Extension permitted for 'ugly' Godalming High Street building
A development to add nine flats to a building described by residents as "ugly" has been approved.Waverley Borough Council granted planning permission to the property in Godalming High Street, which is currently home to a Fat Face shop, a gym and a pub.Opponents told the planning meeting on 7 May the homes would overlook neighbours and put pressure on local parking.But councillors voted in favour of the developer Queensbury Investments, which argued the plans will make "better use of this key town centre site".
The local authority will not issue town centre parking permits to flat residents to keep spaces free for visitors to Godalming, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.The developer will keep the existing commercial property and add two further storeys of flats, some of which will have shared roof terraces.The site is within Godalming Conservation Area and next to listed buildings.A representative of adjoining Great George Street residents told the meeting they understood the building is "really ugly" but this was not the best way to go about improvements.They said "it feels like there is massive, excessive development" and roof terraces will "be looking straight over the rooftops and into our gardens".Andy Jeffery, Godalming Town Council clerk, said the proposal would "disrupt the traditional character and roofline" of the town centre.The developer said the scheme would bring the 1960s-build more in line with the rest of the area, help meet new housing targets, and create new spend in Godalming.Councillor Carole Cockburn said the plans were "well thought through" and that "if you live in a town centre, you have should have different expectations because there are always going to be mixed uses"."We don't want to be building on our green fields," she added. "We don't want to build anywhere but we have to and I'm afraid it's got to be in our towns."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
‘Spiteful' boss cut pregnant accountant's hours after she told him she had morning sickness
A 'spiteful' boss cut his pregnant employee's work hours after she told him she had morning sickness, and then fired her when her maternity leave was due to start, a tribunal has heard. Sadia Shakil had worked as an accountant and bookkeeper at the property development firm Samsons in Bedford since October 2020, and became pregnant early the following year. But after Ms Shakil phoned her boss Mohammed Saleem on 30 March 2021 to inform him that she was experiencing morning sickness due to her pregnancy, he then proceeded to tell her in an email the following day that he was cutting her working hours. In the email seen by the tribunal, Mr Saleem wrote: 'Considering that I am unable to give you extra work as I am abroad and in view that you are feeling unwell during your pregnancy it would be best if you only come into work for 2 days per week.' The tribunal ruled that this was a 'fundamental' breach of Ms Shakil's employment contract, which caused her to experience 'stress, anxiety and panic' while questioning how she and her husband would be able to afford essential items for their baby now that their main source of income had been unilaterally reduced. During this period, Ms Shakil suffered sleepless nights and panic attacks while being 'plagued by worrisome thoughts', including 'doubts about whether she had done the right thing to have a baby at all when she was not financially stable'. After informing her boss that she needed to resign, Ms Shakil managed to secure a second full-time job in May, but she continued to work at Samsons in her spare time in the hope she would be able to resume her full-time role at the firm after her maternity leave. In the months that followed, Mr Saleem ignored multiple emails from Ms Shakil about her upcoming maternity leave, 'which caused her further stress and worry', at a time when she also suffered complications, being admitted to hospital on two occasions. By the end of September, blood tests had revealed a potentially serious condition which Ms Shakil was told put her baby at risk of still birth, resulting in the hospital booking her in to have her baby induced on 17 October. Two days after Ms Shakil's final email on 27 September, informing Mr Saleem that her leave would now commence on 1 October, he finally responded – referring to a letter she had not received 'putting her role at risk of redundancy '. Ms Shakil was dismissed with effect from 1 October 2021, when she began maternity leave, the tribunal noted. After her son was born on 18 October, the family were forced to move back in with Ms Shakil's parents 'due to the financial pressure that [her] loss of employment and lack of maternity pay had created'. Ms Shakil's subsequent claim to the Department for Work and Pensions for maternity allowance was then rejected on the grounds that her employer was responsible for paying it. 'The claimant's early weeks and months with her new baby were marred by the need to devote time to trying to resolve her financial predicament and bringing the employment tribunal proceedings,' the tribunal found. After an initial tribunal in Birmingham in April 2023, Ms Shakil was awarded £5,000 in damages for maternity discrimination and Samsons ordered to pay her for income lost while on reduced hours. In an email sent in June 2023 in which he asked Ms Shakil to provide her bank details so that he could pay her the sum awarded by the tribunal, Mr Saleem wrote 'I hope that you have a wonderful time utilising the monies gained from me', adding that the loss of money 'will make no difference to me'. A further appeal hearing in March 2025 found that Ms Shakil 'was horrified' by the email – which she described as 'disturbing and 'nasty' – and 'was shocked that Mr Saleem could be so spiteful to her'. Ms Shakil's appeal that the sum awarded to her had been too low was accepted, and the judge ordered Samsons to pay her a total of £31,860. Finding it to be a 'serious case of discrimination', the tribunal found: 'The discrimination took place at a time in the claimant's life which she had hoped and planned would be exciting and happy – the pregnancy, birth and early life of her first child. 'Instead, she suffered physical and emotional symptoms of anxiety and distress. These included sleepless nights, panic attacks, intrusive anxious thoughts and tearfulness. There was evidence that the claimant's confidence and self-esteem were damaged by the discrimination. 'These symptoms persisted from the time she was told that her hours had been cut to two days per week, until her baby was born. The symptoms did not stop then, however, because of the claimants' ongoing financial struggles.' It added: 'The effects of the discriminatory dismissal were ongoing at the time of the hearing, four years later, because the claimant is still worried that she might have a similar experience with her new employer if she decides to have another baby.'
