The State of Planning

3 Replies

The plans for Brookwood Farm have been passed. Rightly or wrongly many residents feel abused by ‘the system’ and feel that the council has not performed their duties as well as they should have. This article is more of a collection of thoughts than a narrative of failings so any official reading through should not take overt offence but do feel free to leave comment.

Housing targets

We all know the government has set planning targets for each and every council in the land; these targets have to be met which requires new homes to be built. In the south east the demands are great – it’s a desireable place to live and housing costs are high but the landscape is pretty built up already. What green space there is is normally hard to get permission for building on and decent sized brownfield sites are hard to come by. People may disagree with the targets set both by government and borough councils but they are here to remain. There is a whole other argument as to the rationale behind the targets but that is for another time and place.

Where to build?

This is one of the key questions; the crux of the matter really. Building a huge number of homes piecemeal is not cost effective and will not make up the numbers adequately. To build in numbers you either build flats upwards or you build houses outwards and it’s the latter that really grabs the landscape. This is why whenever you see new proposals there are usually a number of flats thrown in – it sweetens the deal by making up numbers that the council need desperately.

So what of locations and where to build? Woking is simply short of them and that is why plans such as those for Brookwood are passed. There is no single place where a lot of houses can be built and not upset the residents, and I believe the residents understand, although maybe not agree with, that.

Soon to be up is Moor Lane and I guarantee a similar situation is occurring as we in Knaphill have experienced. A similar situation was shown on BBC’s ‘The Planners’ on 30th January – large swathes of land given over to developers.

Many people mention money in respect of these developments. It’s true that the councils will make money, or at least in the case of Brookwood Farm they will but not being an accountant I can’t comment on huge debt versus submitted plans.

Planning capability

Understanding of planning regulations and the local differences up and down the country is a thankless job. No-one loves a council planner but they deal with what they’re told to deal with and do so with what they’re told to use. Recently, Woking Borough Council were recruiting a proportionately large number of staff, to my mind something resembling the whole department in number. Whether this had any bearing on the Brookwood decision is anyone’s guess but it won’t have helped and the reasons for needing so many new planning office staff at once raised a few eyebrows.

The biggest wonder is exactly what the procedures the council follow actually state as the documents appear not to allow for any amount of community or residential response to be taken into account. WBCs housing strategy 2011-2016 has a couple of stated aims of creating a strong community spirit… and a clean, healthy and safe environment. The planning process abjectly fails to do this and seems to act against it.

How can the planning process help build community when the process itself does not engage with the community as a part of the plan? Speaking of my own experience of dealing with the Brookwood plans – from conception the developer had 3 meetings with the public (only 1 of 3 were widely publicised); at these there were no actual plans to discuss, only concepts. The staff were provided by the developer and had no understanding of the area, demographic or planning in general. In fact the most useful and knowledgable member there was the landscaper! From the point of plans being submitted (i.e. when the planning process kicked in) it was statements all the way from WBC; letters announcing plans had been receieved, amended and finally going to the committee. Documents found online did not appear to give the entire view and some key documents were witheld from the public prior to the committee meeting, ‘awaiting decomposition’. Although the last letter from WBC invited everyone to speak, in fact only ONE person is allowed to have their say (presumably on everyones behalf) for a maximum 3 minutes. Hardly enough time to cough and say hello. The point here is that there is no real intent at community engagement, only getting the plans through the process. Mentions of ‘community’ have been just that, mentions and nothing of substance.

With regard to Brookwood Farm, major concerns remain with regard to traffic, roads, school places and medical cover provision. Houses must be built, but the infrastructure supporting them must be an imperitive also and no-one can see where this has been met. Records from a few years ago stated the maximum number of houses supportable on the A322 was 200, not the 300 now passed by committee. A new school being built adds to the problems in several ways, firstly it doesn’t provide enough spaces for pupils but it also necessitated another entrance to the development and even more traffic movements. Figures stated were predicted. We went and did our own number checking by actually counting the traffic movements and the predicted numbers are way off.

Being practical

The point above is that a more practical approach is required. Using untested traffic models and saying ‘we must have the houses’ is not good enough. If communities are to be built, as the council purport to be adamant about, then effort is required and a little bit of legwork wouldn’t go amiss either. If a lot of people are practically shouting ‘there is a traffic problem!’ then the chances are that there is a traffic problem, it’s not a trick. Go and count some cars. Get cold, get hot and get stuck in the fumes but make damned sure your numbers are fact-based and not pie in the sky. If the number of cars don’t stack up then do something about it – reduce the number of dwellings or find another way of reducing traffic. Telling people to walk or get the bus is not one of these. The planners, the councillors and the council all know there are issues when large scale plans are up for debate but precious little is done to allay their fears.

300 new homes and a school are to be built, so what about medical cover? What’s it like at the moment? Over-burdened? Well perhaps some form of mitigation there would be in order then; make it a part of the plans (not a condition, an actual part of the plan).

