Stand by in Farnham with a defibrillator for Councillor Carole Cockburn!



Councillors have just voted to consult the public on amendments to the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan, including sites for an additional 450 homes in the town!

We understand that the Farnham Town Clerk Iain Lynch, is reaching for the defibrillator for Councillor Cockburn who masterminded the Neighbourhood Plan!!
wwbreakingnews.jpgAnd here’s what met councillors as they left the Town Council Meeting!

Does this signal a new era for Farnham Town? Or, is it a new Farnham Dome?Screen Shot 2018-08-16 at 22.26.37.png

Waverley subsidises Hi-Tech Councillors?


Waverley recently published a list of Councillors expenses, which went to No.1 on our summer holiday reading list, knocking off the 2016-2017 from the top spot.
Waverley Councillor expenses 2017-2018

Waverley residents might like to ask Councillors what is the £246 they are paid as an Internet Charge? Don’t most Councillors have the internet?! Is it a little bung for being on the Executive? What could they all have in common?

It was especially odd to see such hi-tech councillors drawing this cash, councillors who in their day jobs might rely on a bit of broadband for their business.


Step forward Cllr Tom Martin (A Change and Configuration Manager at Wordline Global in Guildford) and Cllr Stefan Reynolds – local publisher of Vantage Point magazine. Certainly, busy people whose work relies on an internet connection – we are so pleased that they have something in common – the need to take Waverley coin to get them online. Bless their cotton socks!!


Guess what? ‘Your Waverley’ intends to get smarter in future about the way it extracts money from developers! You read it here first … remember!


Screen Shot 2018-08-13 at 10.03.02

Despite the usual protestations of “we are between a rock and a hard place,” and “what a shame we cannot even provide a few affordable homes” and even a sour snipe at Cranleigh developers from Councillor Mary Forysewski that “at least these Haslemere one and two bedroom properties will be  cheaper than those being built  in Cranleigh where a small proportion of affordable homes were being built by developers of £1.2m and £1.7m properties –  “for heaven knows how much profit.”

So because these poor Haslemere developers can only manage to scrape together a profit of between 15% and 25% – according to another band of EXPERTS,  employed at enormous expense by ‘Your Waverley’ there will be no “affordable homes,” insufficient car parking spaces, little or no disabled spaces, insufficient electric charging points and nowhere for anyone to park a mobility scooter to take them to the nearby Haslemere station! And, possibly only food bins, because


Councillors were given the financial information on PINK papers, for the uninitiated, information that is not for public consumption, because we might come to a different conclusion? Suffice to say The Developers  convinced the planners that:
“in culmination with costs to remediate the contamination from the land, the planning infrastructure contributions, abnormal costs (such as the provision of a new substation and contiguous piling and acoustic fence provision along the railway boundary) and the quality build costs, the proposal would be unable to viably support on-site affordable housing provision or a commuted sum.”

But, they didn’t convince councillors including Gerry Hyman; John Ward; Liz Townsend; and even chairman David Else and certainly not Godalming’s new boy Paul Follows: Who argued the application should be refused until the developer could come up with at least a few affordable homes!

The Council appointed independent viability consultants to analyse the developer’s figures, unfortunately,  details are exempt and for Councillors Eyes Only!

What does it cost to cover the Councils’s infrastructure asks? A mere £200K on a £11M project!

Transport Contribution: (SCC) £41,640; SPA Contribution for a National Trust Warden in Hindhead! £40,000; Education: (Early Years) (SCC) £30,287;Education:(Primary again SCC) £42,969; Play Areas (WBC) £25,312.50; Playing Pitches (WBC)£27,562.50; Recycling (WBC) £99.50 for food bins: 

Total £207,870.50.

The good news is: Councillors have asked officers that in future they would like to be a great deal smarter – yes SMARTER, about the 106 contributions provided by developers towards infrastructure. SMARTER! We nearly fell out of our web. After consenting thousands of homes across the borough they decide that now, while the stable door is closing they want to be smarter?


Because soon it is to be replaced by something called CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) which is three times higher, which if applied to most developments in the borough will almost certainly result in NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION ON SITES IN FUTURE!!


Thank you fly tippers for dumping on Haslemere and thank you Surrey County Council for encouraging it?


The closure and part closure of many of Surrey’s recycling facilities combined with the increased charges for disposing of rubble brings about scenes like this captured below by a Haslemere resident.

Other people detritus is now blocking an access road to properties and will probably be a cost to the long-suffering ratepayers, who will, in the end, be responsible for its clearance.

If anyone recognises the wallpaper or anything else in this collection of refuse and rubble, please contact the Haslemere Community Board. We will attempt to be charitable and say someone may have paid to have this builder’s rubble removed but instead, to save time and money it has been dumped blocking accesses to properties. 

At last night’s Waverley Joint Planning Committee councillors and planning officers discussed clearing up an untidy site by granting planning permission to build 45 apartments in two blocks, at 5-21 Wey Hill, Haslemere, saying it would dramatically improve the entrance to the town! (The subject of another post to follow).

Imagine meeting this lot when you drive home!!

Screen Shot 2018-08-14 at 09.22.13.png

Oh! What a night – at Waverley planning “experts” roundtable​ tonight?


As one of our followers said to us recently:

Screen Shot 2018-08-13 at 09.47.15.png

So tonight another planning officer bites the dust – and he’s only been in the job a month!

You probably saw Richard Fox at ‘Your Waverley’s’ last Joint Planning Committee when the poor devil was asked questions that he was simply unequipped to answer about the Hewitts development in Cranleigh. Q. Did the four storey homes have dormer windows or not?  He said NO!

Suffice to say, they do, so councillors were misled, and as a consequence of an enjoyable early lunch!!! followed by a difficult interview – up goes the advert for another planning officer? And up goes the planning application again tonight – to be revisited? And… OUT GOES RICHARD! You can view it here: Thank heaven there are a few councillors left at Waverley that care about – the new town they have dubbed – ‘Poor Old Cranleigh.”

What baffles us here at the Waverley Web is? ‘YW’s” Planning officers consistently mislead councillors, or don’t answer their questions at all, which is the same thing? So why aren’t more of them going out through the big glass security doors, never to return?

And tonight?

Screen Shot 2018-08-13 at 10.03.02.png

Councillors are being asked to rubber-stamp this application for 45 one and two bedroomed flats by the railway at Wey Hill tonight. 

The Developers have convinced the planners that:
“in culmination with costs to remediate the contamination from the land, the planning infrastructure contributions, abnormal costs (such as the provision of a new substation and contiguous piling and acoustic fence provision along the railway boundary) and the quality build costs, the proposal would be unable to viably support on-site affordable housing provision or a commuted sum.”

Whilst the Council has appointed independent viability consultants to analyse the developer’s figures, unfortunately, all the details are exempt and for Councillors Eyes Only!

What does it cost to cover the Councils’s infrastructure asks? A mere £200K on a £11M project.

Transport Contribution


SPA Contribution


Education: (Early Years)


Education: (Primary)


Play Areas


Playing Pitches





Please don’t refuse it though, say the officers, as we have already counted 39 of these dwellings in the Local Plan to provide their Five Year Supply. As the Council has that Land supply – why not refuse it until you get a better brownfield offer?

Waverley Planners have just had a once in a blue moon moment!


Despite the odds being stacked in favour of a hill-top pile used as an office building in Haslemere making way for 27 new homes – councillors shunned Betty’s boot – and refused the controversial scheme on the edge of the town.

Wow! Shucks! Did the heat go to the heads of members of Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee last week when they voted by 14 to ? against converting offices at  Longdene Hose and build in its grounds in Hedgehog Lane? Chairpeople at ‘YW’ never actually announce what the vote is!!

Screen Shot 2018-08-08 at 19.30.13.png

Alfold’s Councillor Kevin Deanus said “this picture” of the proposed development site which  proposes further damage to the countryside – “says it all.”

Waverley officers saw no reason to refuse consent for a development in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Great Landscape Value. The site is beyond the town settlement and very close to Sturt Farm, Haslemere nearby and where 135 dwellings have been approved.

However, councillors did!  In response to councillor Steven Mulliner’s claims that with a 5-year land supply under its belt there was no requirement for development in areas of constraint in Waverley.

PO Louise Yandell warned councillors that  Haslemere’s housing allocation of  990 new homes during the life of the Local Plan was a “minimum and not a maximum figure.”

The usual Martini advocates of development – “Anytime, Anyplace, Anywhere, except in their own wards, gave good reasons why the scheme should be approved! They said they were fearful an appeal on a previous scheme to be heard in October would be approved.

The Tory cabal of Waverley Council’s yes men/women who will hopefully be hanging up their councillor (PSBD) identity tags soon  – Band; Goodridge; Carole Cockburn ; Anna James and not forgetting former chairman Peter Isherwood whose hand is never down and has been shunted out of the Chairman’s  seat followed by his vice-chairman CC – and we don’t mean Coco Chanel’s – after their distasteful remarks about the Eastern villages! He has been shunted to the right and she (CC) has been shunted off the bench altogether! Teach them to turn off their mics before they insult their residents?

For once even Farnham Residents’ Councillor Jerry Hyman’s argument about the lack of Appropriate Assessment under the Special Protection Area (SPA’s) issues found favour with some. Cranleigh’s Liz Townsend challenged officers’ claims that if the development went ahead there WAS  “sufficient mitigation?” But the officers and their legal chums stubbornly refuse to accept challenges that they might not be obeying an environmental law by carrying out appropriate assessment and are ducking under the comfort blanket provided by Natural England. You can read the Sweetman ruling by clicking on the link below.

Some claim that “Your Waverley’ and Natural England’S APPROACH  HAS  FOR MANY YEARS IGNORED ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.

Has a ruling by the European Court of Justice sent an Exocet missile into Waverley Towers?

The answer, of course, is NO! Because Waverley Borough Council has decided it doesn’t have to obey The European Court of Justice ruling – well that is until someone challenges them of course? Is that the sound of another Judicial Review we hear?

Funny – that nobody  mentioned the loss of office accommodation – wonder why – when according to Waverley Council’s data it  is becoming increasingly concerned having lost an amazing:

Screen Shot 2018-08-08 at 20.14.28.png

Not to mention that they receive not a single penny in 106 infrastructure contributions from these developments as well as the loss of business rates and premises where residents can WORK!



We’re back – and catching up!


While our team was away we received the comment featured below, and further comments from others, on the JR Local Plan and Dunsfold Aerodrome High Court hearings- here’s our rather belated response.

Dear Mr Ruffles

Apologies for the delay in replying but even the Waverley Web needs to take a break and hang out somewhere else!

We were not represented by any of our correspondents at the High Court on 12 July. However, that doesn’t mean our post was a work of fiction. We received feedback via a mole at Waverley Borough Council and from one or two boasts by the rather smug members of the PoW Campaign who didn’t realise they were confiding in the wrong person!!

Clearly, as we weren’t present, we can’t vouch for the veracity of everything we were told but have heard several accounts of the proceedings from people who were and having cross-referenced them we were happy to report with the caveat that if anyone who was present took issue with our post we would be happy to issue an amendment or clarification if necessary.

