- 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
Wisley Airfield 2,000 Homes Appeal Turned Down – But It May Not Be The End Of The Saga
Published on: 13 Jun, 2018
Updated on: 23 Nov, 2018
The Secretary of State has turned down plans to build 2,000 homes on the site of the former Wisley airfield at Three Farm Meadow.
It comes as a blow to Cayman Island-based developers Wisley Property Investments Ltd. It had appealed after Guildford Borough Council had originally refused planning permission in 2016.
Wisley Property Investments Ltd’s plan for the development of the former Wisley airfield site as previously shown on its website.
As announced on Wednesday, June 13, 2018, Secretary of State James Brokenshire has upheld the council’s decision. He made his decision following a report by planning inspector Clive Hughes that followed a public hearing in 2017.
Harm to green belt land and a lack of suitable infrastructure were the key reasons for refusing the appeal.
The developer’s project manager Mike Murray, said: “We are obviously disappointed by the result of the public inquiry. It’s a complicated decision and we will need to consider it in some detail before announcing our next steps.
“However, it is worth noting that the decision on this application does not prejudice the allocation of the site in the draft Local Plan which is currently undergoing examination in public.”
The area at Wisley that had been earmarked for development. Picture from the Wisley Action group’s website.
The leader of Guildford Borough Council, Paul Spooner, said the council is very pleased with the decision, adding that it supports the council’s view that the application that was submitted and subsequently refused by the council’s planning committee was unacceptable.
He added: “Both the inspector at the original appeal and now the Secretary of State have agreed with the council that the applicant had not demonstrated that there were very special circumstances, outside the context of a Local Plan examination, to justify the grant of planning permission.”
However, he noted: “This decision relates solely to the appeal proposal and the council’s decision to refuse that specific planning application. The site remains part of a proposed allocation in our emerging Local Plan, which is currently subject to examination. Many of the issues raised in the decision letter are likely to be discussed at the public hearing sessions currently under way.
“The independent examination of our Local Plan is managed by the planning inspector and it is up to him to decide how to manage this discussion. The council remains of the view that including a new settlement at the former Wisley airfield forms part of the best strategy for delivering the housing needed in our borough.”
Helen Jefferies
Helen Jefferies, a committee member of the Wisley Action Group (WAG) that has been opposed to the plan said: “We are delighted to have received such a powerful refusal, on numerous grounds, from the Secretary of State – endorsing so many of the planning arguments presented by WAG and other campaigners during this protracted battle with Cayman Island investors.
“If Guildford’s Conservative councillors had taken the same stance, we would have had a Local Plan in place over a year ago.
“We now look forward to this controversial site being removed from the Local Plan and would like to thank all our many supporters for their help, encouragement and backing in bringing this somewhat protracted battle to a close.”
Share This Post
Responses to Wisley Airfield 2,000 Homes Appeal Turned Down – But It May Not Be The End Of The Saga
Leave a Comment Please see our comments policy. All comments are moderated and may take time to appear.
See: E-Bikes for Hire Arrive in Guildford
Jan Lofthouse
June 14, 2018 at 11:19 am
Save the green belt and rural historic surrey villages.
David Roberts
June 14, 2018 at 11:39 am
The Secretary of State’s decision is not as “complicated” as Mr Murray would have us think.
It is a very strong refusal, and the message to the developers is “Give up!”
I hope that all costs will be awarded against their apparently deep pockets.
As for Guildford Borough Council, they speak with forked tongue – applauding the rejection of the planning application while maintaining the site in the draft Local Plan so that the same developers can simply have another go.
Surely there should be limits to how much developers may harass the public and use up public resources in this way?
As the Local Plan inspector has noted, GBC have not supported the development of any proposed green belt site with evidence of special circumstances as required under the NPPF.
Given the great weight attached to this factor by his minister in the present case, I trust he will find the inclusion of these sites in the Local Plan deeply unsound.
Paul Robinson
June 14, 2018 at 7:13 pm
Doesn’t lack of infrastructure apply even more so to Dunsfold?
Wisley is by two modern major roads, while Dunsfold is by a two-lane 1940s standard road that struggles with 21st-century traffic levels.
Jules Cranwell
June 15, 2018 at 11:13 pm
What applies to Wisley should apply to Dunsfold, on the grounds of lack of infrastructure alone, as you say, even worse than Wisley.
Alan Robertson
June 15, 2018 at 4:02 pm
The current Council, its planning department and its managing director can not be trusted to stand up to aggressive property developers, for reasons which, at present, can only be surmised.
Hopefully, most of them [councilors] will lose their seats during the upcoming elections as they have failed miserably to serve their electorate.
The only way to improve the situation is to elect independent counciillors with integrity who lack self-interest and have the ability to resist temptation.
Colin Cross
June 16, 2018 at 12:35 am
Mr Robinson: You obviously live no-where near the A3 / M25 junction as you would have experienced first hand the traffic blight we locals all suffer from living beside the busiest and most accident prone junction on Britain’s strategic road network.
When I moved here in 1976 they had just opened the new A3 Ripley bypass to stop the endless traffic through the village. But now the B road through Ripley regularly acts as the A3 bypass due to the sheer weight of traffic on the A3 both north and south and the regularity of accidents in both directions.
Let’s not even begin to look at the air pollution and related issues.
Be careful what you wish for. The Wisley airfield site is totally unsustainable, just as the inspector so graphically states.
Paul Robinson
June 20, 2018 at 1:11 am
Colin, you misunderstand. I am not supporting the Wisley development but merely saying if the M25/A3 infrastructure is unsuitable than surely the A281 by Dunsfold is even more unsuitable to cater for at least another 2,500 car journeys every morning and evening.
Incidentally I moved to Burnt Common in 1967 when the B road through Ripley/Burnt Common was the A3.
We had a road traffic accident every week when the roundabout at Burnt Common was a crossroads across a dual carriageway.