Letter: A Perverse Decision By One Man – What Happened to ‘Localism’?

Published on: 30 Jan, 2018
Updated on: 30 Jan, 2018

From Graham Richings

I am sure that many Guildford residents feel the same way as I do about the planning inspector’s decision to reverse the refusal by Guildford Borough Council of Solum’s application for permission to re develop the railway station.

It seems completely wrong that one man can make a decision of this nature when a locally elected council have unanimously made a decision not to allow this re development. Whatever happened to “localism”?

Paul Spooner, the local council leader, is quite right to register his disapproval of this decision. This redevelopment will destroy the appearance of this part of Guildford and ruin the views on the approaches to Guildford from some of the approach roads, not to mention the views that many residents living on the higher ground around Guildford have from their homes. For instance the view from the junction of Elmside and Hedgeway [in Onslow Village] views of the town will be dominated by this carbuncle.

This is a perverse decision by one man. I would urge others to do as I have done and write to the prime minister. Central government should be well aware of the consequences of this type of planning decision by their own inspectorate. Local people should be in charge of such a large development in their town.

Having said all of that, it is somewhat hypocritical of Paul Spooner to take the attitude he has whilst apparently supporting the proposed development on The Hog’s Back at Blackwell Farm.

If the Local Plan is passed by the Planning Inspectorate at the forthcoming public inquiry this will allow a small town at least twice the size of Onslow Village to be built this end of The Hog’s Back, bringing with it greater traffic chaos and infrastructure problems. Like the Solum plan this will destroy much of what is good and attractive about Guildford and its surrounding.

Responses to Letter: A Perverse Decision By One Man – What Happened to ‘Localism’?

Richard Davies Reply

January 30, 2018 at 5:08 pm

“It seems completely wrong that one man can make a decision of this nature when a locally elected council have unanimously made a decision not to allow this redevelopment. Whatever happened to ‘localism’?”

I couldn’t agree more, as I’m sure tens of thousands of others do.

The decision is beyond “perverse”.

This development can be stopped, but that’ll require a concerted, persistent and united effort from all who oppose it; ie the council, local political parties, local groups and individuals.

The realms of fantasy, or not?
Sue Wyeth-Price Reply

January 30, 2018 at 8:12 pm

I agree, beyond perverse!

This week the planning inspectorate also passed the application for Land in the Street, Tongham, despite it being refused by the councillors. The planning inspector, in her decision notice, has acknowledged the problems with the traffic in The Street, and with the narrow footpaths and parking. However, she refused to add a condition ensuring the footpaths would be widened to ensure pedestrian safety….. on the grounds that the roads are too narrow. This prioritises motorises traffic above more sustainable methods of transport.

Perhaps perversity is the nature of the beast?
Peta Malthouse Reply

February 2, 2018 at 11:59 am

I am afraid that Sajid Javid has already announced this morning (Jan 31) that the government will not be friends of Nimbyism.

It seems to me that our Local Plan is government led. Theresa May has been in China encouraging university links and appears in that regard to have followed in Paul Spooner’s footsteps what with the town linking and all.

The only infrastructure spending approved is a new rail station at Park Barn and an improved junction at A31/A3. Our very own Anne Milton said that the university and Research Park are part of the ‘tiger’ economy in the South East which needs to expand (said at a meeting of the Guildford Residents Association in about 2013/4 at the beginning of the Local Plan process).

In their eyes, we are all Nimbys.
Jules Cranwell Reply

February 4, 2018 at 10:44 am

Don’t be fooled by the refusal of permissions by the councillors on the Planning Committee. They take this public position largely to hold on to votes, so they can claim, “It wasn’t me, a big boy did it and ran away.”

In the Wisley case, no notes of council/developer “consultations” were kept.