With regard to how well Waverley Borough Council was represented, we were told Waverley’s Chief Executive Tom Horwood; the Leader, Julia Potts;  Head of Planning, Elizabeth Sims and her sidekick “Sick As A” Graham Parrott were present in Court. Given the importance of the occasion – the potential voiding of Waverley’s latest Local Plan – a Plan, moreover, that has been many years and many hundreds of thousands of pounds in the making – so they bloody should be! If the Plan gets thrown out – thanks to CPRE and PoW – it will be CATASTROPHIC for both the Borough and its residents!  Particularly Cranleigh – whose countryside will go under concrete faster than knotweed can spread!
And, with that thought in mind, it was right and proper that the Council fielded its senior team. Indeed, given the importance you place on PoW’s arguments to the whole of Waverley and its Local Plan, we’re only surprised that you’re quibbling about Waverley fielding its movers and shakers! You really can’t have your cake, eat it and have some left over for a trifle, Mr Ruffles!

Who the Dunsfold Developer chose to rock up with is neither here nor there, as far as we’re concerned, because we, the Waverley taxpayers, aren’t footing the bill! However, we understand their CEO, AKA the Flying Scot and their lead on the Dunsfold development, Jerry Forrester, were present. It’s hardly surprising that a ‘gentleman from Trinity College’ was present given they’re the site owner! Bloody rude if he hadn’t shown his face if you ask us.

We love the phrase contrived to sit ‘hugger mugger’ with the WBC team. According to one of our moles, the Dunsfold Developer and his team sat on the right of the courtroom, very properly behind their legal eagles. It was the PoW supporters who plumped themselves down behind the Dunsfold Developer, despite their legal team being on the left side of the courtroom! What was all that about? 

However, it’s summer and the sun’s shining, we’re just back from our hols (the Charlotte’s Web Barn, in case you’re interested!) and we’re in a good mood.

Turning to your final paragraph, WBC has failed miserably, prior to the appointment of Julia Potts and Elizabeth Sims, to get its act together and produce a  Local Plan. Had it done so under the previous regimes of the unlamented Mrs Mary Orton-Pett, Councillor Richard Shut-the-Gates and Councillor Robert Know-less, Waverley wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in today. Those three, burying their heads in the sand and sticking two fingers up to the government, has left WBC with a disastrous legacy which La Potts and Sims have struggled to overcome. It just goes to show, if you want something doing, ask a woman!

No one – least of all La Potts and Sims – want to inflate Waverley’s housing numbers, though it sometimes appears the latter tries hard –  but the fact remains that without an adopted Local Plan the entire borough is in deep do-do and at risk of even more development than under the current challenged Plan.

You may choose to think PoW’s motives are as white as the driven snow but we beg to differ – as pure as the driven slush more like! The only thing Bob Lies and his cronies care about is killing off the Dunsfold Development and in questioning the housing numbers – which WBC was forced to accept, under duress, in order to get an adopted Local Plan in place – they saw an opportunity to upset the Dunsfold decision. Whoopee! Never mind that no housing at Dunsfold Aerodrome means more housing in Cranleigh, the eastern villages and Farnham. Who cares about those towns? Certainly not the inappropriately named Protect our Waverley!

Screen Shot 2018-08-08 at 20.55.30.png


The Potty one is “so excited” that the redevelopment at Blightwells has begun.





I’m so excited – I almost Pirates of Penzance.


We nearly fell off our Web with helpless laughter as we hung suspended in a dark and dusty corner of Farnham this week – and we could hear the chuckles reverberating through the town.

Are we – Waverley taxpayers’ paying good money in council tax for this drivel to be printed by ‘Your Waverley’s’ spin machine called – ‘Your Waverley.’

Because if it was OUR Waverley ‘Your Waverley’ would be listening to the opposition that is rearing its head ever higher to us with the “vibrant new scene”  about to land in our midst!


• Bridge over the River Wey

Trees have been cleared along the A31 to make way for a new bridge across the River Wey, which will take construction traffic away from the town during the main works starting in 2019. Hoarding will go up around the site in August and there will be traffic management measures on the A3l, reducing to one lane and reducing the speed limit from 50 to 44 miles an hour until Christmas.

• Walk this Wey

To make way for the scheme there are also some planned footpath closures. The footpath that runs behind Dogflud Car Park, between South Street and the Leisure Centre is closed and re-routed. From 6 August until March 2019, Borelli Walk will close so the bridge can be built. New access schemes will be created within the completed scheme.

• New Wey in

Dogflud Car Park will be closed during the construction phase and will be upgraded, along with South Street Car Park, to provide modern accessible and safe parking. Other benefits include an additional £l.4 million to improve traffic flows at key junctions in the town centre, a new park and stride scheme and upgraded public transport infrastructure.

The leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Brightwells. Councillor Julia Potts, was so excited she put on her best bonnet and said:

“I am so excited that work has now started to progress the scheme and residents can see that things are happening. Once the hoarding is up and the bridge starts to get built there will be some disruption but I hope that people will see that it will be worth it in the long term. Farnham is desperate for a cinema, new homes and a retail offer”.

What a load of drivel. 

The Campaign For The Protection of some parts of rural England’s hypocrisy​ is legendary!


While Waverley’s green fields and green belt are currently sinking, or about to sink under concrete, this once-respected national organisation is whining about the lack of affordable housing and the need for local authorities to grant permissions on brownfield sites!


The very same hypocritical outfit that has joined forces with the local NIMBYs – some of whom are DEVELOPERS themselves, to take ‘Your Waverley,’ to the High Court – limiting their own costs to just £10,000 while wasting shedloads of our council tax, simply because they are supporting a Local Plan which includes development in their backyards at Dunsfold Aerodrome. One of the biggest brownfield sites this side of London!


Does ‘Your Waverley’ have to manage a crisis now the High Court has allowed challenges to the Local Plan to be heard at a Judicial Review?

All the Rumpoles will have their wheelbarrows at the ready to trouser the taxpayers’ cash being poured into their oversized pant pockets – however, what’s the old saying – “he who laughs last laughs longest.” Because one of Waverley’s famous four (Milford Man) who challenged the Local Plan – has had his fingers slightly singed  – and his bank balance reduced, by a High Court decision to award Waverley their costs!

Oops – the judge also refused to give the other challengers the assurances they crave that their costs will be limited to £10,000 for a judicial review to be held in the Autumn! 

The mutter in the gutter around Alfold/Dunsfold/Hascombe/Loxwood/Chiddingfold is that some of the parish councils who have used their money to prime the legal pump have had enough and are not stumping up any more of their parish precept to fund the ‘impossible fight!’

In the meantime, while the birds sing, and the planes continue to fly at the airfield – Cranleigh is turning into one big building site and the only caterpillars are of the tractor species.

Here’s who is reading the Waverley Web.


Screen Shot 2017-07-22 at 00.11.46While we are away sunning ourselves in foreign climes we thought you might like to know which countries now regularly follow the comings and goings of ‘Your Waverley?

Who says the Waverley Web cannot reach the parts that others reach?

So don’t forget to subscribe or follow to hear what is happening in and around the Waverley Borough. Because, we may be away resting, but we are still posting and back soon!!




After 50 years in Farnham – another major chain store​ ​ closes its doors!


Last Saturday saw the DOROTHY PERKINS store in Farnham close its doors for the last time.

This brings to an end a 50 year-long association of the popular store with our town!  – Here are just a few of the others – but fear not there will be dozens of new shops opening soon in the Woolmead and Blightwells developments (with our money) – won’t there?

But .. according to the DP’s store staff – another nice shop is due to take its place?

Here’s what Farnham people think about our local authorities cunning plan to invest our money in more shops and restaurants.

The number of business and retail units in Waverley being turned into homes is reaching alarming proportions.

And… what about Guildford! Where two flagship stores – House of Fraser and Debenhams boasting half a million square feet of retail floor space look set to fail!

Whatever the outcome of takeover talks going on as we type, questions will remain over the sustainability of these two anchor department stores in Guildford, and there will be concerns about the possible economic and fiscal implications, locally, should either fail.

Additionally, current council plans (Guildford BC) for up to 420,000 square feet of new retail space on North Street might now look even more doubtful, especially following the Local Plan examiner’s remarks querying the logic of this allocation, despite GBC’s planning department’s defence of their decision.

 Tory councils, with the backing of Surrey County Council, are so arrogant as they play Monopoly with our money! Can’t they read the runes?

House of Fraser, Guildford was refitted and relaunched as a new store in 2000. It was previously known as the Army & Navy, and before that Harvey’s. The store includes the Jellicoe Heritage Roof Garden, a water garden designed and installed by the late Sir Geoffrey Jellicoe in 1958 and where customers could once sit and eat enjoying a panoramic view across the town.  It was closed for health and safety reasons. It has a grade II listing from English Heritage and, according to the House of Fraser website, has a dedicated gardener.

See also: Comment: It Is True – The Number of Empty Shops in Guildford Is Increasing

Just a little thought on Woking’s unmet need straight from our sun lounger?


Screen Shot 2018-08-06 at 09.51.16.png

There’s nothing like sitting on a sun lounger sipping a Pink Gin listening to the waves lapping against the rocks to get the old brain cells working is there?

Here’s a thought for you which we haven’t seen expressed anywhere to date but I think it is a point which could do with an airing.

Dunsfold Aerodrome was in the latest version of the local plan right from the start, wasn’t it? So it has been tested and consulted on at every stage.


When the Woking unmet need figures were introduced and then confirmed by the Inspector in 2017 Waverley’s answer was to add numbers TO THE REST OF THE BOROUGH including Farnham. See MM3 on page 7 below.

So in the unlikely scenario that CPRE wins its challenge to the local plan on the Woking unmet need point, people should be asking themselves why should it be Dunsfold Aerodrome that gets thrown into doubt and removed from the local plan (the PoW case) and not all the additional houses which were bolted onto Farnham (and undermined their neighbourhood plan if you remember) and Cranleigh and various other places including some in the Green Belt?

In this case, it should really be “last in, first out”

Just a thought? Back home soon when we will reveal all the countries reading the Waverley Web!

You can read it for yourself here:

Schedule of Main Modifications

Much ado about the location of a new Cranleigh Leisure Centre.


Since ‘Your Waverley’s commitment to spend £12.7million on a new leisure centre – there has been much talk about where it should go? Should the Village Way centre be demolished and rebuilt, or refurbished and improved?

Rumours are rife about re-siting it on the proposed new private nursing home site in Knowle Lane now there is to be no replacement village hospital – or building it on the Snoxhall Playing fields?

Neither is an option as the Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust has tied up the former parish-owned land for a private nursing home development and the parish council which has been shafted by the charity, has tied up all the remainder of the parish land it owns into a Community Land Trust, to ensure it doesn’t happen again! This was prompted by the scurrilous behind the scenes dealings of a former parish council chairman who wanted to build on the nearby Beryl Harvey field donated to the village by the late Gordon Harvey, in memory of his wife. The benefactor’s son kiboshed the bid, with villagers backing, at a public meeting, and the plan to build houses on the allotment/conservation area in Knowle Lane was subsequently scrapped. 

We are reliably informed by villagers in the East, that as with the “replacement cottage hospital,” which will not now go ahead, local fundraising also paid for the creation of the original Cranleigh Leisure Centre, so villagers believe they are entitled to have their say?

