What chance housing at Dunsfold now?


Screen Shot 2017-10-21 at 13.11.47.png

The vast majority of recent ministerial decisions on using appeals have been in TORY seats and an appreciable proportion are being REFUSED against inspector’s advice, research shows. In other words decision being made are not PLANNING DECISIONS BUT POLITICAL DECISIONS!

According to research carried out by law firm Irwin Mitchell, 64 of the 69 decisions called-in applications or recovered appeals involving housing proposals issued in communities secretary Sajid Javid’s name since he took office last June involved sites in Conservative constituencies. “That’s a pretty amazing statistic, given the Tories have only 56 per cent of English MPs,” said Irwin Mitchell planning partner Carl Dyer.

The research, published recently, also highlights 14 cases involving some 2,500 homes in which Javid refused permission against inspectors’ recommendations. All but one were in Tory-held constituencies. The exception was Speaker John Bercow’s Buckingham constituency, where plans for 130 homes were refused in July following a call-in inquiry. “If the system is leading to the secretary of state looking more closely at his supporters’ seats, that issue will continue to influence his successors until it is addressed,” said Dyer.

Closer analysis of the figures shows that those 2,500 homes accounted for around 15 per cent of the total units proposed in schemes decided by Javid. During his tenure, he has endorsed inspectors’ recommendations to refuse 25 schemes collectively comprising around 6,000 homes but approved 28 schemes providing more than 8,000 units. In only two cases, including a 750-home development in Lichfield approved this February, has he gone against an inspector’s recommendation to refuse permission.

Dyer voiced frustration at growing ministerial intervention on housing schemes since the 2015 election. He suggested that the recovery threshold for ministerial intervention, currently set at 150 units outside neighbourhood plan areas, should be raised to something like 1,000 homes: “Below that, the government should leave well alone,” he said.

Screen Shot 2017-10-21 at 13.16.06.png

Conflict with emerging or adopted neighbourhood development plans (NDPs) featured in eight of the 14 schemes refused against inspectors’ advice. “It appears that the secretary of state is giving more weight than his inspectors to neighbourhood plans. These are certainly more popular in the south of England, where the Conservatives have more seats. It’s crazy that ministers are getting involved in schemes of a few dozen homes,” said Dyer.

The high percentage of decisions in Conservative seats is a function of England’s political geography and the significant weight the government attaches to NDPs, said Matthew Spry, senior director at consultancy Lichfields. “Conservative seats are focused more in rural areas, so it’s more likely they will encounter greenfield schemes that attract call-in or recovery. It’s the same with NDPs – 79 per cent of made neighbourhood plans are in Conservative-controlled councils, but these make up only 54 per cent of all councils.”

David Bainbridge, a planning partner at consultants Bidwells, pointed to a correlation between high housing demand, constrained land supply and political governance. “Conservative controlled councils in the South East and East of England are subject to significant growth pressures.” In that event, he said, “the more vocal and motivated opposition will use political connections to assist their case”. He added: “If local politicians support the proposed development, ministerial intervention is less likely. But many of us have the feeling that more appeals are recovered, or at least that more are refused, in the run-up to a general election.”

Simon Neate, a director at consultancy Indigo Planning, said the preponderance of ministerial interventions in Tory seats revealed by the Irwin Mitchell research is probably due to better links between residents and their MPs and ministers in rural or semi-rural areas with environmental and landscape protection. “Conservative-minded people are likely to be conservative in other respects and more likely to object. Attractive places attract civic-minded people anxious to protect local amenities and often well equipped to do something about it,” he said.

Commenting on the key findings from the Irwin Mitchell study, a Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said: “The secretary of state, in considering called-in applications and recovered appeals, will always focus on the merits of the individual cases before making a decision, having full regard to the inspector’s report. His role is to reach a view based upon his consideration of the facts.”
Separate research by Indigo presented at last week’s Planning for Housing conference, organised by Planning, indicates that the proportion of appeals dismissed where councils could show a five-year land supply increased from 14 per cent in January 2016 to 25 per cent this August. The research also revealed that the overall number of homes allowed on appeal decreased from 34,000 in 2015/16 to 28,000 in 2016/17, with a further drop predicted in 2017/18. But Neate said this was “more than compensated for” by a rise in the number of homes approved by local authorities. The DCLG has been approached for a statement.

Needless to say, one has not been forthcoming – ‘surprise, surprise.’

The morale of the tale… more green fields and open countryside going under concrete in the Waverley borough NEAR YOU?
Conservative Councillors can refuse planning applications locally, knowing that their refusal will be overturned on Appeal!


Is the temperature rising – at ‘Your Waverley’?


Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 18.52.56.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 20.02.49.png


When is prime agricultural land, not prime agricultural land?


When local authorities agree with each other that they  want to grant planning permission to build on it!

When Guildford councillors overturned their officers’ advice to approve an application to build 254 homes on the Waverley/Guildford border at Tongham, it sent temperatures rising at Waverley judging by Joint Planning Committee Chairman ‘Mao’ aka Peter Isherwood’s puce-face, he looked fit to burst a blood vessel!

Q When is a SANG ( Sustainable access to a natural green space) – not a SANG?

A When it cannot be accessed – from the A331 and the A31, and is isolated?

Guildford councillors’ objections centred around the ‘strain the proposed development would put on the local healthcare system’ and the lack of transport infrastructure in the area? Their decision was prompted by the concerns expressed by the Guildford & Waverley Care Commissioning Group(G&W CCG).

Wow! Who rattled its cage all of a sudden? It has been strangely silent on the question of development in the Waverley Borough, despite thousands of homes having already  been approved adding many more thousands of  extra patients  requiring  healthcare! Is the CCG waking up – at last! Or is it only waking up in Guildford – and not Waverley?

The planning officers led by Liz The Biz recommended approval of the hybrid application, but changed her mind when Guildford councillors said NO.  Never mind the fact that there proposed development would breach the strategic gap between Farnham and Guildford, just a minor difficulty really! Anything goes in Waverley.

Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 18.55.38.png

 One of our followers  in the east summed it all up (below) – after  the unanimous decision by Waverley’s JPC to refuse the application to provide  green space on their side of the boundary, to allow the huge development on the Guildford side to go ahead.

P.S. It goes to appeal next week! So watch this space!

Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 20.05.55.pngScreen Shot 2017-10-12 at 20.06.11.png

Dumb and Dumber making an ‘ASH’ of it… again?


£27m of the county council’s pension fund invested in tobacco companies – and a £400,000 grant to the Watts Gallery when at the same time  borough councils are forced to kick wardens out of sheltered accommodation, and recycling centres shut their gates to the public – most of the week!

You couldn’t make it up could you? Because it is also promoting The Stop Smoking Campaign throughout the county!

DUMBANDDUMBERAnd now Dumb and Dumber  want everyone in Surrey to write to the Prime Minister to complain about central government funding cuts. The Waverley Web sincerely hopes Theresa May sends them away with a flea in their ears.

Surrey is one of the most prosperous counties  in the country. Its residents pay squillions in taxes, mostly pay for their own elderly care and many provide their own private health-care. The charitable sector is also one of the best funded in the country, and thanks to the generosity of Surrey residents who volunteer and give up many millions of hours of their time – voluntary organisations and the arts continue.

So what the hell is the council doing with our money? Isn’t it time Surrey County Council starts thinking about its  priorities?  

Screen Shot 2017-10-19 at 21.30.12.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-19 at 21.30.55.pngScreen Shot 2017-10-19 at 21.31.24.png

By Jove – Waverley Planners have broken the habit of a life-time and REFUSED a development in the east.


 There we were  the  cynical souls at the Waverley Web only yesterday predicting that the Planning Officers jackboot would be firmly put up the arse of the Joint Planning Committee to ensure development of 58 dwellings would go ahead in Ewhurst. So we were wrong!

But 10 out of 10 to the officers and their YES men for trying!

Oops here goes another Neighbourhood Plan.

Just as well our editorial team didn’t put a bet on this Larkfield, Ewhurst scheme  which was REFUSED by 10 votes to eight. We would have sworn Liz the Biz would have pummelled wannabe objectors into line. And… are we  mistaken? Was  demob happy  Peter Cleveland showing his softer side as he is leaving Waverley Towers to work for – would you Adam and Eve it developers, and there were we thinking he already did!

Needless to say all the usual culprits Michael Goodridge (unelected Wonersh), Mike Band (Cranleigh)  Chairman Peter Isherwood (Hindhead), etc  stuck their mits in the air, supporting development, anytime, any place, anywhere, regardless of highway dangers, the views of the locals, and certainly NOT – the lack of suitable infrastructure, on a dangerous junction. Would have been a different story had our Farnham twins Carole Cockburn and Pat Frost been there. Only 18 members turned up!

Ewhurst Parish Councillor Mike Turner together with a villager put up a strong case for kicking former resident Peter Nutting’s application to extend the Larkfield development on The Green into touch.  A scheme, which if allowed, could open the floodgates to further development at the back of Mapledrakes Road and could herald a huge change in  Ewhurst’s rural character.

Mr Brierley (sorry couldn’t hear…again (?)  speaking for objectors argued Waverley’s Local Plan proposed 100 dwellings in Ewhurst between 2013-2032.

 “So we should be building 57 homes over the next 15 years not 58 homes over the next 15 months.’

Referring to  outstanding consents at Backward Point  and outstanding appeals at Chanrossa on Cranleigh Road,  he argued  if these were combined with the Larkfield  scheme  it would amount to a huge character change for  Ewhurst. A rural village with few amenities, and which relied on Cranleigh for most of its services. 

Borough Councillor Val Henry, who had no vote, said four minutes was insufficient to sum up her strong opposition, which had generated  huge objection from villagers. She warned of the consequences of making the highway improvements proposed by SCC highways, and claimed HGV’s were already badly damaging roads.The loss of mature trees would impact on The Green and,  ‘the street scene will be changed for all time.’ It would also virtually scupper the emerging Neighbourhood Plan

Ewhurst is now a well  used  rat run from Horsham, through Shere and onto the A3.

Alfold’s Kevin Deanus, said from the outset he was “totally opposed’, and would  vote against. The developer is trying to squash a pint into a half pint pot, The Green is a C listed road, – do I believe an access is suitable there? – No I DO NOT!

Cranleigh Councillor Mary Foryszewski preceded her objection by saying she was ‘thoroughly  depressed’  being asked, yet again,  to permit yet more development on the borough’s green fields. ‘One meeting after another we are  asked to support development on yet another of our green fields, Cranleigh, Alfold, and Ewhurst’s  – I know I won’t be listened too, but watch this space,  eventually it will  come to the rest of the borough’s  green fields, near you.

Screen Shot 2017-10-18 at 22.57.33.png‘Richard Cooper SCC highway ‘expert’ said there was NO road safety danger at the Ewhurst junction. (remember: an ex is a has-been and a spurt is a drip under pressure) the same sort of ‘experts’  who defended the indefensible granting 54 homes on a Cranleigh flood plain for Thakeham homes.  The same ‘ex-perts’ that painted a blue line and pretended it was a pavement, instead of a proper pavement, for the Baker Oates development in Boundstone, Farnham.

The councillor who describes himself as ‘the Cranleigh lorry driver’ owner of Stennetts Transport, described the proposed, so-called  highway improvements, as dangerous. Warning HGV’s would be forced to drive on the wrong side of the road, facing oncoming traffic . The same road used daily by Ockley brick lorries – click on the link below to see just how many more lorries!

.Is another ‘horrendous’ scheme on its way to the MAD WORLD THAT IS THE.. East of Waverley?

But after the application was refused – the officers warned that traffic concerns should NOT be used as grounds for refusal – because – the ex-perts had a different view! And there was a strong chance there would be another APPEAL!









Going Going Godalming


Build more homes say The Conservatives! Build more homes on Brownfield land says the Government! Convert empty offices into flats without planning permission says the Government! Brilliant – instant housing numbers say the Conservatives!

The unintended consequences of converting town centre offices to flats means naturally – there are no places to work in our towns. And to afford a town centre flat (starting at £350k), you’ll naturally need to commute to London. And you’ll be so busy working, you’ll need to rely on Amazon Prime and Ocado online to deliver your internet shopping. Visit the high street? Don’t have time – except for maybe a cheeky Saturday stroll around a Farmers Market.

