The Knaphillian

Recently bought for housing, does the former garden centre warrant saving?

It appears that the former Botany Barns garden centre site in Barrs Lane, Knaphill has received a temporary reprieve. Our very special thanks to Melissa Aspin, the vocalist of local rock band Frayed Not for providing the information. The site has recently been taken over by Surrey Poultry and along with the Mizens Miniature Railway next door, Knaphill has an attraction it can be proud of. 

What the hell is wrong with these councillors that they insist on ruining a village instead of listening to the residents?!

The Knaphillian at 01:54PM on Jan 06, 2009

A political row is brewing as local conservative MP sounds death-knell for Botany Barns site in Barrs Lane. Lib-Dem Councillor Olly Wells has reported on his party's website that Conservative Councillor for Knaphill, Melanie Whitehand has submitted a written representation in favour of a development in the Green Belt at Botany Barns, Barrs Lane to the Woking Borough Council Planning Committee. Once again this is clear evidence that politicians and big business have the final say when it comes to ripping away the very fabric that is Knaphill.

As I was elected by the residents of Knaphill, I was responding to the mood of the residents of Barrs Lane, who were generally approving of the development. Their agreement came about following a meeting I set up between these residents and the current owner and his architect so that the residents of Barrs Lane could voice their concerns on the development to the owner.  A meeting that  I felt should be organised as originally the developer had asked for my view on the developement and to which my response was that it is not my view that should be considered but those of local residents. My views were not and neither should they have been discussed at this meeting, I submitted the letter of approval on behalf of these residents. They were unable to register this view as not enough (10) letters of objection to the development had been received by the Council. Again, the opposition party are being very economical with the facts!

Loofah at 09:38AM on Jan 07, 2009

What the hell is wrong with these councillors that they insist on ruining a village instead of listening to the residents?!

Dear loofah,

can I requeast that you read my posting on the previous comment re. Botany Barns.

thanks

melanie Whitehand

The Knaphillian at 04:46PM on Nov 25, 2008

Recently bought for housing, does the former garden centre warrant saving?

My information is that site has not been purchased for housing and will not qualify for development as it is Green Belt.

Hence the recent accusation from Councillor Wells that I advocated building on the land despite it being Green Belt and to which he questioned the reasoning behind my recent letter of approval.

Incorrect facts!!!

see my response to the other postings.

thanks

I, and I'm sure the rest of the forum members, appreciate your taking the time to respond Councillor Whitehand.

My entry was based on information posted which in turn was based on information attained by a forum member; clearly the information was a tad one-sided as Olly Wells' was the only info available. Maybe you could make use of your own blog space and keep the residents up to date as to your activities in the same way Mr Wells does?

Again I appreciate your acting for the resident of Barrs Lane however, I would think it more appropriate to act in the interest of ALL Knaphill? Barrs Lane is clearly a contentious issue. As the application was for 6 DWELLINGS it is fairly clear that the land was in fact purchased for housing and now your letter of approval was sent so you can probably see where conclusions were made, erroneously or otherwise.

Again, thanks for taking the time to post in the forum.

Loofah at 06:21AM on Jan 08, 2009

I, and I'm sure the rest of the forum members, appreciate your taking the time to respond Councillor Whitehand.

My entry was based on information posted which in turn was based on information attained by a forum member; clearly the information was a tad one-sided as Olly Wells' was the only info available. Maybe you could make use of your own blog space and keep the residents up to date as to your activities in the same way Mr Wells does?

Again I appreciate your acting for the resident of Barrs Lane however, I would think it more appropriate to act in the interest of ALL Knaphill? Barrs Lane is clearly a contentious issue. As the application was for 6 DWELLINGS it is fairly clear that the land was in fact purchased for housing and now your letter of approval was sent so you can probably see where conclusions were made, erroneously or otherwise.

Again, thanks for taking the time to post in the forum.

Evening Loofah,

I do understand why  the comments were posted and I appreciate the opportunity to set the matter straight.

I have written to Councillor Olly Wells in an attempt to put right his interpretation of my action, which he has acknowledged, I have asked him to post a retraction on his blog site of this misinterpretation in the  hope that the correct version is available for all to read.

The planning application actually involved was for 2 extra properties to be built as the other 4 properties were from conversions to the existing barns. It was these two separate properties that caused the application to be refused. Mizens railway were keen to have the development as they are experiencing serious instances of theft and vandalism to their Railway site, they hoped that if the houses could be built it would secure the land and help reduce this unpleasant activity.