We had hoped to bring you a  link to all the possible plans for the Village Way site – which should be open for consultation to allow Cranleigh residents to decide! But it has been removed by Waverley Council!

After 6 months of the details of all Waverley’s leisure improvements being online, the council took down the presentation after residents started to discuss it on Facebook. They realised it contained figures to be paid to a third party before a deal had been done.
Luckily residents here in Godalming had started sharing screenshots.

Don’t click on the link because it won’t work – a bit like Waverley Borough Council!


Blightwells here we come!!


And guess where the developer’s money’s going? … To fund improvements to Godalming and Farnham Leisure Centres and build a new £12.7m centre in Cranleigh New Town!


WHY? Because there’s an election coming!


Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 09.08.44.png

We couldn’t have put it better ourselves Neil!



Screen Shot 2018-07-27 at 23.19.49.png

Need a job?



Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 17.36.40.png

Enter a caption


Thank heaven there are a few councillors left at Waverley that care about – the new town they have dubbed – ‘Poor Old Cranleigh.”


Just a handful of councillors – abstained – from supporting the layout and landscaping of Miller Homes consented application to build 120 three and four storey homes on the former Hewitts Industrial Estate in Elmbridge Road – why didn’t they vote against it is anyone’s guess? Do they get to feel Betty’s Appealing Boot if they dare oppose a scheme which was described by a string of councillors as:


Here’s `Kevin Deanus Councillor for Alfold.


Screen Shot 2018-07-30 at 19.20.19.png


Screen Shot 2018-07-30 at 19.21.00.png

However, Waverley was between a rock and a hard place after a Government Inspector over-ruled its refusal and allowed the application to turn the former light industrial estate into a housing estate! But surely with a bit of negotiation, they could have persuaded the developer to provide something more suitable?

Even Elizabeth Townsend – Chairman of Cranleigh Parish Council appeared unperturbed that the former industrial estate, which will further urbanise the once rural area of west Cranleigh, and change it beyond recognition. But she did voice her concerns about landscaping near the entrance, the treatment of the ancient woodland, and the possible overlooking of cottages nearby by such large buildings.

However, 17 members of the Joint Planning Committee granted the reserved matters with four abstentions – so life goes on over there as another set of bulldozers and HGV’s roll into -“Poor Old Cranleigh!”

Here’s the village’s design statement for what it’s worth! And – here’s a decent Alfold Councillor Kevin Deanus telling the planners exactly what he thinks of the plan!

Screen Shot 2018-08-01 at 09.20.38.png

What is the most well-used phrase at ‘Your Waverley’s council meetings?




If, you get the answer right. 


We will put you out of your misery… the phrase most often used in response to councillors questions by officers, the leader, and the executive is…


And.. if ‘we are satisfied’ then so must you be?


The 2019 Council elections have arrived at ‘Your Waverley.’


And electioneering has started!

Tory councillors didn’t even attempt to hide their loathing for any challenge or questions from the council’s minority parties at the recent Full Council Meeting. No wonder it took over a week to post the webcast, it burned the master’s fingers, so he went fishing!

That pesky Godalming new boy Councillor Paul Follows has been getting up the ever-widening nostrils of the Tories ever since he set foot onto The Bury’s Hallowed Ground! And.. they don’t even try to hide their contempt … because there’s an election coming on!

You can watch the Potty One’s eyes narrowing and she ummed and ahhd and tells him he will receive a more detailed answer from somewhere, sometime, somehow in the future. WW wonder – does he ever get one?

Screen Shot 2018-07-30 at 13.15.39.pngAt the last two Full council meetings, the Godalming upstart has dared to ask a few simple questions after being  asked to agree more money for the Judicial Reviews – you know the ones Protect Our Little Corner and the Campaign to Protect Some parts of Rural Englands’ fights to be played out soon in the High Court?  

He asked: What are the consequences to the local plan as a whole if the JR’s were successful because obviously, it impacts the Green Belt status of a big chunk of my ward, and elsewhere in Godalming?

Positive or negative – it has consequences and I just wants to know what those were. Is the whole plan undermined, or just parts?

What does he get? – Blank looks and is ignored.

Gone are the days when minority parties, or for that matter Waverley’s residents, were given the benefit of a civil straight answer – in public – and were treated with a modicum of respect. Challenge the tories at your peril, you will be ridiculed for daring to question where and how public cash is being spent.  Ask Gerry Hyman he’s got the T-shirt.

Paul Follows was one of the very few councillors not to vote for the Local Plan, he abstained. His concern, being that it was vulnerable to a JR challenge and that shed loads of public cash would likely be chucked at its defence…which turns out to be the case! 

This week the Godalming upstart was at it again… this time asking questions on the proposed funding for Waverley’s leisure centres. Not too many mind, because Cranleigh’s Boudicca, who has been rewarded with the deputy mayoral role after being kicked out by her ‘colleagues’ as chairman of Cranleigh Parish Council, ruled he had asked enough!! Nothing like a bit of power is there, especially when it has been taken away from you on the home patch!

He had dared to ask why a Press Release was sent out to the Media before the Full Council had an opportunity to comment on the Executive’s decision to spend squillions on new and existing centres? And… he’s a little concerned, despite being generally supportive of leisure facilities, about where the money is coming from and the increasing tax burden on Waverley residents?

Here’s Bramley’s By-Pass Byham, who now wants Bramley to have a leisure centre starting the election ball rolling: Didn’t someone tell the poor old duffer that it has taken many, many, many years to get any money for East Street and it has only just gone into the bank? And nobody is quite sure that his administration hasn’t presided over a white elephant?How did Waverley Conservatives manage to shrink the Brightwells dividend so much?

Oh! and why, because the Executive had only been held a few days earlier, under them there rules, why a debate on the decision could not be held and.. he couldn’t get any answers?  

Why ask another question then Councillor Follows? You know you won’t get an answer… because


Here’s your answer – Silly Billy! ‘There is an election coming on Councillor Follows, YW will be throwing money at the public over the coming months and standing up in the council chamber saying stuff like this? Just in case they decide to vote for your lot – or any other lot come to that!








Screams the headline on the Cranleigh edition of the Sorry Advertiser. How we all love the silly season – particularly when some of the WW is away lounging on sunbeds in the Scilly Isles!

Unlikely, says the Waverley Web … because they’re alive and well, chewing the fat of the land in Alfold, Chiddingfold, Dunsfold & Hascombe. They lurk behind hedges in their million-pound mansions and they wouldn’t dream of slumming it in the emerging New Town that Waverley Councillors now refer to as Poor-Old-Cranleigh!

Screen Shot 2018-07-27 at 23.22.24.png

These Dinosaurs, who evolved from Stop Dunsfold Park New Town into Protect our Waverley (all in the interests of self-preservation you understand) have fought tooth-and-nail for the past 10 years to preserve their own villages in aspic, at the expense of the rest of the Borough – Cranleigh  Godalming, and Farnham in particular.

On a serious note, Fossils Galore (no, we didn’t make that up, but we might well pinch it as our new sobriquet for PoW!) are hoping to secure support for a dedicated museum and activity centre following the discovery of the full skeleton of an Iguanodon dinosaur at the Wienerberger factory in Ewhurst last year. Didn’t they know most of the old fossils are already sitting in the Natural History Museum in London?

The Waverley Web thinks it’s a great idea but strongly recommends Fossils Galore waits on the results of PoW’s Judicial Review because, if unsuccessful, they could find themselves with a cartload of prehistoric beasts to add to their collection:

• Pride of Place in the exhibition could be given to the Velociraptur – otherwise, know as ‘Crap-Peddler-in-Chief’ Bob Lies
• Tyrannosaurus – otherwise known as Tyrant-in-Chief Peppa-Pig, who hasn’t got a good word – let alone a nice one to say for anyone! Anyone for a chipolata?
• Spinosaurus – Spinmeisters-in-Chief Chris Britton & Sarah Sullivan

Clearly, it’s the Silly Season in the sticks!

How did Waverley Conservatives manage to shrink the Brightwells dividend so much?



Or Perhaps as an alternative headline as suggested by Farnham’s Laurence Garner in this letter to the brilliant Farnham Herald…and which has been sent to us.

 Council taxpayers ‘royally swindled’

On the front page of your July 19 edition, you quote councillor Julia Potts boasting that there was ‘money in the bank’: £3.2 million from Crest Nicholson. Your older readers may recall that when Waverley decided in 2002 to award the contract to Crest Nicholson they boasted that there would be £20 million for the council to spend.
It was on this basis that the council over-rode the wishes of the people – expressed in a public consultation – and awarded the project to Crest Nicholson. Since then the value of the land shrank to eight-and-a-half before finally shrinking mysteriously to three-and-a-half million.
Up until 1973, Brightwells Gardens was the property of the people of Farnham, a pleasant amenity: mature trees, shady lawns with park benches and flower beds, a tennis court, a bowling green, and originally an open-air swimming pool; a pleasant spot in the heart of the town.
This was gifted, in a moment of folly, to WBC. After the agreement with Crest, the garden was deliberately degraded by Waverley to an unsightly slum, the bowling green trashed, the tennis courts wrecked, the gardens neglected before finally being sold to Crest Nicholson. They now have the impudence to call the Brightwells scheme a ‘regeneration’.
Councillor Potts neglected to mention that the £3.2 million must be off-set against the £4 million spent by WBC to buy The Marlborough Head public house and the £3.2 million spent on the Gostrey Centre extension to the Memorial Hall – a project originally to be built by Crest at Brightwells at their expense.
The fact is that the council tax payers of Farnham, and all Waverley, have been royally swindled by WBC, whether by design or through incompetence, it really doesn’t matter.
Laurence Carter, Wykeham Road. Farnham

However, what he omits to say is the council also allowed the Gostrey Centre for the elderly to deteriorate over many years. In fact, if a well-intentioned chef hadn’t reported the disgraceful state of the kitchen to Waverley’s own environmental health officers, it would have been forced to close down much earlier. But allowing it to deteriorate fitted in nicely with ‘Your Waverley’s cunning plans!

Yolande Hesse has written.

On the front page of your July 19 edition, you quote councillor Julia Potts boasting that there was ‘money in the bank’: £3.2 million from Crest Nicholson. Your older readers may recall that when Waverley decided in 2002 to award the contract to Crest Nicholson they boasted that there would be £20 million for the council to spend.
It was on this basis that the council over-rode the wishes of the people – expressed in a public consultation – and awarded the project to Crest Nicholson. Since then the value of the land shrank to eight-and-a-half before finally shrinking mysteriously to three-and-a-half million.
Up until 1973, Brightwells Gardens was the property of the people of Farnham, a pleasant amenity: mature trees, shady lawns with park benches and flower beds, a tennis court, a bowling green, and originally an open-air swimming pool; a pleasant spot in the heart of the town.
This was gifted, in a moment of folly, to WBC. After the agreement with Crest, the garden was deliberately degraded by Waverley to an unsightly slum, the bowling green trashed, the tennis courts wrecked, the gardens neglected before finally being sold to Crest Nicholson. They now have the impudence to call the Brightwells scheme a ‘regeneration’.
Councillor Potts neglected to mention that the £3.2 million must be off-set against the £4 million spent by WBC to buy The Marlborough Head public house and the £3.2 million spent on the Gostrey Centre extension to the Memorial Hall – a project originally to be built by Crest at Brightwells at their expense.
The fact is that the council tax payers of Farnham, and all Waverley, have been royally swindled by WBC, whether by design or through incompetence, it really doesn’t matter.
Laurence Carter, Wykeham Road. Farnham

Were Cranleigh firefighters around to fight this blaze near woodland?