The consequences of all this are there are no office workers to buy sandwiches and eat out during the day, and everybody is so tired or poor, they can’t afford to eat out in the evening. Hence Godalming’s failing high street:


Photos from Huw Price on the Community Board.
In addition the franchisee of Subway has handed back the lease, and independent Bar Coretto have shut down completely. Alan Paine Knitwear has gone, and next door to them the Scats/Mole Countryside store has shuttered. Opposite them the English Chain company are rumoured to be developing their offices works for flats too.
You can’t even spend a penny in Godalming High Street, since Waverley shut the toilets in Crown Court – although we understand the local councillors are so fed up of being pissed upon by Waverley that the Town Council will be investing in new bog roll very soon.

Oops here goes another Neighbourhood Plan.


Screen Shot 2017-10-16 at 18.32.23.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-16 at 19.29.53.pngDown the pan goes Cranleigh’s Neighbourhood Plan, then Farnham’s, Alfold’s and now its the turn of the Surrey Hills village of Ewhurst.

Isn’t it time  to rip up all the borough’s Neighbourood Plans – forget the many millions of hours spent by thousands of residents across the borough in their preparation. Because Waverley has a developer led plan, backed by Government Inspectors’ all of whom are determined to cover ‘Your Waverley’ in concrete.

This week it is the turn of Ewhurst to be ignored by Liz the Biz and the rest of Waverley’s shove and shunt planning officers – one of whom is off to greener pastures, where no doubt, he will soon be covering that in concrete?

On Wednesday the jackboot of Elizabeth Sims( LTB) will go under the arse of Peter Cleveland, and Chairman Peter Isherwood to shove through 58 homes into the foot of the picturesque Surrey hills . Land  owned by Peter Nutting has been earmarked,  after his previous success developing the countryside in homes and now called Larkfield,  wants to trouser a bit more dosh by knocking down two homes to force  onto more of his land behind for another 58. Not in his name of course!

Screen Shot 2017-10-16 at 18.54.42.png

Having buggered off to Hampshire’s countryside, the former Ewurst resident is eager  to plump up his bank balance, having once told its residents how much he and his family cared for the place they once called home.

So ditch the Neighbourhood Plan, and let’s all hear ‘Your Waverley’, not ours any more,  here at the Waverley Web we’re  too ashamed to own up to recognising this council as ‘ours’,  as it recommends  its  handpicked councillors, which won’t include substitutes from Cranleigh,  consent to  homes beyond the Green Belt. Homes outside the defined settlement on a site which was not allocated within its own Draft Local Plan, or was put forward as a suitable site in the Council’s (2016) Land Availability Assessment.

Oh, and forget that it is  good agricultural land, or that there is ancient woodland or trees covered by  Tree Preservation Orders which will have to go. Just give them the chop and plant some new ones around the little boxes. As for the wildlife! what wildlife? Sod them,  they can always gravitate up the hill a bit, because there’s no gold in them there hills – or is there?

What ever you do JPC – don’t take a blind bit of notice of the parish council or the villagers of Ewhurst over there in the East, because most of them are just Tory voting fodder, who will rock-up at the next election and vote for anything BLUE!

But just REMEMBER – the new residents will rely for almost every service they use, including GP’s on CRANLEIGH NEW TOWN!

 Inspector SJ Buckingham maintained the site in Farnham mentioned below was ‘ previously developed land’ in other words – a brown field site, and would not be ‘especially harmful in the countryside’. Funny,  Waverley planners seem less reticent about granting permissions on the countryside, even around flood plains, in the East of the borough.

So – another shed-load of legal costs will soon drop into the council tax-payers lap.




In one short, succinct letter to the Haslemere Herald, Peter Maltby, of Chiddingfold, has explained why Sajid Javid should pull his finger out and grant consent for the Dunsfold Park planning application which is currently gathering dust on his desk.

Forget Mistress Milton. Forget Jeremy SHunt. Forget PoW. Forget the Waverley Web. Just read and digest the argument put forward by Mr Maltby, a Chiddingfold resident who is fed up with the Parish Councils, in cahoots with PoW, who are persistently not representing the views of the majority of local residents like him.

Oh! and don’t forget Mr Maltby, and all you other unsuspecting parish residents, your parish councils are spending your money opposing Dunsfold, and your borough council is spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of your money – supporting Dunsfold Park! You couldn’t make it up!!

Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 16.31.28.png

17.10.12 - Dunsfold site is too good to miss copy.png

Apologise! Why would Hunt the Shunt – apologise, you have to be a BIG man to do that … don’t you?


Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 16.01.49


“I really must try harder to tell the TRUTH.”

Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 16.01.49.png

After making a false claim, a very false claim, in fact 43(x) times a false claim, in the House of Commons on World Health Day – our MP has remained shtum and allowed the Department of Health to correct Hansard on his behalf.

The MP for South West Surrey told his colleagues there were 30,000 more people working in mental health now, compared to when Labour left office.

It’s ok  for Hunt, because the official record (Hansard) has been corrected, and the DoH says, ‘he has no intention of apologising.’  Why would he – he wouldn’t know how!Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 16.28.24.png

Barbara Keeley, Labour’s Shadow Cabinet Member for Mental Health and Social Care said: ‘The Tory government claim to want to make mental health a priority, but Jeremy Hunt doesn’t even know how many mental health staff are working in the NHS.

“Safe staffing was an issue raised by the CQC’s new State of Care report recently. Labour will invest more in mental health so that all services are staffed safely.”

Mr Hunt initially made the claim in response to the opening question from Tory colleague Stephen McPartland  in the Health Questions in the House of Commons.

A question provided to Mr Hunt in advance of the session, by Mr McPartland asked “what steps he has taken to increase the size of the mental health workforce.”

Reading from papers in front of him, Mr Hunt replied: “Our mental health workforce has increased by 30,000 since 2010, and another 21,000 posts are planned.”


When a Member of Parliament inadvertently misleads the house, it is common practice for them to APOLOGISE  to the house.  

Dave Munday, the Unite union’s lead officer for mental health said: “Jeremy Hunt is shameless in trying to distort the true reality of what’s happened to mental health nursing under the Tories and should apologise to parliament.

“On his watch we’ve seen the number of mental health nurses plummet by 13.1% because of austerity and real term pay cuts. The truth is there’s a crisis in mental health because of him and the Tory government.”