What of other plans submitted? 15 High Street (with flats above) is a good one. Does a village require 3 supermarkets in close proximity? Like a hole in the head. Common sense (not part of the planning process) would suggest that 3 huge players (Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Co-Op) in the retailing game would put local traders out of business. It is not competition, it is the death of community. A look at the plans also show that deliveries can only happen if certain parking spaces are vacant which should, surely, have raised the question of ‘is this really the best idea?’. Incidentally refuse deliveries for that development will have to be made via the kerbside, another point for questioning the plans.

The Point

There is no benefit to examining in detail any plan. The point to be made here was that the planning process is just plain wrong, for starters there is no planning involved, it’s just going through the motions.

To councils up the land –  More community engagement would go a very long way with most people and be demonstrating just a bit of thought over what the plans are showing you. Thinking of the resultant activity and impacts will inevitably lead you to a better solution. Some might call this actual planning – deliberate thought over the impact of intended changes for the betterment of an area and community. Show that you value the area you have stewardship over and the people within it, and not that you are really just after the cash reward.

A simple request goes out to all of you planners – start to think about what you’re doing and stop ticking boxes.

Last thought

Last year the taxpayer footed the £50m bill for the West Coast Main Line franchise bid going pearshaped after Sir Richard Branson questioned it. He was in a unique position of wealth and influence to do so and by that factor alone unearthed what people have known for some time – the process was wrong. Where’s Branson when you need him?

Brookwood Farm considered 29th January

10 Replies

The plans for development at Brookwood Farm are going to be put in front of the Planning Committee on the 29th January. It is highly likely, almost certain in fact, that these will be pushed through despite community concerns over traffic and a range of other issues that have categorically been ignored or marginalised.

There is now a requirement imposed by the LEA for a new school; the new school is designed for 210 new places but must accommodate 240 making the school unsuitable before it’s built. The school has resulted in the requirement for secondary road access via Sparvell Road, a quiet road never designed to accommodate high volumes of traffic.

It should be noted that although the requirements placed on the residential (Cala Homes) development by the LEA for a new school will result in even higher volumes of traffic, the plans for both residential and school will be treated separately. In essence this means that WBC planning can ignore any traffic analysis for a new school on the site in their consideration of the residential plans. They will then be obliged to pass plans for the school irrespective of the traffic analysis and the absolute linkage between the two proposals. It’s a ridiculous situation and frankly the thought that they have been split is specifically for this reason; if considered together as they should be (being wholly dependent upon each other) the proposals would never be passed.

As many people including us have pointed out many times, the traffic on the A322 is already at or over capacity; the junction at Redding Way/Bagshot Road cannot sustain an increase of the volume being proposed, despite what an unproven and highly questionable traffic model might claim, and that’s just for the residential development. The School will add a further predicted 182 daily arrivals and 179 departures. Presumably some people stay in school overnight. Interestingly, it has been predicted that a development of 300 dwellings will produce approximately 2/3 of the amount of traffic of the school. Some arbitrary assumptions of people walking to the school has been made to reduce the scary figures but even so the reports have stated that with the school the junction will be operating significantly over theoretical capacity.

Moving traffic outlet to further up the A322 (from Sparvell Road) is a folly as they must turn left. That is of course unless SCC are overturned on their assessment of it being unsafe to turn right? Perhaps a new roundabout will be placed there but that is pure speculation and would add to traffic disruption in it’s own right. So, in order to turn right from this exit, traffic must turn left and then right into Chobham Road, another residential street with a primary school (Knaphill Lower) and impassable at peak times due to parking and other traffic issues. Cars will either perform U-turns near Birds Grove or head all the way up and turn right through the village centre or turn left back toward the A322. MADNESS!!

Will the plans be approved? Almost certainly.

Recent traffic report can be seen here.

Committee meeting minutes November 2012

Leave a reply

Agreed Minutes 14 November 2012 – Kings House Coffee Shop

Attendees: – John Butler (chairman), Ann Mason, Rachel Varney, Martin Dunham, Andy Hills Tony Polak, Tony Hayes-Allen, Phil Stubbs.

 

Apologies: – Debbie Harlow, Neville Hinks

 

  1. Minutes of the last meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 October 2012 were approved.

 

  1. Matters Arising

The majority of action points are covered by the agenda items and will be covered under their own heading.

 

John raised the issue of publishing minutes on the web; he suggested that at the start of each meeting members will be asked if they agree to the last set of minutes being published on the KRA web site. The Committee agreed and the minutes of October meeting will be published.

 

  1. Projects
    1. Christmas decorations

Andy reported that everything was now in place to mount the brackets on those shops that have agreed to participate. The brackets will go up on Sunday 25 November. Christmas trees have yet to be ordered but Ten Acres have said there should be no problem.

 

Martin offered a box of time switches.

 

3.2 Litter collection

Ann and Tony Polak reported that around 15 volunteers turned up last Saturday for a mornings litter collection. In addition to general litter all the leaves were cleared from the lawn in front of the old library ready for the armistice service. Following the mornings work the majority of volunteers retired to Kings House for coffee and cakes.

 

The committee thanked Ann and Tony for organising the event.

 

It was agreed that litter collection should become an annual event.