Screen Shot 2018-07-27 at 23.03.11.png

The car ablaze adjacent to woodland near Keepers Cottage, Cranleigh!

Because most of the time Cranleigh’s single pump machine has been seen racing around the Surrey countryside attempting to cover for other stations that are either unmanned or are running an overtime ban!

Of course, for Surrey County Council, paying part-time (retained) firemen to stand-by in other parts of the county isn’t cheap. It costs shedloads of money to take firefighters out of area! In addition, they are then unavailable to cover their own areas so if an incident occurs in Cranleigh firemen then travel from Dorking travel home again and then trouser even more cash. If the waste of taxpayer’s money wasn’t so serious it would be funny?

You couldn’t make it up?

But then why would Dumb & Dumber at County Towers give a damn. They’re too busy putting the cold steel of council budget cuts right through the heart of our vital emergency services. So much so Surrey’s head honcho in the brigade has been kicked into touch because he’s not prepared to put his name to cuts that he believes will impact on manpower and put Surry’s residents lives at risk. So his loyal staff have banned overtime! 

You can read it here: Dumb and Dumber do it again?

Waverley planners are not bats, they are devious, dishonourable​​, and don’t even obey their own YES men/women!



BETTY PUTS THE BOOT IN ON BLIGHTWELLS BATS and the Farnham residents who mourn for the town!

Well, Councillors Follows; Townsend; Hyman and Ward are you going to sit back and accept the duplicity of your planning officers, you know, the ones you employ to do the bidding of the elected representatives of the public?

Didn’t you witness the request by your colleagues on the Joint Planning Committee to add a condition to Crest Nicholsons’s Planning application No  Screen Shot 2018-06-25 at 17.53.11.png

A Condition that would protect the bats in the “Maternity Wing” of Blightwells Cottage and anywhere else on the Farnham East Street site? A CONDITION Not an Informative? An informative that just reminds CNS that it is an offence to disturb protected species under the wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 should a protected species be found during the course of the works!

Stop work?!

Wanna bet no bats will be found there?  But if its alright with Bet the Boot – then its all legal and above board… isn’t it?

It’s official – Waverley Planners have gone Bats!

Screen Shot 2018-06-25 at 17.44.30.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-26 at 16.36.37.png


Dumb and Dumber do it again?





Surrey’s chief fire officer Russell Pearson, a man who wears his honours for “dedicated service to the emergency services” with pride has been thrown out of the service after resisting budget cuts.

That’s the claim of Fire Brigade Union’s after the highly respected chief officer who was featured in this year’s New Year’s Honours was ousted, just seven months later,  from his job! Why? Because he warned that reducing fire cover would leave the county’s Fire & Rescue Services unable to protect US, the public.

Well done Dumb – you never let us down – you prefer to fritter away over £50m of Surrey taxpayer’s money on an unpopular retail development in Farnham that commercial backers wouldn’t touch with a bargepole – to compromise our safety wouldn’t you?

Perhaps you haven’t heard Dumber that more than 30,000 store chains in this country are in crisis? Facing such financial stress meaning many more businesses will follow the wave of store closures that are sweeping through our towns and cities – including wealthy Surrey! The very same stores in which you invested OUR money, preferring instead to put our lives at risk?

Recently you asked Surrey residents what their priorities were: We here at the Waverley Web believe – keeping us safe – is a  top priority along with caring for the elderly and vulnerable children. 

Screen Shot 2018-07-25 at 10.33.41.png

Mr Pearson joined SFRS in 1992 and has served as the county’s chief fire officer since 2007.

The FBU released a statement saying that Mr Pearson will no longer hold his 11-year position and the union fears he was “ousted” due to his stance on further service savings.

A Surrey County Council (SCC) spokesman said in response: “We cannot comment on speculation about individuals.”

  • Fire service close to ‘decimation’
  • Fire cover ‘halved’ in Camberley
  • Woking cover cut six times

Funding cuts

“I am in no doubt that the only reason SCC would replace Russell Pearson is so they can get someone in to do a hatchet job, solely to make cuts without any regard to public or firefighter safety,” claims Richard Jones, executive council member for the FBU for the south-east.

“With emergency response times in Surrey at their slowest since 1996, the number of fires we attend and rescues we make increasing year on year since 2015, further cuts are absolutely absurd and show SCC is  prioritising monetary savings ahead of public safety.”

In June last year firefighters and union members declared a motion of no confidence and one year on, this motion is still in place.

The FBU says that since 2010 more than £20 million has been saved from SFRS budget, and an additional £661,000 is expected to be saved this year alone.

According to SCC’s Medium Term Financial Plan, savings of £4.075 million and £1.8 million are expected in 2019 and 2020 respectively.

According to the FBU chairman Lee Belsten the service is now “dangerously close to the mark” and its frontline response and emergency control resources will be “decimated” if funding cuts continue.

He argued that staff shortages, as well as reduced resources, means all of Surrey’s fire stations are currently below 20 firefighters, response time remains up to 10% under target, on-call crew are 40% deficient and emergency control staff are up to 50% short.

Overall, the number of firefighters in Surrey have plummeted by 40%, claimed the FBU, resulting in numerous fire appliances being left unavailable in times of emergency because there are not enough firefighters to crew them.

However, a SCC spokesman says: “we have carried out a recruitment campaign and are making a significant investment to our new fire stations, equipment and vehicles to meet the needs of a modern fire service”.

Surrey is now the county with the lowest number of fire service staff per headcount of population

‘Fire service on its knees’

Following the FBU statement on Mr Pearson, an anonymous firefighter said Russell has been doing an amazing job fighting the cuts, there’s the suspicion that because he is not willing to support the cuts that’s one reason he’s been pushed to the side.

“He’s the right man for the job, he’s passionate about the fire service and doesn’t want to see it get any smaller. The fire service is on its knees, if they bring in any more cuts it will be a case of which station will they close next.

“They are relying on the goodwill of firefighters to come in on their days off. We don’t want the public thinking that we are letting them down, we just don’t have the resources.”

Another firefighter, who also did not wish to give their name, said:“I think the whole thing is disgusting, Russell has done nothing but work hard for the fire service.“If they’ve got rid of him because he doesn’t do what they want him to do, then that seems like an awful way to do things. He’s been pushing back against the cuts and, speaking from the front line, there’s nothing more that the fire service can give.”

Boom – Boom – another 200 houses in Paul Follows’ lap?


Guildford has recently allocated Green Belt for another 200+ houses at Aaron’s Hill/ Eashing Lane.

The Planning Inspector took away the Green Belt on the edge of Godalming at Aaron’s Hill, and due to an overlap of boundaries, one half of this field is in Guildford.
So does Godalming get all the traffic, and Guildford get all the cash??


A few more of Waverley’s green fields bit the dust!

Screen Shot 2018-06-29 at 00.35.03.png

Have the Cranleigh Stennetts jumped or were they were pushed?



Last year there was much ado about the fact that, despite her Herculean efforts,  Councillor Elizabeth Townsend couldn’t obtain a seat on Waverley’s most influential planning committee. However, although Councillor Townsend was refused entry into the Joint Planning Committee’s hallowed hall, she has repeatedly taken advantage of a four-minute slot allowed to ward councillors to speak up for their patch! BUT NOT VOTE!

Of course, had she been there – things could now look very different for Cranleigh New Town! Good reason for her Tory Tosser colleagues not to allow her in to scupper the onward march of development in the east!

This woman stood, and was elected as a Conservative, but is as independent as it is possible to be in to-day’s WBC! In the clip below she stands up for the residents of Cranleigh who to a man/woman opposed development on a floodplain. Now the bulldozers are forging through the tree-lined road into the site to prepare the way for Snakeham Homes who boast regularly of its – “direct line into NO 10.” 

It certainly proved to have a direct line into Waverley Towers because its Flood Risk Assessment Consultants sat with the sacred knights of the round table – aka the planning officers – as shoulder to shoulder they battled for a planning consent!

Even MP Anne Milton was stunned and told Cranleigh people – “How ever was this allowed to happen.” 

Well it has happened and is continuing to happen.

Snakeham’s detritus is now joining hundreds of other builders detritus in Elm Bridge – 265 or maybe many more at the West Cranleigh Nurseries site, 120 at Hewitts Industrial Estate, 425 between Alfold Road and Knowle Lane by Berkeley Homes and 75  – Miller Homes, who, just like Cala Homes, – did their Charles Dickens bit saying  – “Please Sir Planners, can we have more,”  to add to the 75 approved at Little Meadow.  One succeeded – one didn’t!

It is widely known in the east of the borough, according to our Cranleigh sources,  that now the Stennett duo have trousered their own lucrative planning victories- in the Green Belt, they have no need to seek re-election next year! 

One Cranleigh parish councillor said, “Since Stewart Stennett resigned from the parish council three years ago, he has never turned up at a parish  meeting, in fact, we wouldn’t even know what he looks like.”

Councillor Patricia Ellis who also took part in the secret meetings with developers, some of which took place in her own home, meetings chaired by her late husband Brian Ellis, has also disappeared since resigning from the parish council last year! She din’t even take any interest in the recent consultation of Cranleigh’s Neighbourhood Plan!

So now with a vacant seat the Executive which body rules the Waverley roost  had little option but to give a seat to Councillor Townsend who alongside Councillor Mary Foryszewski are now the only Cranleigh voices! 

Screen Shot 2018-06-13 at 11.11.00.png

However, there is little need for them now! Developers who queued up to outline their plans – in secret- to Waverley planning officers and the chosen few Cranleigh councillors, who wanted to see more footfall on Cranleigh’s streets, are now building faster than Knotweed can grow-

Berkeley Homes; Cala Homes; Crest Nicholson – (which was allowed with Councillor Jeannette Stennett’s casting vote) Miller Homes; A2 Dominion; Thakeham Homes; Bellway Homes; West Cranleigh nurseries… Oh! and w musn’t forgt Hasmmish Robber and on it goes…

R.I.P. Local democracy has finally choked on its own dogma and died at ‘Your Waverley.’

Screen Shot 2018-07-21 at 11.04.27.png

Here’s what Farnham people think about our local authorities cunning plan to invest our money in more shops and restaurants.



Regular followers of the Farnham Herald and this little minnow The Waverley Web, will know that Surrey County Council is investing over £50m of OUR MONEY in the development of Blightwells in Farnham!  Bu**er, the Redgrave Theatre, and the popular Marlborough Head pub – which were once part of   Farnham’s character – and the centrally placed Gostrey old people’s centre. Bu**er the bats, the bowling green and the open character – let’s fill in with shops and restaurants to attract the Wimbledon and Wandsworth Wanderers to our town.

Some stores have already pulled out, others may soon follow – and why is this happening?