Mr Hunt has previously been accused of misleading the House over his claim that there were 11,000 ‘excess deaths’ in the NHS at weekends.

 He also told Waverley Tories he didn’t intend to interfere in the Dunsfold Park planning saga, which is situated a mile from his home, and then proceeded to tell  a woman on Godalming Station, he was opposed to the development.

White man speaks with forked tongue comes to mind.


Screen Shot 2017-10-12 at 16.04.15.png



The Waverley Web has always thought of The Telegraph as a serious newspaper with an international reputation for quality reporting ‘of record’ …

But that was before we read in the October 8th edition of The Sunday Telegraph that they’d tipped Mistress Milton as a potential contender for the Leadership of the Tory Party in their ‘On the rise Tory contenders in the ranks’ article …

Are they mad?

Who, outside of Waverley, has even heard of Mistress Milton?

After a lot of back patting – having choked on our croissants and coffee – to a wo/man our editorial team concluded that someone at The Telegraph was having a joke – a BIG joke – at Mistress Milton’s expense. Well, what else are we supposed to think when one looks at the quality of the other contenders on the list – Dominic Raab, Esther McVey, Jo Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg … need we go on?

And, if further proof were needed, with Britain building 60,000 too few homes a year and an affordability crisis that has caused home ownership among the young to slump by a third, that Flag-Waving-NIMBY, the Rt Hon Anne Milton MP, is the last woman likely to be chosen to address that particular problem.

Not only has she openly boasted about how she whipped Sajid Javid (Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government) into calling in an application on the largest brownfield site – which isn’t even in her constituency! – but she’s so far behind the times in Cranleigh she needs to get on a moving-walkway just to stand still! Whilst boasting that Cranleigh only needs a few hundred homes, it seems to have entirely passed her by that consent has been granted for over 1,800 – with many more in the pipeline! – and all because she got Dunsfold Park called in to appease the cash-and-clout-brigade in Alfold and Dunsfold who line her election coffers.

Now the crash and clout brigade are moving in  on our Annie’s little political sinecure of Ewhurst, where a ‘once local landowner and Annie supporter’ wants to build another shedload of houses.

annemilton_newoutfitOnce we’d all stopped laughing, one of our more astute editors pointed out that the even more interesting point about the article was what it didn’t say … not a word about Jeremy SHunt, Mistress Milton’s parliamentary colleague, whom it’s rumoured locally was hiding behind her starched linen skirts when she battered, bullied, cajoled and finally whipped Javid into doing their bidding! How the mighty have fallen!!!

You can read the Telegraph article here:


When will someone within ‘Your Waverley’s’ the hallowed halls be held accountable for their BIG mistakes?


Croydon Council kicked Waverley’s ‘Omen’ into touch with a golden goodbye, and ‘Your Waverley’ welcomed him with open arms. He has seen off two Chief Executives – Mrs MOP and Wen-am-I leaving, but now his reign is over… WW wonders WHY?

After all – didn’t he do well – he managed to kick Age UK Waverley into touch – even suggesting, just a month ago, that all the other voluntary sector organisations would do much better if they were funded by a Waverley Lottery leaving  ‘Your Waverley’ to trouser £750,000 a year, by dumping their future funding on… US.

Yep,  it’s called double whammy!

Then of course he managed to re-new all the old people’s day centre leases, making it even more difficult for them to stay in the black, and…

re-negoiated the 100 year-lease on Cranleigh’s beloved day centre, and exchanged it for a 25 year-lease which,  if the organisation fails, YES YOU GUESSED… the lease returns to your very clever WBC! So… a building funded by the residents of Cranleigh, on land owned by ‘YW’ goes right back to “YW.’ Who can then do just what the hell they like with it!

His colleagues call him THE OMEN, we here at the WW call him the ‘Silent Assassin.’

Good luck Epsom and Ewell Council – you lose -we gain! And… he gets out, yet again,  before the mucky brown stuff hits the proverbial fan!!



Another one heads for the…Screen Shot 2017-10-09 at 19.00.47.png

You can read the pdf file here:

17.10.12 – Council chief quits shortly before the outcome of air quality report copy

‘Your Waverley’s’ very own ‘Billy no mates,’ stands up for Cranleigh and is slapped down…again.


Here is a clip of Farnham Residents’ Councillor Jerry Hyman explaining why 54 homes should not be built on the flooded fields pictured below:

Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 17.54.20.png

Just in case you missed one of our Farnham councillors speaking up for Cranleigh in  a bid to persuade Waverley Planners from making yet another… MISTAKE.. A BIG MISTAKE.Screen Shot 2017-08-17 at 16.21.28


The morale of the tale is quite simple.




Ignore ‘local knowledge,’ refuse to allow pictorial evidence to be shown, because it could provide valuable evidence that could influence the decision-makers, who continually ignore the views of Cranleigh councillors, and remember that Chairman Moa is in charge – and the “experts and the lead flood authority are always right’

So don’t forget  Cranleigh residents – the  next time your homes go under a couple of feet of floodwater, and the summer stench and fly infestations are difficult for you to bear…  in 2017 the ‘experts’ said…

No problem! and so did a Touch of Frost and Chairman Mao!

Thakeham’s home – but certainly not dry!

Mea Culpa – Councillor David Else.



In our recent report on the disgraceful decision by ‘Your Waverley’s’ Joint Planning Committee to allow Thakeham Homes application to build  54 homes on one of the worst floodplains  in Cranleigh, we made a BIG MISTAKE. We inadvertently named the  councillor named above as having voted FOR the scheme rather than AGAINST, or did he just ABSTAIN?

Thakeham’s home – but certainly not dry!

Well Councillor Else we apologise for our error, and fully understand that you would not wish to have your name attached to such a disgraceful decision, and one which we here at the Waverley Web believe should be judicially reviewed!

However, in our defence, may we say, on our behalf, and on behalf of the borough’s voting fodder, that it was impossible to see or hear how anyone voted. Because the webcast was aimed into the borough hall walls! Exactly the  same walls that all the objectors including Cranleigh’s borough and parish councillors as well as the Civic Society, had been addressing for more than an hour!

It was also almost impossible to hear the actual voting, and you have a chairman, unlike your good self, who finds it impossible to communicate decisions properly and appears incapable of treating his colleagues with a modicum of respect.