My intention then as always is to represent the residents of Knaphill, the Barrs Lane residents were comfortable with this planning application as were other bodies in Knaphill who contacted the Council stating such. I am comittted to retaining Green Belt land, my understanding from residents of Barrs lane was that they were of the mind it may have been Brownfield due to the previous use of agriculture/trade. They were surprised that it was classified as Green Belt. The meeting set up was advertied in the local press and I would happily have spoken to any resident about the issue. For or against. Green Belt land can be built on under certain conditions, one of which is when there is 'Community Benefit' hence the Council wishing to place the huge Leisure Centre on St. John's Lye under the 'Community Benefit 'category, I would add I spoke up against this development!! 

Mizens Railway being sited on Botany Barns land could be interpreted as a Community Benefit, and the developer was led to believe that his application may qualify under that condition. However, not the case!! The site is deemed Green Belt  and cannot be built on.

I do check in to the Knaphillian fairly regularly and have had problems posting on the site, however that problem has now been rectified, I did post comments and respond to queries previously.

May I take this opportunity of advertising my monthly surgery. It is held in Kings Coffee House from 6.30pm until 8pm. Last year it was on the last Tuesday of every month, I am re-scheduling the day of week , hoping to make it on a Wednesday, I will confirm a.s.a.p.

Thanks for your time. Regards

To improve security at the Mizzens site by allowing residential development
around it reminds me of the proposal to cut off someone's head to cure
their headache .....let us remove woodland as people could fly tip on it....oh,and why not close parks also, as youth could hang out there and cause trouble......lol   

captainkaraoke at 12:14PM on Jan 18, 2009

To improve security at the Mizzens site by allowing residential development
around it reminds me of the proposal to cut off someone's head to cure
their headache .....let us remove woodland as people could fly tip on it....oh,and why not close parks also, as youth could hang out there and cause trouble......lol   

Mizens has only one Z

There is only one Z in Mizens Railway.

Come on Captain - get a grip !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   cool

The chicken place only takes up a small part of the site.  What's happening with the rest of it?

Bad news... the planning application for Botany Barns'  redevelopment has been passed by Woking Borough Council. Having visited the Chicken Farm and Pentangle Aquaria at the weekend - the staff there are simply gutted! - We're not sure when the bulldozers are due, but this is a unique part of Knaphill that will be lost.

Doesn't  history, beautiful surroundings and a useful and integral part of the community count for anything anymore?

The Knaphillian at 11:02AM on Apr 20, 2009

Bad news... the planning application for Botany Barns'  redevelopment has been passed by Woking Borough Council. Having visited the Chicken Farm and Pentangle Aquaria at the weekend - the staff there are simply gutted! - We're not sure when the bulldozers are due, but this is a unique part of Knaphill that will be lost.

 

Doesn't  history, beautiful surroundings and a useful and integral part of the community count for anything anymore?

 

 

 

 

Discussions had taken place with Woking Borough Council Planners circa 2003. The proposal was to extend the Garden Centre and bring it into the 21st Century so that it may more effectively compete with the likes of Squires and Wyevale whilst at the same time protect the employment both in the retail side of the garden centre and aquatics shop as well as providing employment within the offices situated in the garden centre.

The plan put forward to them consolidated all the old buildings that were in use and all the old derelict or unsitely buildings that were on the site. To compete with some of the bigger groups it would have been necessary to build a better enclosed retail area. As part of the proposed changes most of the old buildings would have been retained and indeed would have been returned to something like their original build. It would also have given the opportunity to carry out much needed repairs and renovations. The plan also proposed to build a new glasshouse next to the existing one. This would have utilized an area that had in the past had a barn on it. I beleive that the original structure had been blown down in the gales of 1987. This glasshouse would have been a modern Venlo structure which was suited to modern growing methods. The old "house" would have been demolished and replaced with a single storey office structure which would then have met with current disabled legislation.

It was believed that the negotiations were going well until at the late on in the pre application discussions the planning officer involved decided that she would not support any formal application.

So far from a stated policy at that time of supporting small businesses that already existed in the green belt, it seemed that the planning dept were not going to assist. Again as a small business it was considered that it was not possible to run to the expense of planning fees appeal fees etc and pour money into repairs to buildings that were becoming unsuitable for their use at that time.

That is why Woking has lost yet another asset.

Evening,

I have just read up on this comment and I am curious to understand the statement re. small businesses and the lack of support from the Council planning dept. Could 'informed member' contact me  as I am concerned that the inference is that the planning department acted negatively towards this site.

Many Thanks