Except of the Farnham Residents’ councillors, who are SHUT UP at every stick and turn and Godalming’s new boy Councillor Paul Follows who said: “I am wondering why the council’s web page for Brightwells has not been updated since March (still includes Byron Burgers!). nd the Memorial Hall not since January?! Surely supporters of those against the scheme have a right to have up to date information on what’s going on. Unless of course there is some reason for this?

Apparently the answer is simple: Waverley is producing a new up-dated Blightwells website and sending in the bulldozers!

Now you see it – soon you won’t. Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.17.32.png


Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.19.17.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-19 at 20.44.36.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.22.55.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.23.28.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.20.57.png

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 00.18.54.png

Want to learn more about Cranleigh’s proposed new private nursing home – then rock up to the parish council meeting tonight.


There were villagers over there in the east believing that they were to get the new ‘village hospital’ they have  eagerly awaited for the past 20 years – and then up pops a weasel!

What’s more it isn’t half a pound of tuppeny rice that is about to buy Cranleigh and the surrounding villages a proposed 60-bed  private nursing home, ten social care beds and ten community beds – it was millions of pounds of their money following  two-decades of local fundraising.

Decades ago the parish council was duped into handing over a former recreation ground owned by the parish  to local charity – Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust – in return for land swapped  by a man villagers now describe as a ‘local benefucter.’ Self-same benefucter who has trousered millions for a huge development of 265 homes in Elm Bridge Road.

The CVH Trust  was going to build a replacement hospital plus a day hospital and 14 beds following the closure of one of the oldest cottage hospitals in the country on theparish land.  Now same trust is going to present its cunning plans to the council  to build a nursing home for A-One, a countrywide private care company. It will tell how it will  – solve the county council’s social care bed crisis with 10 beds, allowing it to sell off the defunct Long Fields nursing home site in Ewhurst Road.  Before its closure three years ago it boasted  50+ beds,. Now thanks to the ‘Charity’ it can trouser the cash from the sale of land to help fill the big black hole at Surrey county towers! This leaves Cranleigh with minus 40 social care beds, but 60 private commercial rate beds costing?

Now there’s a question – how much?

The ten beds community beds are for…? Wait for it, yes, you guessed patients from among the 25 GP practices that make up the Guildford & Waverley Clinical Commissioning Group! So much for localism? 

We should also mention that the private for profit THREE-STOREY nursing home, built on valuable parish land also comes with a 26 block of residential flats and… two access – one from Knowle Lane immediateky alongside Whisker Drive the other along the parish owned road to the Snoxhall Playing Fields! What does the parish council get out of this? Pop along and you may find out? 

You can read past posts here:

Cranleigh’s proposed new private nursing home is provoking a local storm.

When is a hospital not a hospital? When it’s in “poor old Cranleigh? – whose residents appear to have been SHAFTED by a charity!

Screen Shot 2017-07-29 at 12.15.17Angry of Cranleigh wrote to us here at the Waverley Web, saying he had just spotted on the parish  noticeboard that ‘THE TRUSTWORTHY TRUST,’ as it was depicted in a local magazine recently, is to present its plans to the parish council, tonight Thursday at 7p.m. Council Offices, Village Way.

Perhaps our little spider sould be climbing up said parish council office wall- because when villagers get to hear where their treacle has gone – they may want to climb a few walls too?

Cranleigh gets more like Farnham every day – in a word SHAFTED!



How many members of staff leave ‘Your Waverley’ every month?


We could say quite a lot about this, but as we do not wish to identify our little spider inside the dusty corners of Waverley Towers so we have decided to keep our Chelicera tightly shut!

Suffice to say staff morale is not good at ‘Your Waverley’ and the temperature is rising particulary at the top of the building where it is stiflingly hot!animated-spider-image-0201


Screen Shot 2018-06-19 at 17.16.21.png

Three cheers for the new boy on Waverley’s block because the council could soon be shaken and stirred.


The winds of change are wafting over ‘Your Waverley’.

Since the arrival of Councillor Paul Follows – who happens to be a Liberal Democrat – but we here at the Waverley Web don’t give a damn about his politicsd.! All we care about is that he is joining Farnham Residents his independent minded colleagues, in attempting to bring about some fairness in council dealings.

Paul Follows - Lib Dem Godalming

This evening the member for Godalming Central and Ockford will be attending the full counicil meeting, and an earlier briefing session regarding the development of Brightwells in Farnham.

And you know what – Godalming’s new boy says he will be aiming for a “small but meaningful victory ratified by full council in the form of my suggested changes to the standards panel (which should make it fairer, more reflective of the makeup of the council and more transparent). It has also had the knock-on effect of changing some of the committee seat allocations, and I have picked up an additional seat on the Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee (in addition to my Planning Committee seats) – which is a huge boost to my ability to serve the residents of my ward.”

Screen Shot 2018-07-17 at 14.38.39.png

He says,  “Planning and housing issues are (and will be especially over the next year) be fundamental to the Central and Ockford ward – and this will give me much greater oversight and input into both of these areas.

I will be querying (again) what the consequences of the recent High Court ruling regarding the local plan and its consequences. The status of the Green Belt in my ward may depend on it (or not – they (the planners) have still not explained).
He says he  will also be asking the Conservative leader to give me her definition of ‘Affordable’ – something absent from the draft corporate plan to see if it squares with my own view of this:

“Affordable for local people, affordable for key workers and affordable for first time buyers. Having recently been told by someone who works for a developer that £750k is ‘Affordable’ I think we need to have a debate on this topic!

I will also be asking the executive (along with other councillors) to justify how they propose to pay for the proposed leisure centre upgrades (and whilst I support the idea in principal) I would like to know what we are NOT doing as a result of this, and if these are what the borough considers a priority over other things. I would remind people (though I am sure they wouldn’t need to be reminded) that taxes went up and Waverley has started charging for some services that had been previous cheaper or free.

I would be very interested to hear your views on this,  particularly over the course of the today (Tuesday).”

Waverley Borough Council  Council – Tuesday, 17th July, 2018 7.00 pm

Bridge over troubled waters in Farnham!


Now even Farnham Town and Waverley Borough Councillor  Carole Cockburn is throwing her toys out of the pram as the long-awaited demolition of Blightwells begins! But she is angry, and when Our Carole gets angry she roars!

Screen Shot 2018-07-16 at 19.12.54.png


The Farnham Lion roars!

Because most of the redevelopment of Blightwells in East Street by the  poisoned partnership of ‘Your Waverley,’ Surrey County Council and Surrey County Council has been drafted on the back of a fag packet, using tens of millions of our money – developer Crest Nicholson has had to change tack.

WAVERLEY councillors recently gave Crest permission to build a larger temporary construction access bridge connecting the East Street redevelopment site to the A31 Farnham bypass – controversially using a ‘haul road’ along Borelli Walk.

 Charles Borelli, the famous town architect the walk was named after,  must be spinning in his grave?

The decision, agreed by Waverley’s joint planning committee, gives Crest leave to construct a two-lane, 12-metre wide prefabricated steel bridge across the River Wey and Borelli Walk – replacing the single-lane, five-metre wide bridge approved in 2012.
The bridge forms a pre-commencement condition of Crest’s 2012 planning permission for Brightwells, which councillors demanded in a bid  to take construction traffic away from the town centre.
Waverley leader and Upper Hale councillor Julia Potts said the bridge,  “has always been a red line and remains that today,” while planning officers also “reminded” councillors that, as the principle of taking construction access from the A31 has already been established, it would be “unreasonable” to reject Crest’s latest application, resulting only in a less desirable construction access and increased tailbacks on the A31.
Most councillors accepted this view, because they are heartily sick and tired of hearing the word Blightwells and are demob happy as many  will be leaving the council in their droves next year.     Haslemere’s Stephen Mulliner, tried to curtail the debate (there’s a lot of that about at ‘Your Waverley 2018!- in particular the exhaustive objections of Farnham Residents member Jerry Hyman, who expressed concern at the proposed lane closures on the A31 to facilitate the bridge works., and a potential clash with the 2021 opening of Brightwells.

Shock, horror all around when it was revealed that Crest now proposes building the bridge using a temporary ‘haul road’, complete with a site office along the picturesque Borelli Walk from South Street – despite the developer admitting in 2012 that the haul road would have a “highly damaging impact” on the character and amenity of Borelli Walk and South Street!
Waverley’ planners (we use the word sparingly because there is little or no planning going on in ‘Your Waverley” these days,  failed to stipulate how the bridge should be constructed in 2012 – which now allows the developer’s stooges, council planning officers, to decide that if it’s alright with them to establish a haul road through the discharging of conditions under delegated powers. then it’s OK! 

Not so said  Carole Cockburn,  Farnham Town Council’s leader a member of both the 2012 and the present  planning committees. She took umbrage that this key decision had been taken without councillors’ express consent!

Whoops – another one who realises there is a borough election next year?

She told members: “When this came forward and I saw that as a result of the discharge of a condition the haul road along Borelli Walk was established my heart did sink. I’ve got no problem with a two-lane bridge at all, in fact, I wonder why it wasn’t done before. But when we granted consent for the bridge [in 2012], I think we all imagined that it would be built from the East Street site – I don’t think any of us imagined that we would go down Borelli Walk.

 Borelli Walk holds special significance in the town, not only because it is “one of the most attractive walks in Farnham” – as stated on Waverley’s own website – but also because it was opened in 1953 to honour the great 20th-century town architect Charles Borelli.

TheWalks boasts commemorative benches and ornamental trees donated by members of the public – many of which are to be removed or “pruned” to make way for the haul road. It is also opposite Homepark House, a block of sheltered flats located just 30 metres from the proposed bridge. 


“I’m sorry, I cannot believe this is acceptable, I really can’t,”Councillor Cockburn cried. “Yes you can re-plant the trees, but if somebody’s donated the tree in memory of somebody, a special person, and we’re going to hack it up to bring a couple of lorries down there – I just cannot support this.”
Her outrage was backed by  Bramley’s By-Pass Byham shared her concern that the “desecration” of Borelli Walk had been agreed behind councillors’ backs!

Farnha’s former Mayor Councillor John Ward, said: “The whole point of this bridge was to avoid destruction of Borelli Walk. The haul road is an appalling idea, it should not be considered and I beg councillors to throw this out.”

But, needless to say, they didn’t and they won’t because this Conservative administration has pinned its colours to the Crest Nicholson mast, and it can do anything, just anything including killing off all the bats, because it’s called …


Almost 40 trees have already been cut down to make way for the bridge, but officers reassured members that only one further tree – a cedar – is set to be removed in Borelli Walk, with several others including two lime trees flanking South Street set to be pruned and protected with temporary fencing, and three hawthorns coppiced.

No surprise there then – we all know what Betty Boot aka Liz Simms said when Crest Nicholson needed to remove ancient woodland in the east of the borough. “you can always plant some more.”
Leader Potts assured everyone the commemorative benches would be “safely stored” and reinstated after the works.
The Borelli Walk access would be in place for the duration of the bridge construction period, “a maximum of 40 weeks”, including an initial six weeks to construct the bridge and a further 11 weeks to remove it.
Crest predict an average of three HGVs will use the track daily throughout the bridge works, and a condition of its consent stipulates that any lane closures on the A31 “shall not take place before 9am or after 5pm Monday to Friday”.
The bridge will remain in place for the four-and-a-half year construction of the Brightwells scheme.