At least we here at the Waverley Web apologise. Councillor Isherwood, and Councillor Frost  should publicly apologise to Councillor Hyman for their utter rudeness, when all the man was doing was attempting to stand up for those poor beleaguered souls over there in the East. Honesty, transparency… HUMBUG!

Here is just one comment, selected from the  dozens we have received, some far too insulting to print.

Screen Shot 2017-10-09 at 19.06.27.png

The Omen is… roamin’!



Our erstwhile colleague Damien Roberts  – Strategic Director of ‘Your Waverley’ –  known within Waverley’s walls as The Omen – and outside as the ‘silent  assassin’ is leaving the sinking ship.

He takes his leave of ‘Your Waverley’ in a couple of months – no surprise there then and he will be closely followed by a few others, about whom we  will brief you later.

So ‘sad’ is he to be leaving the Good Ship Waverley, at such ‘an exciting time’ in the wake of the departure of his Chief Executive colleague Wen’amI’leaving (Paul Wenham), and the arrival of a new Managing Director (how many more titles for the head honcho will they come up with), that The Omen has put out a little missive to his friends and admirers.

I wanted to let you know that I have been offered a new role at Epsom and Ewell Council as their Chief Operating Officer and have decided to accept.

Screen Shot 2017-10-03 at 09.30.58.png


Residents have coined a new name for the home of ‘Your Waverley’…”Godawfulming”.


Now why would ‘Your Waverley’ want to retain local businesses – after all work places don’t figure in the housing figures do they?

So services and businesses mentioned in the e-mail below – are small fry really – and now the Catteshall Lane area of Godalming, mentioned below and which attracted a shed-load of objections – has been approved. 


Because if the Government’s wish is to cram homes into every available space, then its wish is ‘Your Waverley’s’ command. 737851301_959159

Hi William,
Just discovered that my lovely garage Catteshall Garage at Woodside Park in Godalming is closed (although the chap who ran it has gone mobile). Why? The landowner Mr R Trendle of Woodside Park Properties limited has been granted permission for “up to” 100 dwellings including 17 affordable (presumably the others won’t be affordable) plus play space, building for community use blah blah.
This one sneaked us by although Waverley notified 155 people, 16 objected and 26 supported.
Permission was given 26 May this year.
So, even more cars in Godalming once building work starts.

The Catteshall area is already heaving with vehicles as is the Sainsbury’s end of town and we await with trepidation the affect that full occupation of Prime Place (the former police station site) will bring along with, no doubt, more vehicles.

Both Sainsbury’s and Waitrose car parks are regularly bumper to bumper zig zagging right through from end to end like a huge snake, with drivers getting more and more frustrated as they try to get out.

In addition we learn that the English Chain Company in Brighton Road, Godalming also has plans lodged with Waverley for 14 dwellings on this site which has an horrendously difficult access.

When will it all end. The town has sadly become known locally as “godawfulming” – about right I reckon.


Thakeham’s home – but certainly not dry!


Another shameful night for ‘Your Waverley and its officers aided an abetted by a company that has  poured  money into Tory coffers and also aims  to build over 500 homes over  Alfold’s countryside too!

Will the last person to leave Cranleigh get the boats out? Because yet another round of ‘Your Waverley’s dirty work has been done.

Cranleigh Residents, parish and borough councillors and the Civic Society, fought tirelessly to stop  one of the most controversial applications ever to be considered by Waverley Planners. But, they failed by 10 votes to 8, with two abstentions to stop Thakeham Homes building 54 homes in Elmbridge Road.  Members of the Joint Planning Committee from the rest of the borough stood shoulder to shoulder to approve the scheme, demonstrating  they don’t give a damn about increasing Cranleigh flooding problems, the size of homes to be built there, or the stench young families will have to endure.

OH! and by the way there is no history on flooding in 2013. COMPLETE SILENCE FROM THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY. Despite the fact that its officers visited the site!  Stitch up – or what?

 Satisfied by planners and experts, (there were so many of them in the chamber it was like the charge of the light brigade) that floodwater would not reach more than 25 metres from the new homes, councillors chose to ignore  the impact the developer’s scheme  could have on every other property in Elmbridge, including homes on the adjacent  Knowle Park Initiative site still to receive detailed consent.

 Cranleigh councillor Mary Foryszewski warned her colleagues, future generations of Cranleigh people will hold them responsible for the decisions they make. And she was joined by her Cranleigh colleagues, Jeannette and Stewart Stennett, and Liz Townsend (who spoke but had no vote). 

Once again, a Cranleigh councillor Mike Band from Shamley Green, together with Wonersh councillor, Michael ‘Sleepy’ Goodridge and Bramley’s By-Pass Byham all supported building on a site in the full knowledge that it could put people’s lives at risk and where, they were warned,  homes could be uninsurable.

The treacherous bunch of Tory tossers  revealed for all to see, that they were quite prepared to accept fiddled figures based on dodgy data from The Environment Agency, Thames Water and Thakeham Homes, rather than photographic and personal  evidence provided by the people who actually live with the constant fear of flooding,  and breathe the stinking  Summer  effluent and witness road traffic accidents. They ignored photographic evidence of a car covered in floodwater, where an elderly gentleman was rescued from his car, only yards from his home. Despite being told by Cranleigh Councillor Liz Townsend and Farnham’s Jerry Hyman that floodwater was much worse than had been stated and in December 2013 it had reached 45.194m!

They also refused to allow councillors to view further  photographic evidence presented by Councillor Jerry Hyman  showing  both a water mark on the pumping station on the Elmbridge Road, taken in December 2013, as well as flood detritus, proving water had been over a 1 in 1,000 years predicted flood event. Cranleigh has suffered  at least five floods of this magnitude in 50 years – 1968, 1981, 1985, 2001 and 2013, so more than  1 in 25 years! Far from the flood zones being increased , due to recent climate change data, they were decreased, and the safety of new residents and people living further downstream should have been paramount. At which point, By-Pass B, did admit he might be worried if it caused problems in Bramley, parochial or what!!

