted: for, unanimous
  • Why: no reason not to, there was no compelling reason not to do this