Screen Shot 2018-07-14 at 00.58.39.png

Waverley Web wasn’t at the High Court when Protect our Little Corner (POW) and the Campaign to Protect SOME PARTS of Rural England’s (CPRE)  made  their case before Mr Justice Lewis for a Judicial Review. They were challenging   bot  Waverley’s Local Plan and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government’s approval of the Dunsfold Aerodrome  planning application.  However,  it didn’t matter a jot because the Burys leaks like a colander and the POW jungle drums were beating before Peppa Pig and her piglets had boarded the 17:04 from Waterloo!

In recent days, the Waverley rumour mill has been in overdrive and our Editor’s inbox at groaned under the weight of messages from those desperate to off-load so it hasn’t been difficult to get the low down on what went on. 

That said, we can’t claim to be eye witnesses, so if anyone  present spots any errors,  please don’t hesitate to put us right and we’ll be happy to print a correction. We just can’t spin enough webs these days!!animated-spider-image-0157

Apparently, despite its imposing exterior, the deeper into the bowels of the court building they delved the dingier it became. Court Room 76 was a sad little place  with plastic chairs and empty bookshelves. Clearly the great Dunsfold Divide – as it is now called – doesn’t rate very highly on the High Court’s importance-o-meter.

The usual suspects assembled: CPRE’s barrister channelling Fiona Shackleton, without the designer labels and perfectly coiffed hair. Dunsfold’s Alan Gone-to-Ground  skulked  around,  standing in for Alfold’s Nick Pidgeon and Hascombe’s Charles Orange – whom regular readers will recall, haven’t been spotted in public since it was revealed that they are both backyard developers – not their own, you understand, just everyone elses!

POW’s Sarah Sullivan, of  – (‘I’ve got permission to live in a converted cow shed so sod the rest of you!’) sat with Chris Britten in the cheap seats, not in the comfy ones alongside  the BIG BOYS,  Bob Lies, and  CPRE/POW’s legal team. 

 Waverley’s ‘Gone to Potts’ caused a bit of a frisson after wafting in wearing fishnet stockings!  La Potts was in femme fatale mode; presumably, if all else failed,  hoping  to seduce the Judge … but we digress. You’re not interested in the dramatis personae, you want to know the outcome of the Battle of the Bumble Bee (a reference to Bob Lies’ socks)!

Cutting to the chase (SPOILER ALERT!) the judge, dismissed the majority of POW and CPRE’s challenges, namely that both the Council and Jonathan Bore, the Local Plan Inspector, had failed to consider environmental constraints when calculating the borough’s housing need insisting that both parties had correctly followed NPPF guidelines.

However, he agreed that it was unclear just how the Inspector had calculated Woking’s  unmet housing need. This was relevant because the Inspector had said Waverley must meet 50% of  that  borough’s unmet need. Even the barristers (all five(!) of them, so we’re told, couldn’t agree amongst themselves how the Inspector had done his sums and come up with 83 homes per year. Yep, that it folks, that’s what all the fuss boiled down to – 83 homes a year

Call us naive but wouldn’t the simplest, cheapest solution have been to ask the Inspector? Apparently not! 

Why not? Your guess is as good as ours! So, now POW and CPRE get to waste another two days of the High Court’s time and  shed-loads of Waverley Tax Payer’s dosh arguing over a technicality. Couldn’t someone have phoned Mr. Bore? How difficult can it be in this media-savvy age to ring the Inspector,  or via Skype? Our Editor’s five year old could have managed it!

It’s not often that the Waverley Web sympathises with Waverley Council,  but, seriously, how could it  be expected to know that POW, casting around for any excuse to upset the Local Plan, would question the Inspector’s basic arithmetic skills?

Poor old Potts,  after spending hundreds of thousands of pounds and as many man-hours, believed she had achieved something no other Leader, and Head of Planning,  had achieved in living memory: an adopted Local Plan!

 After taking  a pragmatic approach and accepting the Inspector’s amendments the whole plan is now in jeopardy because objectors decided they don’t want development on their doorstep. They’re quite happy for hundreds of homes to be built elsewhere in the borough but the largest brownfield site in Waverley  – must remain sacrosanct because Peppa and the piglets don’t want anyone else rolling around their rural sty.

As they  crowed of their SUCCESS, POW omitted to mention in its Press Release their various aforementioned failures. 

  • The Judge dismissed claims that the Local Plan Inspector had completely failed to consider environmental constraints and confirmed that there was no argument that both Waverley and the Inspector had applied the correct approach as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.
  • He also dismissed two of POW’s challenges to the Secretary of State’s decision to grant planning permission at Dunsfold Park for failing to have due regard for ancient woodland and some key parts of the revised NPPF.

However,  POW succeeded in scoring two goals, and no-one, us included,  should ignore that this could be enough to bring down the Local Plan, putting the entire borough at risk of a developers’ free-for-all. Now, Farnham, Haslemere, and Godalming and the eastern towns and villages could  be under siege!!

So, back at the sty, will POW reach for the begging bowl – again! –  repeating the immortal words of Oliver Twist, ‘Please, Sir, I want some more’. 

However, beware POW, Waverley’s walls are ringing with the news that the other challenge to Waverley’s local plan brought by Milford’s aptly named Mr. and Mrs. House, was thrown out and the Council is likely be awarded costs! 

For those who don’t want Waverley digging any deeper into tax-payer pockets to fund POW’s endless, feckless, vexatious litigation to protect their little corner of the borough, let’s hope POW’s request for a cost cap, under the Aarhus Convention, fails. They and their barrister – ( concerned no doubt, for his own fees!) were disappointed at  the judges refusal  to rule on costs  because the nincompoops hadn’t completed the forms correctly! Nothing to do with not understanding the way to do it, you understand, but everything to do with not wanting to reveal the identity of their wealthy backers!

We have only had one comment from a Waverley councillor. Others just wanted to know what the judge’s decision was!! But here’s a comment from Councillor Paul Follows  whose Godalming Ward could be badly affected by this decision.

I asked Julia P, in public @ the last 2 full councils when they asked for more money to fight this, what were the consequences to the local plan as a whole if the JR’s were successful (because obviously, it impacts the Green Belt status of a big chunk of my ward, and elsewhere in Godalming).

Positive or negative – it has consequences and I wanted to know what those were. Is the whole plan undermined, or just parts? I got blank looks basically and no formal response.

I would like to remind people that I was one of the very few councillors not to vote  for the local plan at its main vote (I abstained), and one of the main reasons I didn’t  vote for it was because I was concerned it was vulnerable to a JR challenge and that shed loads of public cash would likely be chucked at its defence…which turns out to be the case. The video detailing some my reasons for abstaining is still on my Facebook page.




Along comes a Povey riding to the rescue of Surrey County Council.



Thankfully Cranleigh and Ewhurst County councillor has come riding to the rescue of the beleaguered county council forced  to make savings of £250m over the next three years if it is to stay afloat. We could almost hear his whip cracking against the Tory leader’s back.

He tried to dislodge Hodge the Bodge earlier this year, but failed… miserably… though he argued  it was NOT unanimous!

Whilst back-stabbing is a popular sport at county towers, there is no-one more adept at the practice than a Povey! A man who we hear never bears a grudge!!! 

Suffice to say, Surrey County Council’s female finance director picked up her Radley and walked – along with her plump final salary local government pension giving just 24 hours notice! Temper, temper!

But in trots our little Povey eager to ride on the back of misfortune to point yet another blunt stick  into Hodge’s eyeballs, accusing him of “not running sustainable budgets and there being a while elephant in the room!” More like a rat in the run?

But here’s the piece de resistance from the  former council leader who lined his own company’s pockets with county council elderly care contracts, and was found wanting by the Local Government Ombudsman.  Ever heard the one about the no confidence vote in the Leader of Surrey County Council?   Hell hath no fury like a Povey scorned!

He says”  “I am concerned, I have been in business for 30 years and one thing in business you learn over everything else is that you follow the money.”

You hit the nail on the head there Councillor Povey, because if anyone followed the money you did!! Ask Guildford MP Anne Milton?

He continues: ‘You take it to bed with you, (what the money, or the budget?) you take the medium term strategy to bed with you to read again and again. Those that don’t, end up like Carillion or Northamptonshire County Council.”

He then waxed lyrical about the finance director’s departure flashing up lots of red lights, and issued a stern warning to his colleagues!

“A finance director leaving at short notice is another warning you need to take account of.”

Do we see another attempt by the Povey Pony riding to the rescue, to unseat Hodge the Bodge?

Needless to say a SCC spokesperson said that finance director Sheila Little has decided this is a good time to pursue other opportunities, and we wish her well.” An interim director has been apointed and a new director will be in place in the Autumn.


Does ‘Your Waverley’ have to manage a crisis now the High Court has allowed challenges to the Local Plan to be heard at a Judicial Review?


Please note: There are two posts today – don’t miss the Good News posted earlier today!

Screen Shot 2017-08-31 at 14.11.13

Council Julias Potts and her Conservative cohorts are reeling in the knowledge that the council now faces a Judicial Review!

However, the Campaign for the Protection of Some Parts of Rural England (CPRE)  and the Protect Our Little Corner of Waverley (POW) are jubilant that a High Court Judge has backed their call for a Judicial Review into – one aspect of their challenges All the others were kicked into touch!

All the Rumpoles will need wheelbarrows when they appear at the High Court in front of yet another judge in the Autumn! To carry away more of the ratepayers’ money.

Perhaps The Secretary of State for Communities will ask his own Government Inspector to rock up and explain why he included 50% of Woking’s unmet need into both the Waverley and Guildford Local Plans? In fact, might have been an idea for him to be in the High Court yesterday to explain the rationale behind his decision – as it might have saved a shedload of OUR MONEY!

However, let’s not be churlish, this was a triumph for democracy in the David and Goliath fight wagered by POW! WOW!  Led by nonother than former lawyer and Dunsfold Parish Council chairman Alan ‘Gone to Ground.’ This small group of LOCAL people who don’t give a damn that Godalming’s Green Belt is going under concrete and that it has now been renamed Godawfulming because it is set to become part of greater Guildford! Or that the playing fields of Charterhouse School could soon welcome in the earthmovers. What about the playing fields of Eton – or Priorsfield School next door? Or maybe, Farnham Special Protection Areas (SPA’s)? It could the send the Dartford Warbler up north!

As for the east of the borough, residents there are punch drunk awaiting the next green field,  belt of trees, hedgerows, or wildlife habitat to disappear in a cloud of dust! 

‘The Potty `one’ pictured below drowning in another fine mess that Government Inspector Jonathon Bore has dropped her into by ruling Waverley must take some of Woking’s unmet housing need. That town is now building highrise 20+ storey buildings and is fast becoming an outer London suburb!


 However, (POW’s) begging bowl could be out again, because the judge was not entirely sure yesterday that its application for capped costs of £10,000 is legit because it hadn’t filled in the paperwork correctly. In other words, they can continue to run amok at your expense.

Millions will be poured into the borough’s leisure facilities​ – but Cranleigh could be the biggest winner with a £12.7m jackpot.