According to the Cranleigh Civic Society: Click here: New residents are not guaranteed flood insurance, in fact they could end up with new (and very expensive) homes that are frankly worthless, but then why would Waverley councillors worry about that, they will either have RETIRED and  won’t be there to take the consequences for their dastardly deeds,  or hopefully, will be  kicked out at the 2018 elections!

So another development dumped on  Cranleigh bringing its  total new houses up to nearly 1,400.  In a race for a housing figure to stop Farnham’s new homes being built. Leaving Craneigh with flooding problems for ever more,

Guess where the children’s play areas is? In the  drainage or (SUDS) area,    so will not only be completely useless when  needed most, but a danger to youngsters. let’s  hope new residents  keeps a careful eye on their children!

So.. it’s now official – ‘Your Waverley’ is sacrificing the East of the borough on the altar of developers! AND…

 Here at the Waverley Web, we  often say, nothing further will surprise us, but we had to admit we were  shocked by the decision to allow wealthy farmer Peter Hewitt, build, what everyone admitted were,  sub-standard homes on an island adjacent to one of the worst  areas for flooding, smell and traffic hazards,  near a one way bridge the scene of numerous  serious accidents.

One councillor described Thakeham’s  argument that it  builds  “quality homes”   which would be artificially elevated to keep out the floodwater –  would become a housing  island, surrounded by water – opposite a  stinking Sewage Treatment Works, infested with flies, with  homes that fail to  meet even Waverley’s own accepted  accommodation size standards,   

But according to Brian ~Adams the Council’s Portfolio holder for planning, people wanted cheap homes, and whether or not they met acceptable standards, was not a planning consideration. 

“Yes, Mr Adams, let’s build another ghetto in Cranleigh like Sirus Place”, said one angry resident after the meeting. 

Chairman Peter Isherwood, made a fool of himself yet again, by insulting a council colleague. Yes, you guessed Farnham’s Jerry Hyman because  Farnham Residents elected representative  dared to contradict  evidence put forward by the ‘experts’, and was reminded by the chairman, who has himself become an integral part of Waverley’s  shove and shunt brigade to push  as much development in the East as possible that HE (JH) was NOT an expert.  Despite JH’s dogged determination to challenging the experts  ‘misleading evidence’, Isherwood did his usual shut the fu** up exercise, accusing  Hyman, of ‘being no expert and refusing to allow him to speak.

Here’s one residents take on the evening, despite the fact that when voting took place the webcast camera was pointed to the wall! Wonder why? Could it be councillors wanted to keep their faces hidden.

Well here they are: Carole Cockburn (stick it all over there in Cranleigh because we don’t want more housing in Farnham), Chairman Peter Isherwood(Handheld) , Maurice Byham – I’ll vote for anything anywhere as long as it isn’t Dunsfold; Mike Band; Michael Goodridge (Wonersh) ; Bryan Adams(Frensham/Tilford) ; Anna James (Chiddingfold);  Pat Frost (Farnham), David Else (Elstead); Stephen Hill (Farnham) 

It makes my blood boil – I want to know who voted for and who against – Bet I can guess!!! Planners ignore the facts and stick to the NPPF when it suits – I am sick to death of this Planner-Lead Council – as for Isherwood dissing Mr Hyman- there has to be something that can be done – It makes for foul watching and I really feel for the Cranleigh Councilors who are simply not listened to – I hope that when Thakeham try to sell these homes the Buyers know what they are getting……. Boxes for the Affordable and Flooded gardens for everyone – Well done Thakeham. Having reviewed their tactics with the proposed Springbok developement – anything that can be done via Desk Based research or dodgy companies that no longer exist is fine – Shocking and I cannot believe they let this one through – Well done WBC – I hope you will bear the fruits of this decision when it all goes soggy and insurance claims start coming in – Bearing in mind this is all recorded for posterity – I will certainly remind them.


If you can bear it You can watch the meeting,  streamed for two hours before the actual meeting takes place – here:


KPI – turns the tide for the houses at Poo Corner.


So there you have it, folks, if,  although we rather suspect it’s a case of, when (given how desperate ‘Your Waverley’ is to increase its housing numbers –  since Mistress Milton and Jeremey Shunt succeeded in their  machinations to have  Dunsfold Park’s scheme called in,  depriving Waverley of 1800 much needed homes), Thakeham Homes succeeds in building yet more houses on Cranleigh’s floodplain, they’ll be calling their new development The Houses at Pooh Corner!


No doubt it believes  that a hefty dose of nostalgia and rural realism will go down a treat with those emigrating down the A3 from Nappy Valley and if anyone has the nerve to complain to the Thakeham Thugs when the affluent’s effluent starts coming up through their mod-cons – dishwashers, washing machines and jacuzzis – they’ll be able to tell them, with perfectly straight faces – why do you think we called them The Houses at Pooh Corner?

Some developers will do anything to mislead ‘Your Waverley’s Planners. Following our Post yesterday headed: Thakeham’s thuggery set to reap rich rewards. we received the following comment from a man who knows more than a little bit about Cranleigh’s matters, and a more than a bit about the shady goings on there.

What is it with Cranleigh  developers, who appear to be  beyond the pale in their desperation to get rich quick. The Knowle Park Initiative boasts  to be the saviour of Cranleigh, with a mission statement that reads like something out of The Brothers Grimm book of fantasy and fairytales.

Listen to the webcast tonight and watch democracy at work as planning officers,  who once upon a time were there to guide members, kick them into submission to ensure  permission is granted for 54 more homes in Elmbridge Road, to add to the 700 already granted – and there’s more to come!


 Dear Waverley Web,

The two main problems with this site are flood risk and odour risk, and you have done a good job pointing this out. Please also note:

The flood risk is a little more acute than perhaps you realise. Since moving here in 1896, I’ve seen this field flooded a few times. Since 2013 when the cottage just across the road got badly flooded and the occupants had to vacate for almost a year, in late 2015 the developer KPI (Knowle Park Initiative) illegally dredged the stretch of Cranleigh Waters along their proposed site in an attempt to move the flood risk from their site downstream (to this proposed Thakeham Homes field). The Environment Agency has told Cranleigh Civic Society that if an application from KPI to dredge the river had been applied for, it would not have been granted. We told the Head of Planning at Waverley Borough Council about this at a meeting on 02-Mar-16, but she ignored it.