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
More than 300 student flats planned on empty Glasgow site
A planning application has been submitted for the project, on Meadow Road in Thornwood, which would bring a "long-neglected site" into reuse. The development would aim to revitalise the area as well as "provide enhanced safety to the immediate public realm through passive surveillance of the street". Applicant Primer Glasgow Ltd also said the 338-unit purpose-built student accommodation would create a significant increase in economic activity. Documents reveal that during pre-application engagement with residents, one of the key feedback was to create a plan that "will be completed and not fail". More than 300 student flats planned on empty Glasgow site (Image: Sourced) READ NEXT: Plan to demolish listed building to make way for UK-first hotel concept Papers also state that there were several unsuccessful applications on the land, along with incomplete building attempts. Currently, its condition is described as "very poor". Developer Primus Property Group said the structure will be thoughtfully designed to support a modern lifestyle, offering students comfortable and practical living spaces. Along with the properties, rain gardens, cycle storage, trees, study booths, lounge seating and more amenities are planned. Glasgow City Council planning officials are evaluating the bid and a decision is expected by Thursday, October 2.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI
Campaigners have accused ministers of lying to parliament and the creative industries after the government signalled it would not force AI companies to disclose how they train their models. Ministers are holding firm in a standoff with the House of Lords, which has called for artists to be offered immediate copyright protection against artificial intelligence companies. Peers voted by 221 to 116 on Wednesday to insist on an amendment to the data bill that would force AI firms to be transparent about what copyrighted material they use to train their models. In an amendment tabled on Friday, the government dismissed the Lords' request and reiterated its promise to publish an economic impact assessment and technical reports on the future of AI and copyright regulation. Beeban Kidron, the cross-bench peer and film director who has campaigned on behalf of the industry, said during Wednesday's debate that she would 'accept anything that the Commons does' after this week. 'I will not stand in front of your Lordships again and press our case,' she said. But the News Media Association (NMA), which represents publishers including the Guardian, said peers could table further amendments to the data bill when it returns to the Lords next Wednesday. Industry figures said the government was acting in bad faith by not addressing the Lords' concerns and called for it to make further amendments of its own before MPs vote on it on Tuesday. Kidron said: 'The government has repeatedly taken all protections for UK copyrights holders out of the data bill. In doing so they have shafted the creative industries, and they have proved willing to decimate the UK's second biggest industrial sector. They have lied to parliament, and they are lying to the sector.' She said the government's action 'adds another sector to the growing number that have an unbridgeable gap of trust with the government'. Owen Meredith, chief executive of the NMA, said: 'the government's refusal to listen to the strong view of the Lords … risks undermining the legislative process. 'There is still time for the government to do the right thing, and take transparency powers in this bill. This would be a key step towards rebuilding trust with a £126bn industry.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion The government's approach to copyright has drawn the ire of major creative artists and organisations including Paul McCartney, Kate Bush and the National Theatre, with Elton John describing the situation as an 'existential issue' this week. Opponents of the plans have warned that even if the attempts to insert clauses into the data bill fail, the government could be challenged in the courts over the proposed changes. The consultation on copyright changes, which is due to produce its findings before the end of the year, contains four options: to let AI companies use copyrighted work without permission, alongside an option for artists to 'opt out' of the process; to leave the situation unchanged; to require AI companies to seek licences for using copyrighted work; and to allow AI firms to use copyrighted work with no opt-out for creative companies and individuals. Kyle has said the copyright-waiver-plus-opt-out scenario is no longer the government's preferred option, but Kidron's amendments have attempted to head off that option by effectively requiring tech companies to seek licensing deals for any content that they use to train their AI models.