Consultants employed by Waverley Council have identified that dramatic improvements are needed to leisure centres in Farnham, Godalming, and Cranleigh.


This includes almost £1m coming from development consented at Dunsfold Aerodrome? Or maybe not following yesterday’s decision by the High Court to grant objectors to the Local Plan, including Dunsfold Aerodrome,  a Judicial Review!


Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 22.17.18.png

The existing Cranleigh Leisure Centre in the Village Way car park, Cranleigh.

Waverley accepts that there is to be a massive increase in the East’s population and its existing facilities are not fit for purpose so cannot cope with such a large influx of young families.

This week the EXECUTIVE gave the go-ahead for a detailed design and procurement to extend  Farnham and Godalming leisure centres. And continue consulting on a new leisure centre in Cranleigh. It anticipates that over the next few years Godalming will have approximately 1,500 new homes, and Farnham 2,780, but although residents there are currently well served, with existing leisure facilities, improvements could be made. Haslemere Leisure Centre received a £4.2m refurbishment in 2014

It was agreed to set aside £3.2m to press ahead for a detailed specification for improvements at  Farnham and Godalming leisure centers, subject to negotiations with Places for People on future management.’

Is this just for “the tendering process.” Or is it the cost of providing the new facilities?

Crest Nicholsons Blightwells scheme,  which as we write doesn’t have the final planning consent necessary to commence development, will include an electricity sub-station slap bang in front of the leisure centre swimming pool windows. And,  an access ramp is proposed for a new multi-story car park, within metres of the leisure centre main doors into its foyer!

Could be really healthy for those pursuing leisure as car fumes belch fumes into the building!! So no problem there then?

e.g. Farnham has the third worst air quality according to a recent SCC report coming third behind the M25 and the A231


Officers are to negotiate the management fee terms for the remainder of the existing contract with PfP, provided the extended facilities are delivered;

The Strategic Director in consultation with the Deputy Leader will also enter into an appropriate lease and/or contractual arrangements to enable the car park lease extension at Godalming Leisure Centre.

But the majority of the money to be spent is going into the East of the borough.

If the full council ratifies the Executive’s recommendations next week £12.7m (some borrowed) will provide a new leisure complex on a new site in Cranleigh. Officers will begin work  on a detailed consultation with external consultants to identify a potential new location for the Cranleigh Leisure Centre and report back to Executive – “as a matter of urgency.”

Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 18.58.13.png

These are the costings for remodeling the old centre in Village Way, Cranleigh at £8.7m or building a completely new facility  on a new site at an estimated cost of £12.7m.

Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 18.58.57.png

This has to be approved by the FULL COUNCIL.

The council said “We are going to work with the parish council to find a way forward” So what is Waverley’s cunning plan? Watch this space?

Here’s the link to the meeting:



It’s the final countdown?


Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 23.46.36.png

The Royal Court of Justice – High Court, London.

Tomorrow Waverley residents will hear whether Part 1 of its Local Plan passes the High Court test when a judge rules whether the Conservative’s blueprint for future development in the borough goes to Judicial Review!

The judge could decide after the one-day hearing today Thursday (12th June).

All the Rumpoles representing ‘Your Waverley,’ the Dunsfold Park developers as well as all the parties who are challenging THE PLAN are already flexing their legal muscles. After all, they need strong muscles to carry away OUR taxpayer’s money, though we understand the same can’t be said for the legal eagles acting on behalf of the Campaign for the Preservation of Some parts of Rural England (CPRE) and Protect One Little Corner of Waverley (POW) who have protected themselves with the Aarhus legislation – which allows the public ‘Action to Justice.’  This limits the hit on their plump wallets to just £10,000 while the hit on our pockets is huge! Still, can’t complain we live in a democracy … don’t we?

Isn’t it time someone, somewhere accused these people of vexatious litigation?

One wonders if Waverley and Dunsfold Aerodrome will appeal to the judge to allow this financial limit to continue if a full-blow Judicial Review ensues? 

Whilst our sympathy for developers is limited, as they have much deeper pockets than our local authority, will they rock up and support local community projects – like a new leisure centre planned for the east of the borough? The infrastructure requirements or local community projects. In the future, if they are required to slog on until the European Court, go before the Pope for dispensation to build or appear before The Almighty himself to rule, will there be any money left in anyone’s coffers?

Watch this space!




Let’s pin the​ tail on the Waverley Donkey?


Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 09.47.23.pngTomorrow a High Court judge will decide whether Part 1 of  ‘Waverley’s Local Plan is sound or whether a challenge by the Campaign for the Protection of some parts of Rural England, for a Judicial Review, can go ahead.

He will also hear challenges from Protect Our Little Corner of Waverley against development at Dunsfold Aerodrome and a Milford man against anyone building in his backyard – you can read it by clicking on this link here:  Nightmare on Waverley Street?

If this, or the other challenges are allowed and a full Judicial Review/s ensues, it could be nine months and shedloads of money away.  The housing numbers agreed by a Government Inspector could then be in doubt and it will be back to the drawing board!  Has Waverley Borough Council got it right? Should it be forced to take 50% of Woking’s unmet need? 

Here’s what one Waverley resident thinks. Do you agree?

You know that game “pin the tail on the donkey”?

Well, just suppose you were a visitor to Waverley and you were invited to pin the whole housing numbers target onto one point on a map of our borough, but in this case, you were allowed not to have to wear a blindfold? Well then, you’d pin it on Milford, wouldn’t you?

You’d pick the place in the Borough which had plenty of undeveloped land, is close to a mainline railway station (that could easily have its platforms extended) so people could get to work, was close to the A3 and the A31, and close to enough to existing main settlements for shopping, schools and so on. And you wouldn’t have to worry about Green Belt as there are plenty of new housing growth areas springing up around the country on Green Belt currently. Anyway, if you build a housing estate on a pretty green field, whether or not it happens by historical chance to be called “Green Belt” doesn’t change it from being a pretty green field.

Yep, Milford, it would be.

So can anyone tell me why instead Waverley is dumping new housing into Farnham and Godalming which are already grid-locked with traffic, and into the area of the borough furthest away from main roads and rail stations (Cranleigh, Dunsfold, and Alfold)? Is there some glaringly obvious point I’m missing here?

Thanks, Waverley Web for letting people like me air their comments.

The letter writer asked to remain anonymous.


Perish the thought! But have our local authorities colluded to make Godalming​ part of Greater​ Guildford?



Screen Shot 2015-11-03 at 18.56.00


Screen Shot 2018-07-09 at 10.13.56

A considerable amount of discussion between Councillor Follows and both councils, as well ss local residents has been ongoing since this Facebook entry was posted.


Here’s a section from Waverley Borough Council’s papers which refers to its discussions with Guildford Borough Council over the future of Aaron’s Hill.

So how do they intend to deal with the traffic onto Portsmouth Road in Godalming? Or the A3 which becomes more of a car park every day that goes by? Have these two authorities even discussed the proposals with Surrey County Council, who only a couple of months ago proposed closing Green Oaks School close by?

Do the right hands know what the left hands are doing in our local authorities?

Is Godalming’s infrastructure, schools, GP surgeries, water, etc able to take this or will it be the straw that breaks this particular camel’s back?

Because Godalming residents now sit in mounting traffic queues, they refer to the town as Godawfulming!

Screen Shot 2018-07-09 at 10.29.50

Here’s your man to contact:

One Cranleigh woman’s take on the Local Plan Part​ 2. And… does it have a new relief road in the making?





Add another 15 to the total above, which excludes any ‘windfall sites’ as a local character property at Penwerris in Horsham Road, Cranleigh that has been a home of multiple occupancy providing homes for 21 of the least-well heeled members of Cranleigh’s population now becomes an expensive  Des Res for the Retired. Another 15 homes for the Renaissance Group, part of Legal & General, and approved under new planning rules imposed by ‘Your Waverley’planning officers who can now grant permission for under 25 properties under their delegated powers. APOLOGY. This has not yet been approved as the Highway Authority has objected to a single entrance into the site, so it has gone back to the drawing board!

Why did they even bother to ask the parish council, the grass-roots watchdog for its views?  Because they never take any notice of them – do they? You can read why parish council members objected to the overdevelopment of this site on the link below!

You will also notice from the letter below that the parish council has objected to the construction of an estate road between `Knowle Lane and Alfold Road for the Berkeley Group’s construction traffic.  Berkley’s is presently building the first 55 ‘high end’ properties which are part of the 425 homes consented. Worry about the trees or the biodiversity? Ask the men who dug new holes for the Badgers at little Meadow, part of the Bellway homes sites, and who found them drowned dead!  As for the other infill scheme – great crested newts, bats, and other wildlife – Waverley planners don’t give a damn ask the residents of Farnham. 

Does Cranleigh Newtown finally have a relief road in the making?

And… WHAT ABOUT WATER? Cranleigh along with other villages including Haslemere are under pressure… literally!


Screen Shot 2018-06-26 at 11.04.12.png



Cranleigh Parish Council has contacted us to say its Neighbourhood Plan consultations will be held on Thursday 12th July 9am-4pm, Friday 13th 4-8pm and Saturday 14th from 9am-12.30pm at Cranleigh Village Hall. Residents are invited to turn up and have their say and share their ideas on the town’s development sites; green spaces; Snoxhall Fields and future planning policies.

Cranleigh along with other villages including Haslemere are under pressure… literally!


The town dubbed by Waverley Planners as  ‘Poor Old Cranleigh’ has now been joined by the residents of ‘Poor Old Haslemere’ as they suffer the ignominy of running out of water!

Showers are either dribbling or have ceased completely, and there is not enough pressure to turn on taps in homes where water has been leaking underground for months, and in some cases years!  Calls to Thames Water have gone unheeded, and some families have been told they are ‘not a priority’ and will have to wait months for underground leaks to be fixed.

Right around the villages, the pressure is low, with many homes having no pressure at all.

In Haslemere Thames Water is delivering lorry loads of water to residents at the Leisure Centre, whilst telling them to restrict their water consumption and warning of a possible hosepipe ban! This has infuriated gardeners, who claim they are very responsible and only sparingly watering plants in pots, which is more than can be said for the water companies who, have, and are still  allowing millions of gallons of water to be lost through leaks and burst pipes.

Cranleigh borough councilors have repeatedly warned Waverley Officers that Cranleigh, in particular, was highly vulnerable. But their pleas were ignored when planning officers claimed it was up to the statutory authorities to provide enough water and sewerage capacity to existing and new homes, and not theirs! Their priority was to ensure the borough had a five-year land supply and Cranleigh and the eastern villages, as well as Farnham, would have to take the lions share of the borough’s future housing requirements.


Over one and half thousand homes are now presently under construction in the new town and despite repeated objections from Cranleigh Parish Council, The Civic Society, AND SOME borough councillors and individuals consents continue apace. Problems with a creaking infrastructure were forewarned in the numerous planning applications when a lack of water supply highlighted by Thames Water was predicted,  unfortunately,  this has all too soon impacted on Cranleigh.

The parish council is urging residents to check on their elderly neighbours who may be unable to get out, particularly in the baking temperatures, to carry bottles of water.