Also, the odour risk is a greater problem than most people realise. Thames Water had an odour assessment done by Ove Arup and Partners in January this year. The report states that their modelling shows the majority of the site to be within the 1.5 to 3 ouE/m3 98th percentile, and in their conclusions they state “The results indicate that odour may be a constraint to residential development on the proposed site, with up to 95% of the proposed site predicted to fall within the 3 ouE/m3 contour.” Cranleigh Civic Society pointed this out to Waverley BC and they ignored it.

Kind regards,

Adrian Clarke
Cranleigh Civic Society

So, we ask,  how much longer will Waverley Planners be permitted to continue allowing unsuitable development in unsuitable locations, in the village councillors themselves have dubbed, “poor old Cranleigh?”

Thakeham’s thuggery set to reap rich rewards.


It’s official according to Thames Water and Surrey County Council’s experts there’s no smell from the Cranleigh Sewage Treatment Works, and the area doesn’t flood!

Got it – No smell,  no floodwater!


 Regardless of what the locals say,  including Cranleigh Parish Council, The Civic Society and Elmbridge residents  the planning numpties at’ Your Waverley’ will tomorrow {Thursday}  stick two fingers up to the residents  whose homes suffer from the stink from the sewage works, and the scourge of annual flooding.

So sod the poor devils that live alongside the Cranleigh Waters’ and Wey and Arun Canal, adjacent to the one way bridge – who have only recently re-occupied their homes since the 2014/15 floods… because what do they know anyway!

Certainly not more than the well-informed  planning team led by Liz the Biz, and Peter Cleveland, who no doubt will  have  left Waverley Towers, long before the next rains hit Cranleigh.

Why wouldn’t you build…  54 dwellings along with associated works, to include formation of an access onto Elmbridge Road? 

 And why wouldn’t you acknowledge that  a ‘desk study’ of the site by developers and county council flooding experts, is far preferable to listening to the views of the people who have lived there, for as long as 50 years, and have the wellington boots to prove it.

Can you remember the days when the comments of parish councils and residents of this borough counted for something? 

Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 17.55.16.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-03 at 19.27.42.png

This is a greenfield site which is subject to regular flooding. the flood risk has been significantly underestimated and the up-to-date allowances for flooding and climate change (Feb 2016) have not been used.  Cranleigh’s sewage infrastructure is inadequate to deal with this development alongside the impact of the various other, already agreed, developments in Cranleigh. This development would have an unacceptable impact on the quality of Cranleigh Waters and does not conform the Water Framework Directive.

This site is located some distance from the village centre with poor public transport. This mean all residents will be heavily reliant upon private cause for their journeys. this is not sustainable development.

Screen Shot 2017-10-03 at 19.31.35.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 17.54.39.pngPage 11 of 61

Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 17.54.20.pngScreen Shot 2017-10-02 at 17.54.02.png


48 letters were received following the original consultations in 2016 raising the following objections:

  •   Adverse impacts on highway safety
  •   Increased flooding
  •   Does not reflect the needs of Cranleigh given the high number of other applications which have been consented
  •   Adverse impacts on ecology
  •   Sewerage plant can not cope with extra demand
  •   Proposed number of houses is more than currently in the road
  •   Impact on doctor’s surgery
  •   Loss of farmed agricultural land
  •   More urban sprawl than Cranleigh can cope with
  •   The traffic flow model does not take into account the increased volumeof traffic from the already approved sites
  •   Developers were refused permission 33 years ago
  •   Thames Water is increasing capacity at the sewerage works by 30%without planning permission
  •   Support of Dunsfold development as an alternative
  •   Affordable housing will be unaffordable
  •   Loss of vital flood plain
  •   Adverse impacts on water quality
  •   Inadequate gas, electricity and water supplies
  •   Harm to the character, beauty and openness of the countryside
  •   Up to date allowances for flooding and climate change have not beenused
  •   The site is not deliverable in 5 years
  •   The Council has a current 5 year land supply
  •   Adverse conditions in terms of odour
  •   Trucks using the road shake foundations of properties along ElmbridgeRoad
  •   No landscaping
  •   Loss of trees
  •   Flood event in December 2013 was greater than the 1 in 100 year floodplus allowance for climate change.
  •   SuDS on the western edge of the site would be overwhelmed
  •   Proposal would fail the sequential test
  •   Site is not deliverable as works are required to Cranleigh SewerageTreatment Works
  •   Impact on schoolsFollowing receipt of additional information, an additional 8 objections received on the revised information (consultation beginning August 2017) raising the following objections:
    •   Site floods
    •   No sewerage system
  •   Traffic concerns
  •   SuDs will fail (Sustainable Urban Drainage)
  •   Site would fail the sequential test
  •   The flood mapping for the area does not take into account climatechange
  •   Flooding events have occurred on or near the site on the 24th ofDecember 2013 and January 2015
  •   Development would increase flooding off site
  •   Significant sewerage issues will arise
  •   Cranleigh Waters is failing to meet the Water Framework Directive
  •   Site is not deliverable in 5 years
  •   Poor public transportDetermining Issues

The objections just keep rolling in and  So, we ask, can you see any possible reason why Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee should refuse this planning application? No, of course not, why on earth would it?

Forget the welcome hampers dished out by most developers Thakeham Homes have come up with the novel idea of giving ever buyers a pair of Hunters.

‘Your Waverley’ makes a site visit to Thakeham Homes proposed new development on a floodplain in Cranleigh.

Javid blames NIMBYs for housing problems.


Planners should ignore NIMBYs (not in my back yard) says Sajid Javid – the very same man who has listened to Waverley’s very own – called POW (Protect our Waverley) and has called in the borough’s major brownfield  scheme delaying house-building. 

Speaking at the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester this week the Communities Secretary admitted his party had spent far too long allowing older people with large homes to determine housing policy.

His comments came as it emerged Tory Ministers are urging  Mrs May to slash stamp duty for first-time buyers.

Speaking on the BBC’s John Pienar yesterday, Mr Javid said. “We have been listening too much to these people  who are against development under any circumstances. They bought their homes 20,30,40 years ago, they’re sitting on a nice net egg and don’t want to see the next generation go ahead”.