 

    1. Other projects

The committee discussed the idea of a community BBQ during the early summer. This could be held on the Redding Way playing fields. Another site could be in front of the old library. For this to proceed we require a project leader.

 

 

  1. Village meeting

John reported that the preferred date was 7 March and all local Councillors had indicated that they were willing to participate. Rev.R.Sherlock had also confirmed his availability.

 

Phil reported that Holy Trinity hall was not available and it was suggested that we approach the Knaphill school.

 

It was agreed that we should invite Kate Wilson, WBC Neighbourhood Officer, to the meeting.

 

It was suggested that members of the public should be asked to submit questions prior to the meeting so that they can be grouped into topics.

 

It was agreed that we would start the advertising after Christmas.

 

Action points: – Phil to contact Knaphill School to see if their hall is available.

Phil to invite Kate Wilson to the meeting.

John to contact Mal Foster

 

  1. Brookwood Farm

On the actual development nothing new to report. According to a newspaper report the parent company of Cala Homes was to be sold by auction. No one knew of the implications for the Brookwood Farm development but one hopes it removes any pressure on the WBC by Cala Homes to bring the project at the Planning Committee.

 

6. Planning Issues

Phil reported that there were no new planning applications that he felt required a referral to the committee.

 

7. Membership Secretary Report

Ann stated that she would hope to start the renewal letters soon, Rachel offered Ann her assistance.

 

This year we did not distribute receipts except to new members. Tony Hayes-Allen felt that receipts should be sent out as a matter of courtesy.

 

8. Chairman’s report

John stated that his items had been covered by earlier agenda items.

 

9. Treasurer’s report

John reminded the Committee that they were still looking for a new treasurer.

 

10. Secretary’s report

Phil had circulated his report prior to the meeting.

 

11. Editor’s report

Andy reported that the December edition of the newsletter was coming together and that he had increased the number of advertisements.

 

Given the absence of Neville we did not have an up to date of the list of volunteers who were prepared to distribute the newsletter.

 

It was agreed that we would pay someone to deliver to the streets not covered by volunteers.

 

Action point: – John to make contact with Neville.

 

12. KRA Constitution changes

As a follow on from last month’s debate John tabled the following draft amendment:

 

After a short debate the draft a vote was taken nine members voted for the amendment, one against and one abstention.

 

John will now tidy up the wording.

 

It was confirmed that once the Committee was happy with the wording it would be circulated to members and voted on at the next AGM. This timetable meant that if any Committee member intended to stand at the May County Council election he or she could not stand as a representative of the KRA.

 

13. Any other business

13.1 AGM

It was suggested that the AGM should be held on 24 April, Phil will make contact with various churches to see if a suitable hall was available.

 

In the past it has been the practice to share the AGM evening with either some entertainment or an outside speaker. Martin suggested that the group of singers who entertained members of the local British Legion. Another suggestion was to invite local historian to talk about the historic buildings at the bottom of Knaphill.

Action points: – Martin to contact the singers.

Phil to contact Ian Wakeford

 

13.2 Local schools

Phil asked if it was appropriate for the KRA to keep a watching brief on local schools. He raised this against a background where some failing schools are being turned into academies and on new sites the Government were putting pressure on Local Authorities to move away from LEA controlled schools.

 

Committee agreed.

 

13.3 Open session at the start of KRA committee meetings

John suggested that when we hold the Committee meeting at Kings House we invite members of the public to meet members of the Committee between 7.00 and 8.00 and discuss subject of interest to them. We could suggest some topics.

 

The Committee members felt that this was a good idea.

 

14. Date of next meetings

16th January2013. Meeting to be held at Garibaldi starting at 7.00pm, meeting followed by refreshments.

 

6th February 2013. Meeting to be held at Kings House Coffee shop. Open house 7.00pm to 8.00pm followed by Committee meeting.

 

13th March 2013. Meeting to be held at Garibaldi starting at 7.45pm

 

Meeting closed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bookwood bullet points

Leave a reply

 

BROOKWOOD FARM – KEY PLANNING POINTS

 

  • THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP BROOKWOOD FARM

Brookwood Farm has been agriculture land since the 1800’s but it is not, in a legal sense, part of the Green Belt. The site is one of the safeguarded housing sites as designated in the Local Plan of 1999 and Core Strategy. The safeguarded site lies between the Urban Areas and the Green Belt.

  • THE NUMBER OF DWELLINGS

Key to the whole development is the number of dwellings being planned for Brookwood Farm. The size and shape of land available for development is limited on the east by existing housing, Coresbrook Way, to the north by Bisley Common, west Sheets Heath and south the SANG, suitable alternative natural green space.

Cala Homes always maintained that the site could accommodate 297 new dwellings whilst using one road access via Redding Way. Senior representatives of WBC have stated that by converting the current T junction at Bagshot Road/Redding Way into a full crossroads the fourth arm is safe to take vehicles from 400 dwellings on Brookwood Farm.

In the Planning Officers Report for the extension of Sainsbury’s, Redding Way (PLAN/2011/0160) there is the following words:

The recent S278 Highway Act agreement with SCC for a fourth arm on the A322/Redding Way signal junction allows for scenarios of up to 400 dwellings and their associated traffic movements entering the road network from Brookwood Farm from this point.

The key words are scenarios of up to 400 dwellings. If you build 400 one bedroomed dwellings for senior citizens then the traffic flow will be different to that if you built 400 three and four bedroomed family dwellings. A S278 Highways Act Agreement is an agreement where a highway authority may, if they are satisfied it will be of benefit to the public, enter into an agreement with any person and that agreement between the County Highways Authority and Woking Borough Council (WBC) to construct the fourth arm at the Redding Way/Bagshot Road junction.

A far more important document is a Planning Office report dated 20 June 2006 as a response to a planning application from Woking Borough Council, below is an extract from that report.

PLAN/2006/0400 OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A 5.82 HECARE SITE, TO INCLUDE A MINIMUM 60% AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

This was an outline application, submitted by WBC was later withdrawn.  There are two key comments from Surrey’s Highways Authority:

SCC Highways raise the issue of the impact of likely traffic movements on the highways network. Their considerations are based on an assumed level of development at 30-50dph and indicate that the likely traffic flows from this level of development may have a significant impact. This would result in the requirement to upgrade parts of the highway outside of the site.

It was accepted that the proposed fourth junction arm could accommodate up to about 200 dwellings on the total Brookwood Farm site.

It is noted that the existing main access to the site is designed to accommodate up to 200 dwellings. However, if a greater number of dwellings were to be proposed at the Reserved Matters stage, then that issue could be adequately addressed at that stage. Developers would need to demonstrate that an access serving more than 200 dwellings (across the whole safeguarded site – not just this application site) could be secured. If this is not possible, then development would be limited to 200 dwellings (across the two sites). Similarly the acceptability (or otherwise) of using Sparvell Road as a formal access, as opposed to an emergency access, would then be able to be determined.

The above demonstrates that Cala and WBC’s plan to use a single access road at Redding Way for traffic associated with 309 dwellings was never going to be approved by the County’s Highways Authority.

  • INFRASTRUCTURE – ROADSighways Authority 

The National Planning Policy Framework and Woking’s Core Strategy state that good infrastructure is an integral part of good planning.

The planning by the developer and the local authorities to manage the impact of traffic going into and out of the proposed development site at Brookwood Farm is somewhere between poor and not existent.

Surrey County Council’s congestion strategy includes the following objectives:

  • Improve the reliability of journeys
  • Reduce delays for all transport modes on key routes and at congestion hot spots.
  • Improve the provisions of journey planning information for travel in Surrey.

Given the above strategic objectives how does the following statement made by Bellamy Roberts in the transport assessment report for Cala Homes stand.

9.23 Overall the traffic impact analysis shows that there will, inevitably be some additional delays and queuing on the signalised junctions near the site. However, the increases are small in the overall context of what is already a congested network.

Basically what Cala Homes are saying to residents of Knaphill is; sorry, if you travel along the Bagshot Road we know your journey to work is subject to queuing and delays and our new housing estate is going to add to your problems.

To mitigate against the increased pressure on the A322 the developer plans to introduce a new traffic management system that will involve linking the traffic lights at Redding Way, Connaught Road and Cemetery Pales with a queuing management system. These controls are planned to prevent queuing back from one junction to another.

How this type of queuing management system will work at a junction like Brookwood Crossroads, where all four roads carry heavy traffic loads throughout the peak travel hours, is unknown and untested.

The following points come from various replies we have received from Surrey’s Highway Authority.

  • The proposed traffic management system has not been proven.
  • SCC has reservations with Cala’s estimated traffic impacts on the A322/Redding Way and A322/A324/Cemetery Pales traffic light junctions.

Cala’s traffic modelling results showed a lot of additional traffic congestion, which did not well reflect their statements about the development traffic impact. Recently we received revised traffic modelling information and we have provided some immediate feedback, because the same problems seem to persist.

  • SCHOOLS

The second sentence in paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework is as follows: Where practical, particularly within large-scale developments, key facilities such as primary schools and local shops should be located within walking distance of most properties.

We have a proposal that meets part of the above recommendation. A new school is planned to be built for children in the age range 7 to 11. This means that for the majority of families on the new estate the nearest school for children between the ages 4 to 6 will be Knaphill Lower School. Knaphill Lower School is usually over-subscribed and children living in the centre of Knaphill are being allocated places elsewhere including Bisley.

The plan to create a two site primary school in Brookwood could mean that children of families living in the centre of Knaphill will be denied access to Knaphill Lower School.

The location of schools will lead to higher car use as first schools are outside the walking distance of 400m for many families already living in Knaphill and on large parts of the proposed new estate.

To try and hide the facts the addendum to the Transport Assessment by Bellamy Roberts believes that only an additional 5 cars will travel from Connaught Road turning left into Bagshot Road and then left into the new school during the morning rush hour.

  • TRAFFIC FLOW FIGURES

The following figures have been produced by Bellamy Roberts for Cala Homes.

The developer believes that traffic going to and from the new school will only impact on the morning peak hours. Morning peak being 0700 – 0900.