The problem has been caused in part by a power failure at a Thames Water reservoir and the high volume of water used during the long heatwave. There is no mention of the huge volume of burst pipes that have been identified during the construction of new homes and which requires increased water pressure.

Screen Shot 2018-07-07 at 23.11.33.png

Trailers of bottled water on their way to the Eastern villages. 



Are you listening Jeremy Shunt- your constituents are being sent by their GP’s to the vet!!


Calling Matron Milton?

We know your busy at the moment JH exhausted after a day at Chequers with the PM sorting out Brexit, but really you need to give your GP’s a bit of a ticking off!

Screen Shot 2018-06-15 at 14.33.42.pngBut even the vet couldn’t help this poor 82-year-old Guildford soul – because of Elf and Safety!

Screen Shot 2018-06-15 at 14.34.12.png

The number of business and retail units in Waverley being turned into homes is reaching​ alarming proportions​.


Here are just a few:  Julia Potts was featured recently on film proudly reeling off the key tenants for its own proposed retail development, including the restaurant ASK which we understand has just closed its doors in Cranleigh! Wonder if Blightwells will end up one great big housing development. Could the new shops soon easily convert into flats.

Just a few of Farnham’s empty independent shops that have closed down.

According to ‘Your Waverley’ retail is a key sector of the borough’s economy and a prerequisite to the continued vibrancy of its town centers.  So it must be spitting feathers that so many of its shops and businesses are being converted into – residential units.

And… who’s to blame for that – The Conservative Government – and former Communities Secretary of State Sajid Javid!

There is less need every day for us to travel to our towns and villages as we lose our cashpoints and banks – will they too soon become homes?

Because Waverley’s planning portal is almost impossible for anyone to navigate any longer – did it cost lots of dosh to make such a bu**ers muddle of what was once an easily navigable site? It is difficult to find out exactly how many shops and offices have been converted. But rough guess it is hundreds, maybe even one thousand?

It took ‘Your Waverley’ quite a time to catch up with Government planning legislation that gives permitted development rights to applicants to convert retail and offices without seeking permission. If it had, it would be even more. In fact, one local professional went to Horsham District Council, who downloaded the appropriate forms for him which he then sent to WBC, who didn’t want to accept them!

Having now recognised, like the rest of the country, that the image and attractiveness of high streets are diminishing – because not everyone wants to buy in charity shops – even though we here at the WW do!!! And the proliferation of services, nail bars, hairdressers,  betting and dog shops add nothing to the street scene. 

Now prompted by a cheerleader from Haslemere Town Council which is carrying its message around to other councils in the borough, Waverley has woken up and has decided to work with them too…. wait for it… ‘to safeguard and monitor those permitted development rights!’

And, it is also considering making an Article Four Direction, which is an incredibly difficult, expensive, long-winded and complicated legal means of preventing even more conversions. And, Haslemere Town Council has been rewarded by  being the borough’s first pilot – well, it wouldn’t be Farnham would it?

So why doesn’t our Conservative controlled administration point out to their Tory masters that this change in planning law, combined with massive increases in businesses rates have had very real consequences for our towns and villages?


Taken from WBC  paperwork.

Screen Shot 2018-06-19 at 17.27.24.png

Is this man a Waverley Borough Councillor?


At last… a man with integrity stands up to be counted – OUT – of the Guildford Conservative Association, which is presently selecting candidates for both Guildford and parts of Waverley to fight the next council elections.

How about a few of ‘Your Waverley’s’ disenchanted, disillusioned, and disengaged councillors becoming Independents and standing up for the people they are elected to represent? In fact, why don’t they all turn their backs on party politics, which are now rearing their heads from the grassroots up? Even parish councils are a hotbed of political wranglings, with some having political group meetings before their open business meetings. In Cranleigh, Parish Councillor Angela Richardson, the newly appointed Deputy Chairman of the Guildford Conservative Association, makes no secret of her political ambitions to go to Westminster!

Do they really want to represent people or are our politicians after personal ego and power?

Screen Shot 2018-06-15 at 15.57.22.pngScreen Shot 2018-06-15 at 15.57.43.png

Screen Shot 2018-06-15 at 15.58.04.png

Screen Shot 2018-06-15 at 16.00.52.png

Dumb and Dumber at Surrey County Council just carry on investing our money in – yes, you guessed. RETAIL!



Recently Dumb (Leader of Surrey County Council) said there was always a possibility that when the council invests something that it will go wrong. But when you are investing other people’s money, you are more than just careful, you are scrupulously careful. In fact, you have a legal duty to do so.  And,  when you get it wrong, you don’t keep on making the same mistakes over and over again – DO YOU?

Of the retail units around the country owned by SCC and its partner Halsey Garton Property Group (HGP)  currently valued at £346million – they boast such tenants as Poundland; Matalan; and Next which make up 47% – the remainder are discount shops, department stores, fashion, pets etc.

It has also signed up to take a £56million share of the Blightwells, East St development in Farnham because other investors wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole. It could be ready for occupation sometime over the next five years, weather and bats permitting!

But don’t worry chaps and chapesses, because Hodge the Bodge is supremely confident he has the right expertise on the investment board with a number of members holding years of experience in the commercial sector.

So we can all sleep soundly in our beds in the full knowledge that now SCC, in addition to Dumb and Dumber, has appointed Councillor Nick Darby, (Dittons and West Green Residents) who has 38 years business experience and together with his colleagues is constantly assessing the risk of how to invest OUR money and is “challenging the decisions made.”

Well, perhaps he should begin by challenging the decision promoted by Denise Le Gal  and Waverley Borough Councillor for Farnham and the present Mayor, and the former SCC councillor for Cranleigh/Ewhurst  Alan Young who together promoted tens of millions of pounds of OUR money being dispensed into yet another Big Black Hole, and we are not talking about potholes.

Here are just some of the empty retail premises in Farnham!


Someone has just written this:  

Screen Shot 2018-07-04 at 16.07.34.png

Of course, it has a backup plan!  More shops converted into homes!


The Farnham Society turns the spotlight on Blightwells and the town’s future but why airbrush out The Redgrave Theatre!


Has the Farnham Society dropped a brick?


 The Farnham Society’s recent video about East Street/Brightwells has prompted a response from Anne Cooper, chairman of the Farnham Theatre Association. This e-mail has been forwarded to all the  FTA contacts including the Waverley Web.  Anne urges everyone to view this Youtube video which is about a better future for Farnham. Please make your own comments about the film – not just to refer to Anne Cooper’s response. 

Wherever you live in Waverley – please take five minutes to watch this important film. One of our historic towns is under threat and th bulldozers are moving in!

Dear Farnham Society,

Congratulations on making this film, which will be seen by a very wide
audience. I hope it will bring changes for a better future for Farnham.

However – and you will know what I am about to say – WHY IS THERE NO
THEATRE CAN BRING TO A TOWN CENTRE? Between the years when Crest
Nicholson’s first planning application appeared in 2006 and its most
recent applications, the loss of the theatre brought in just over half
the total number of the many thousands of objections. FTA led the way in
2006 by standing on the streets with objections to the demolition of the
theatre and people formed queues to sign. The Farnham Herald has a
picture of Jeremy Hunt ppc supporting a placard saying ” Sign here.
Save Your Theatre!” He knew what a popular issue it was.

Recently FTA met Waverley’s CEO Tom Horwood and Julia Potts. Tom
Horwood said he was very well aware that High Streets everywhere are
struggling and that people no longer want to come away from a town
centre with just purchases as they want experiences too. We said that
is why we want a theatre and he agreed.

The film’s silence on the emotive subject of the demolition of the
theatre is blatant. It apes Waverley’s revisionist tendency in trying
to write the Redgrave out of history, as though it never happened.
There seems to be a fear that any mention of a revived Redgrave would
undermine Farnham Maltings. How wrong that is! The Maltings could
expand its operations with access to a purpose-built theatre designed to
attract audiences. Now, that is a future worth contemplating.

With best regards,

Anne Cooper

Farnham Theatre Association Chairman

This Farnham lady wants her brick back!

This Farnham lady wants her brick back!


So in the true spirit of kindness the Waverley Web – has made her one!

And we have a few ideas who she can drop it on from a great height!


Is it any wonder that the public has lost faith in fundraising and supporting community projects? Time and time again, the call goes out for us to dig deep into our pockets to provide funds for a community hospital, a community building, an old people’s day centre – and here in Farnham – a  theatre! And whoops – before you know it, along comes ‘Your Waverley’ or the health authority, or another Tom, Dick or Harriet, with another cunning plan to trouser our cash. Yesterday, with no notice – the powers that are omnipotent closed Midhurst Community Hospital’s 17 beds. A hospital supported tirelessly by local people. The CCG didn’t even tell the `League of Friends. So Waverley Borough Council demolishing the much-loved Redgrave Theatre, Blightwells Cottage along with their Pipistrel bats, is no surprise to any of us. It then sticks up a few bat poles to placate the voting-fodder with an informative that if the developer destroys the bats they are breaking environmental law. Since when has that worried our council or the developers. They have been breaking environmental law for years.

Listen, Mrs. Goff, we know we are a little cynical here at the WW – but the decision-makers at Waverley Towers don’t give one toss that local schoolchildren saved their pennies to buy a brick! Neither will they return same bricks to their rightful owners, because if they did they might find some of them flying through the windows of Waverley Towers in protest!  However,  those community-minded youngsters who bought a brick and who trusted the custodians of their money, are now adults, possibly living in other parts of this country and abroad.

But fear not – here’s wScreen Shot 2018-06-28 at 07.56.43here The Waverley Web’s  ‘pedipalps’  now reach. And unless they live in Greenland, in remote parts of Africa or New Guinea – they will know how they have been cheated, and they will have less faith in people and trust ‘the system’ just that little bit less.


WHY? Because that is part of all our yesterdays – and Crest Nicholson are putting in £2 million into art, recreation, and primary education in Farnham because the borough and county councils can no longer afford to provide these basic services through our rates. Also, Crest Nicholson has been handed a prime site on a plate by ‘Your Waverley.’ to enable it to make even more millions to pay its newly appointed Chief Executive Officer and Waverley’s Wonersh Park resident Mr Patrick Bergin another big fat bonus! 


Here’s the Haslemere car park petition you have been asking for. Sign up, sign up.


The Waverley Web is here to highlight, and support the efforts of everyone in the borough.

Look what our support achieved for the people of Godalming, who made Surrey County Council do a complete volt face over the closure of Green Oak School.

Godalming’s people power prevails.

Screen Shot 2018-07-01 at 11.55.58.png

Godawfulming’s fed-up dog walkers barking mad!


 Is  Surrey County Council’s new initiative called… Pay and Conserve? 

But the good news is… The disabled can walk their dogs FREE! Whoopee! But you have to pay by credit or debit card or by phone! This includes  Newlands Corner one of the county’s favourite beauty spots.,


Screen Shot 2018-06-19 at 17.47.52.png

Screen Shot 2018-06-19 at 13.54.46.png

Rodborough Common is the latest area to be targeted as a Surrey County Council cash cow! But Waverley Council has a much better idea. o how to use one of the borough’s car parks. Read it here: Haslemere needs YOU! So let’s all support its petition to save its car park.


%d bloggers like this: