- Stay Connected
Socialize
Abraham Lincoln
If given the truth, the people can be depended upon to meet any national crisis...
Guildford news...
for Guildford people, brought to you by Guildford reporters - Guildford's own news service
Letter: Developer Continues to Insist Its Ill-conceived Proposals Carry Local Support
Published on: 10 Sep, 2023
Updated on: 10 Sep, 2023
From: Tony Edwards
Wisley Action Group campaigner
See also: County Council Response a ‘Travesty of the Highest Order’ says Outgoing Councillor
Senior executives at Taylor Wimpey should, perhaps, check their private healthcare policies for entitlement to some much-needed checks on their vision, hearing and comprehension as they’ve obviously failed to notice the massive outpouring of opposition to their “New Town” proposals from Surrey residents and the unanimous, 100 per cent rejection of the plans from Guildford Borough Council’s Planning Committee.
Like an obstinate child with its eyes firmly shut, hands covering its ears, and “la la la’ing” away all sounds and signs of logic, the company continues to insist that its irrational and ill-conceived proposals carry local support – explaining only last week that: “We have held several public consultations which have informed residents of our proposals.”
They have, indeed, informed us of their proposals and they have been roundly rejected. They will, by now, know for sure, therefore, that the overwhelming weight of opinion is against them.
And the sugar-coated promise of “affordable housing” is no more than another denial of reality when the company is unable to provide any details of the “affordable” prices or, indeed, any affordable homes built by them anywhere in Surrey during the past two years.
Share This Post
Responses to Letter: Developer Continues to Insist Its Ill-conceived Proposals Carry Local Support
Leave a Comment Please see our comments policy. All comments are moderated and may take time to appear.
Barnaby Lawrence
September 11, 2023 at 12:01 pm
Quite right.
What is more Taylor Wimpey pay the same for materials across the country.
The average price of a home in the North East is £177,000 on which, if a new build, developers will make a profit.
The average cost of a home in Surrey is £627,000. The margin per home is £450,000, for the 1,750 proposed dwellings that equates to £787 million.
No wonder they are trying to ignore opinion and steamroller through their plans.
Colin Cross
September 11, 2023 at 5:30 pm
In 2014 a “developer” put forward an application for a similar housing usage for the
FWA site, it failed, they appealed, the inspector failed it again, citing manifold reasons.
We now see history repeating itself but nothing has fundamentally changed and all the old shortcomings are still abundantly clear for any right-minded person to see.
The area concerned was always green belt until the Tories dropped that safeguard in one of their final desperate acts prior to being voted out of office.
Without that safeguard TW thought it was worth a gamble and paid a tidy sum in the hope that they could manipulate the public round to the view that it was not such a bad idea after all. That has singularly failed and the vast majority of local people still
vehemently oppose such a hideous overdevelopment as being wholly unacceptable.
In my time as The Horsleys SCC Councillor I was made aware that the one thing ALL
VOTERS, be they from Ripley, Ockham, The Horsleys, Clandons, Wisley or Effingham,
agreed on was that the FWA idea was a thoroughly bad one and must NEVER happen.
It’s the wrong proposal in the wrong place and for all the wrong reasons.
TW must be shown the door and then that door must be nailed shut one last time.
I sincerely hope that the appointed Inspector is up to this challenge.
Colin Cross
Hugh Grear
September 13, 2023 at 3:34 pm
Wow. Wrong proposal, wrong time, wrong place! Just wrong-headed from beginning to end. They are taking corporate deafness and blindness to a whole new level.
Hugh Grear is a former Rector of Ockham
Jules Cranwell
September 14, 2023 at 8:54 am
I have challenged Taylor Wimpey on several occasions to reveal their so called “affordable” housing prices, which must have featured in their business plan for the site.
I challenge them again to tell us what prices they aim to achieve.
If they follow the example of Thakeham in West Horsley, an “affordable” home is 415,000 for a small one bedroom flat. Can a key worker afford that?