School related traffic going from Connaught Road to the new school on Brookwood Farm a total of 5 vehicles.

School related traffic coming out of Brookwood Farm truning right into Bagshot Road and then right into Connaught Road for the Lower School a total of 14 vehicles.

The estimated amount of extra traffic movements brought about by the splitting of Brookwood School during the morning peak is totally unrealistic.

  • OVERALL TRAFFIC FIGURES

Brookwood Crossroads (A322/A324 junction). This junction is already trying to operate at well about its design capacity and the developer believes that the development on Brookwood Farm will increase the traffic by 176 vehicles or 8% during the morning peak.

How can an increase of 8% of traffic at an already congested junction meet SCC’s congestion objectives?

The Redding Way junction will see morning peak traffic increase by around 14% but this figure has to be question as Cala Homes only expects the 312 dwellings to produce 93 vehicles leaving the Brookwood Farm development during the morning peak. To that 93 vehicles the developer has added 39 vehicle movements linked to the school traffic.  So if the plan was to retain the single access road at Redding Way the developer states that 132 vehicles would have expected to leave the whole development site during the morning peak. With the opening of Sparvell Road that figure is reduced to 78.

Cala’s own figures estimate an additional 209 vehicle movements on the stretch of the A322 that passes through Knaphill during the morning two hour peak travel period.

  • SPARVELL ROAD

In December Cala Homes and WBC accepted the need for a second vehicle access to Brookwood Farm. Using the proposed new school building as the reason for a second access road is a smoke screen.  Cala Homes got their traffic modelling wrong and under pressure from Surrey County Council had to rerun their figures.

It was stated earlier that back in 2006 it was recognised that a development of this size would require two vehicle access roads and back in 2006 Sparvell Road was identified as the second vehicle access road.

In 2006 Sparvell Road was identified as a second vehicle access road as and when Brookwood Farm was to be developed but no investment has been made to improve the road system around this area of Knaphill.

It is important to stress that traffic leaving Sparvell Road can only turn left and so the additional traffic will have an impact on Chobham Road and very little examination of this side of the infrastructure is included in the reports made available to members of the public.

The developer, Cala Homes, and Woking Borough Council have only been interested in the infrastructure that is directly connected to Brookwood Farm and not the impact this large development will have on the whole community.

The KRA have carried out their own traffic study at Sparvell Road and over two mornings between 07.25 and 08.30 between 69% and 79% of the traffic leaving Sparvell Road turned right into Chobham Road.

WBC and SCC are still developing their implementation programmes that are required to support the development plans included in the Core Strategy.

It is important that the draft discussion paper titled ‘Woking Borough Transport Strategy & Implementation Programme’ was made available to a select few in October 2012. This document should be made available to the public before any decisions are made on Brookwood Farm development.

  • THE ALTERNATIVE PLAN
  •  
  • All development is kept to the north of the Redding Way access road.
  • The development to include the new school and dwellings up to a maximum of 200.
  • Access from Sparvell Road into the development site is to be restricted to emergency vehicles.
  • Surrey County Council and the National Highways Agency seek to find a solution to the problems with the A322 between Knaphill and Cemetery Pales’

 

Committee meeting minutes October 2012

Leave a reply

Agreed Minutes

 

KRA Committee Meeting 24 October 2012 – Kings House Coffee Shop

Attendees: – John Butler (chairman), Ann Mason, Martin Dunham, Andy Hills Tony Polak, Neville Hinks, Tony Hayes-Allen, Phil Stubbs.

 

Apologies: – Debbie Harlow, Rachel Varney

 

  1. Minutes of the last meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 September 2012 were approved.

 

  1. Matters Arising

The majority of action points are covered by the agenda items and will be covered under their own heading.

 

  1. Projects
    1. Christmas decorations

Andy reported that there had been two blocks of shops where the shop keeper would like to have Christmas decorations but the proposal had been rejected by the owners of their properties. Thirteen properties have accepted the invitation to have a bracket placed outside their shop and 3 public houses are also on board.

 

The brackets have been purchased and plans will now be set in place to have the brackets fitted.

 

On finances, there was £1450 in the bank and the funding had received a grant of £1,100 from the County’s Community fund.

 

Tony Polak asked if we were going to have a special switching on event. Andy replied that the suggestion would be taken on board.

 

3.2 Litter collection

Ann and Tony Polak reported that everything had been arranged for volunteers to meet to tidy up the village on Saturday 10 November. Posters have been placed in shops and suitable notice boards and WBC had agreed to supply all the necessary equipment and refuge bags. It had been noticed that someone, we believe the police, had arranged for a litter collection by young people on 2 November but it was felt that this should not interfere with our plans, plenty of litter to go round.

 

John stated that teas and coffees would be made available to volunteers in the Kings House after the litter collection.

 

Action point: – Phil to inform the local press of the event.

  1. Village meeting

Following the discussion at our meeting on 26 September John had taken on board all the points made at the last meeting and had also spoken with Rev. Richard Sherlock. Richard had indicated to John that he was willing to act as chairman for such an event and had suggested that March would be a good month to hold the meeting.

 

The idea is that we invite a spokesperson’s for the Council, Councillors and the KRA who would answer questions. The suggestion is that questions are requested prior to the meeting so that Richard can group the questions into subject areas and pull them together and so engineer a constructive meeting.

 

It was suggested that we might like to invite the Police Commissioner.

 

It was agreed that we should try and book the church hall at Holy Trinity.

 

The possible dates being March 7th or 14th.

 

Action points: – Phil to make contact with Holy Trinity on the availability of the

Church hall.

John to make contact with local Councillors.

 

  1. Brookwood Farm

The official position is that the plans submitted by Cala Homes are still under consideration by the local planning authority (WBC). It is understood that there are two major issues that the Council are trying to resolve to make the development sustainable; primary school places and traffic congestion.

 

In June of this year SCC announced that they were looking for land on which to build a new school in the Knaphill/Brookwood area. The County’s Education Officer confirmed that neither Knaphill Lower School nor Knaphill School had sufficient room for any additional classrooms. Two demountable classrooms have been added to St. Johns School and the County are consulting local residents in Bisley about building two permanent classrooms at their school. The Bisley project is purely to provide school places for the children of troops if they are placed at Pirbright camp.

 

On roads and in particular the A322 & A324, the problem of congestion on these roads was raised at the October meeting of SCC’s Local Committee and the County’s Highways Authority were asked to report to the December meeting on any ideas and or plans that will improve the flow of traffic on the two roads especially where they meet at Brookwood Crossroads.

 

  1. Planning Issues

The secretary circulated a planning report prior to the meeting. Since that report was circulated news had come through that WBC had purchased the old Library at 20 High Street from SCC. WBC planned to build affordable apartments for elderly residents with a memorial garden at the front of the new building.

 

Phil had some concerns because the press release from WBC stated that they would use an already agreed outline plan for their proposed building. The agreed plan includes a plan for an underground car park with an access road out onto the High Street. Phil planned to seek clarification from the local Councillors.

 

  1. Membership update

Ann had received three new applications this month.

 

It was agreed that the membership fees should remain unchanged for 2013.

 

  1. Chairman’s report

John had nothing to add to the points he had made under the various agenda headings.

 

  1. Treasurer’s report

John reported that we were coming to the end of this financial year and that he would be drawing up the accounts at the end of the year.

 

  1. Secretary’s report

Phil reported that he and Paul Gray met with Jonathan Lord MP, Cllr. John Kingsbury, Douglas Spinks Deputy Chief Executive and Earnest Amoako Planning Policy Officer on 19 October. The meeting had been suggested by Mr Lord and Cllr. Kingsbury following our criticism of WBC’s interpretation of the new National Planning Policy Framework.

 

During the meeting we raised a number of issues including the Council’s handling of planning applications from Sainsbury’s for the extension of their store in Redding Way, the development of Clifton’s in the High Street and Brookwood Farm. On Sainsbury’s WBC acknowledged that they had received a formal complaint from the KRA and therefore would not answer any questions on that planning decision during this meeting. WBC also failed to respond to points raised about the plans agreed for the redevelopment of the old Clifton’s site. Finally the meeting turned to Brookwood Farm and WBC stated that the KRA were wrong in assuming that the Local Planning Authority were just going through the formalities of considering the plans as the Council had already given its go ahead to the development. Mr Spinks stated that LPA were examining a number of issues in connection with this planning application and no decisions had yet been made.

 

Phil reported that Tesco’s had confirmed that they were to take over of the lease of the proposed new store at 15 High Street. Tesco’s had informed local Councillors that they would be in contact with local residents in the near future.

 

Since June there had been significant changes to the landscape as one walks around the fields that separate Knaphill from Bisley, commonly known as the Priory fields even though the Priory do not own these fields. The most worrying fact was that the tenant had put down a temporary track across three fields and had started to dump waste material in the field. SCC had placed a temporary stop notice on dumping or removing any of the material until they had analysed the material. Phil hoped that Cllr. Saj Hussain could arrange a meeting with the tenant so that we can outline residents’ concerns and the tenant can outline his long term plans.

 

  1. Editors update

Andy reported that he had started work on the Christmas edition of the magazine and as usual the local churches would have two pages to give details of their Christmas services. John reported that all those who advertised in the last edition had paid.

 

There was still a need to cut the costs of the magazine and it was agreed to revert to the use of volunteers to distribute the newsletter. Neville gave details of the streets that were not covered and a number of the Committee members offered to cover some of those on the list.

 

It was agreed that the magazine would be delivered to The Garibaldi where the magazines would be divided into streets and Phil agreed to distribute to the volunteers. It is intended to publish the magazine on 3rd December.

 

Action points: – John to update the list of uncovered streets.

Neville to contact the volunteers and confirm that they are available to distribute the Christmas edition of the magazine.

 

  1. Police Forum

Tony Hays-Allen attended the local Police Forum last week and reported that the main message from the police was that they were being kept busy with various issues. Tony asked the police why the force had not commented on the application from the owners of the petrol station at Brookwood Crossroads for a 24 hour alcohol licence. The police stated in reply that there was no history of any pre-existing misbehaviour due to the opening times of the garage shop and therefore the police had no evidence to bring to the attention of the licencing authority.

 

A question was raised with regards to the inconsiderate parking by some in Chobham Road, especially in the vicinity of Holy Trinity and Knaphill Lower School. The police stated that as there were no road restrictions there was little action that they could take.

 

The police stated that they were looking into reported speeding problems in Knaphill.

 

  1. Any other business

There were no items of AOB.

 

  1. Date of next meetings

The next three scheduled meetings are as follows;

 

14 November 2012 – Meeting to be held at Kings House Coffee Shop at 7.45pm

 

16 January 2013 – Meeting to be held at the Garibaldi at 7.00 pm. The meeting to be followed by refreshments.

 

6 February 2013 – Venue to be decided.

 

Meeting closed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skippers wanted on the waterways of Woking

Leave a reply

One of Surrey’s most distinctive charity projects, the Swingbridge community boat programme (run by the Surrey Care Trust) is currently looking for individuals to train as skippers on their two canal boats.

The local independent charity, is seeking volunteers with experience of working with young people and the confidence to learn how to take responsibility for skippering boat trips and helping to train other novice volunteers. Prior experience of boating is helpful but not essential as volunteers will receive first class in-house training, accredited by the National Community Boats Association.SCT2 SCT1

Placed under the wing of some of Surrey’s most experienced helmsman, aspiring skippers will progress through the Community Crew and subsequent Boat Handling courses before they can undertake the Certificate in Community Boat Management which qualifies them to be a skipper. Training takes place on both of the Surrey Care Trust’s Swingbridge boats and once qualified, a skipper can volunteer on one or both of the respective boat programmes.

Aboard Swingbridge1, a 40ft wide-beam canal boat equipped with wheelchair access and all-weather canopy, skippers and their crew run trips and training for students from the Surrey Care Trust’s STEPS educational programmes, groups with physical or mental disabilities, schools, community groups, care homes and hospices.

Stephen, a skipper with Swingbridge1 since 2010, described how “providing a happy and uplifting experience for elderly and disadvantaged people” was a “highly rewarding” experience for the skipper and the rest of the crew.

Similarly Lew, one of the original members of the Swingbridge team with nearly ten years of experience as a skipper, was equally keen to emphasise how, “the traffic is not all one way.” While skippers and volunteer crew members give generously of their time to deliver new and valuable experiences to those less fortunate or physically able, they also benefit tremendously from their time on the Swingbridge boat. Lew explained,

“There is something about the calmness of a boat trip that brings out reminiscences (generally in older passengers) and some have very fascinating stories to tell. Crew can also get a tremendous buzz from someone (perhaps with learning difficulties) doing something that they previously thought was beyond their reach.”

“Providing a happy and uplifting experience for elderly and disadvantaged people is highly rewarding.”

The second of the Surrey Care Trust boats, Swingbridge2, is a bespoke work boat commissioned to carry out environmental and conservation tasks on the River Wey, River Thames and Basingstoke Canal. The work makes a valuable contribution to looking after the local environment while also enabling volunteers to gain new practical skills.

Both the River Wey and Basingstoke Canal in the Woking area benefit tremendously from the work carried out by the Swingbridge crew. In 2012 the team spent late spring and early summer restoring the waterways, locks, bridges and pathways near Bridge Barn, St John’s Lock, Woking Park and all along the course of the Basingstoke Canal. Swingbridge2 is due to return to the Basingstoke Canal later in May this year.

For those interested in getting involved with the Swingbridge programme or training to become a skipper more information can be found on the website: http://www.swingbridge.org.uk or by contacting the Volunteer Coordinator, Chris Padmore, on 01483 412763 or chris.padmore@surreycaretrust.org.uk.

Bike marking event in Byfleet

Leave a reply

bikePCSO Lesley Foster is inviting local residents to bring along their bicycles to a free marking session in Byfleet.

The event is taking place on Saturday 26 January 2013 between 12noon and 2pm at the Policing Post, St Marys Centre, Stream Close, Byfleet.

PCSO Lesley Foster said: “Cycle marking is a really simple way of protecting your property and if you have had a new bike for Christmas now is the time to think about proper security. Bikes are marked with a special pen which is invisible to the human eye but can be easily read under a UV light. The information written on the bike-frame makes it much easier to reunite bicycles with their proper owners if they are stolen.”

Many bicycle thefts can be prevented by taking a few basic precautions and bikers are reminded of a few safety tips by Surrey Police:

· Obtain a good bike lock (D locks or combination locks are best – ask for a recommendation at a bike shop)

· Lock your bike to something secure – a bike rack or lamp post

· Lock up removable parts (for example, wheels) or take them with you (for example, light fittings)

· If you store your bike in a shed or garage, make sure you keep it secure.

Police: newsletter 4/1/13

Leave a reply

Friday the 28th of December 2012 – Thursday the 3rd of January 2013

In Your Area

I have to report that in the last week the following crime/crimes occurred in or near to your area.

Crime Reference WK/12/7859 – Between the hours of 16:00 on Friday the 28th of December and 14:00 on Saturday the 29th of December 2012 a ground floor flat in ALEXANDRA GARDENS, KNAPHILL was subject to a BURGLARY.

During this time the offender/offenders gained entry to the unoccupied property by forcing open a window. Once in the property the offender/offenders then managed to steal electrical equipment.

The majority of burglaries that are committed occur at the rear of properties. For this reason it is important to deter access into your back gardens. Gates should be closed and locked at all times when not in direct use. Deter the scaling of gates and fences by adding trellis to the tops of them.

Please make sure all doors and windows are closed and locked when not in direct use. Please don’t think that because you are only popping out for a moment that it won’t happen to you!

Consider the installation of an intruder alarm in your home. Any alarm installed should ideally conform to standard BS EN 50131 and should be fitted by a company that is NSI (National Security Inspectorate) or SSAIB (Security Systems and Alarms Inspection Board) approved. Details of such companies can be found at http://www.nsi.org.uk or http://www.ssaib.co.uk

If you feel that you have witnessed any incident that may relate to the above crime/crimes please call 101 quoting the relevant crime number.

Can you please circulate the details of the crimes to the members of your watch if you think it will be of value. Remember that if you have elderly or vulnerable residents in your road this information may frighten them so be careful how you deliver this message.

Yours Sincerely

Mark Saunders

Crime Prevention Design Advisor

If you need to contact us in the meantime, you can reach us on

Email: 13180@surrey.pnn.police.uk
Tel: 101

Sainsburys – service yard disturbance

Leave a reply

On the 4th December a resident contacted one of the KRA members complaining about the noise coming from the service yard during the previous night. On investigation it was found that Sainsbury’s had erected a marquee within the service yard and were using it for additional storage. This meant that contrary to one of the conditions imposed by Woking Borough Council on Sainsbury’s opened the store. The condition states that between 7.00pm and 7.00am there should be no deliveries except by vehicles which are loaded and unloaded directly from the vehicle to the service bay building. A formal complaint was submitted to WBC. The issue was also taken up by Cllr Whitehand.

This is not the first time that Sainsbury’s have used a marquee in the service yard and last year they were informed that it required planning permission. Sainsbury’s did submit a planning application in January 2012 for the previous December and seeking permission to use a marquee during December 2012 and January 2013. This request was withdrawn prior to it going before the Planning Committee. Given the history you can understand our surprise when we were informed on 17th December that it was not a planning issue and that planning permission was not required.

At this point let me quote from the report the Planning Officer was going to submit to the Planning Committee In February 2012. ‘The proposed erection of a marquee for a temporary period between December 2012 and January 2013 would, by reason of the intensification of operations within the outdoor service yard and the lack of any acoustic insulation to the structure, result in an adverse impact on the amenity and peaceful enjoyment of neighbouring residential properties, contrary to policies BE1, BE4 and BE5 of the Local Plan 1999.’

Given the above the residents who live close to the service yard cannot understand why Sainsbury’s went ahead and erected the marquee given they had received such clear advice and more importantly why WBC felt unable to take any action, especially against the increased in the level of noise at night.

There is some good news, on 20th December Sainsbury’s voluntarily agreed not to undertake any activities in the marquee after 1 1.00pm or before 07.00am.

Also Sainsbury’s have now submitted new plans for the service yard to be fully enclosed. The Residents’ Association welcome this move and will be examining the details of the proposed enclosure.

P.Stubbs

Police: Neighbourhood Watch Up, Crime Down!

Leave a reply

Dear

 

Please find below your weekly Neighbourhood Watch Crime Bulletin.

 

Friday the 14th of December 2012 – Thursday the 20th of December 2012

 

I am pleased to report that there are no notable acquisitive crimes to report within your watch area.

 

Neighbourhood Watch Up, Crime Down!

 

I am pleased to report that during 2012 the number of roads in the borough of Woking that are covered by an active Neighbourhood Watch scheme has increased by 6%. We now have 333 schemes across the Woking area.

 

Coincidentally I also am pleased to report that in the last year, 21/12/2011 – 20/12/2012, there were 12% less crimes reported in the borough compared to the previous year, 21/12/2010 – 20/12/2011.

 

Although a lot of this is down to the continuing hard work of officers and staff at Surrey Police, and all of the staff at our partner agencies, I also personally think it’s down to everyone involved in Neighbourhood Watch. By keeping an eye out for one another, by reporting suspicious incidents that you witness and by sharing crime prevention advice you really are making a difference and reducing the opportunities for crime to occur. Thank you for your continuing dedication.

 

I am now away from the office until the 2nd of January 2013 to enjoy some festive rest with the family. I am however already looking forward to working with you all again next year in an attempt to further reduce the level of crime in the borough.

 

On behalf of everyone at Surrey Police I would like to wish you a Merry Christmas and a very happy, and crime free, New Year.

 

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Mark Saunders

Crime Prevention Design Advisor
If you need to contact us in the meantime, you can reach us on

Email: 13180@surrey.pnn.police.uk
Tel: 101