Screen Shot 2017-04-13 at 09.00.56

His remarks drew criticism from countryside groups, traditionally supportive of the Conservative Party, but Mr Javid went on to lament the “injustices” of the housing market and vowed to overhaul it with £10billion more for help-to-buy and new protections for renters including an incentive package for landlords to persuade them to offer longer tenancies.



The moving finger writes… and having writ… moves on.



Just when you thought  things couldn’t get any weirder something really weird  drops onto your door mat or, in the case of Waverley Web, into our in-box …

The Waverley rumour mill went into over drive recently (so we are reliably informed)  after every borough and even some parish councillors awoke to find a Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 11.06.43.pngpoison-pen-postcard, allegedly a confessional from the Flying Scotsman, lying on their door mats. So poisonous was it, that a warning has gone out to dog-owners, because it could be more lethal to pets than the Green & Black free chocolate scourge!

The list of potential authors is endless – in fact, we’re thinking of opening a book at Bet Fred – but what’s not in doubt is that the Flying Scotsman has royally *ISSED OFF someone somewhere.

Several recipients of the poison-pen-postcard forwarded it to Waverley Web and – surprisingly – the sentiments expressed were universal disgust:

“I’m not a fan of Mr McAllister but this type of poison pen letter is the work of a bitter and twisted mind and the writer needs to be exposed.”

“At first I thought it was a joke but on second reading it dawned on me that it was, in fact, a malevolent and vicious attempt to denigrate Mr McAllister. The writer must have a deep and very personal grudge to write something so venal not only about the man himself but about his family and his employees. I very much hope Mr McAllister gets to the bottom of who’s behind this and I’ve offered him the handwritten envelope if he wishes to take it to the police. I hope he does as there’s something very unhealthy and deeply disturbing about this type of behaviour and who knows what it might lead to.”


Another said:

“In common with many of my colleagues, I’m not a torch bearer for Dunsfold Park but this flyer is pure malice and I have great sympathy for McAllister and his team. It’s a particularly nasty and malicious personality to go to so much trouble to publically demonise someone.”

The Waverley Web – which gets a mention in the poison-pen-postcard (apparently, we’re owned by the man we’ve ‘affectionately’ named the Flying Scotsman!) and our alleged correspondents – known as ‘princesses of poison’ – are Councillors Mary Foryszewski and Liz Townsend, short-lived former Cranleigh Parish Councillor Dominique McAll and someone called Kay – thought to be former Alfold Parish Councillor Kay Newman.

Ye Gods! It makes us sound like something out of Star Wars. The Flying Scot is, of course, Darth Vadar and the ‘princesses of poison’ are his Storm Troopers. No doubt the author of the poison-pen-postcard sees him/her self as Obi-Wan Kenobi with poor old Bob Lees cast as Yoda … or is it Chewbacca? And the PoW campaigners are the Rebels. If she plays her cards right, Dear Denise could get a staring role as Princess Leia and Nic-the-brick-Pigeon and Charles William Orange Esq can be R2-D2 and C-3PO – no squabbling over who’s who, chaps!

Our message to P. Oscar Whiskey (the signature on the card, no doubt trying to cast suspicion on the PoW Campaign): Don’t waste your money on Royal Mail, send ecards to us here at Waverley Web. We like your style – ‘Princesses of Poison’, ‘Braveheart’ (now why didn’t we think of that one?!), the ‘B-Team beavering away on brown envelopes’, ‘purveyors of true planning stories in Waverley’ – we’ll publish you for free and our reach is borough-wide! Why waste time cutting, pasting and posting when we can do it all in a flash at the press of a button?

We thought the silly-season was over, but, clearly, there’s  more to be mined from  Waverley’s swamp …. Or, as some  councillors said, is Autumn ushering in a darker, more sinister season as the nights draw in? One thing is sure, as we at the Waverley Web draw the curtains and light the log burner, we’re waiting with baited breath for the next instalment in this fascinating saga of everyday developers. We can really empathise with our Victorians ancestors, anxiously waiting on the next instalment of  Martin Chuzzlewit … or do we mean Little Dorrit? Whatever, don’t keep us waiting too long – we liked the sound of you having plenty more to brag about so much we nearly peed our pants!!!

PS Who do our readers think wrote this poisonous little billet-doux? Various names have been banded about by those who forwarded the poison-pen-postcard to us but one name came up over and over and over again. Why? Apparently, it wouldn’t be the first time the gentleman (who’s clearly not one) in question has sent a letter to Waverley BC accusing the Flying Scot of various misdemeanours – all without a shred of evidence, we understand – and who, but a fellow Scot, would sign off ‘Yours aye’? No names, no pack drill but we guess, from the comments made to us, that the writer has done them self considerably more damage than they’ve done the Flying Scot!

PPS By the by, we think it’s a bit mean of the author of the poison-pen-postcard to cast the blame onto PoW by signing off as P. Oscar Whiskey – or do they think the Flying Scot is not only the brains but the money behind the PoW Campaign too? Now why didn’t we think of that?! Of course, if he’s the owner of the Waverley Web, set up and funded the Cranleigh Society, is dishing out brown envelopes, both locally and nationally, why wouldn’t he set up a body like PoW in order to control the opposition too?! Genius!

Whatever next …? We hear the Surrey Ad might be up for grabs but why stop there? Why not make a takeover bid for the  Farnham and Haslemere Heralds. 

Screen Shot 2017-10-02 at 11.07.56.png

Start writing now Farnham people – or forever hold your peace.


Screen Shot 2017-10-01 at 09.17.11.png

Wants the help of its residents to…

Screen Shot 2017-10-01 at 09.18.08.png

 Out-of-date before the ink was dry!

The consultation on Waverley’s Local Plan Part 1 finally started on Friday 8 September 2017. Councillors understood that it was going to start on Monday 3 September – perhaps a reflection of Waverley’s disarray on this issue. Regardless, the consultation period runs for six weeks, finishing at 5pm on Friday 20 October. No responses will be accepted after that. So, we are now half way though the consultation period. Residents of Farnham have an opportunity to voice their concerns about the main modifications to the Plan. We should point out that Waverley did not consult any town or parish councils, or any councillors, before announcing the modifications to their Local Plan. None.

Screen Shot 2017-10-01 at 09.17.54
We outlined the main issues that we have with the main modification last month but for the sake of clarity we repeat them again. Waverley are requiring Farnham to take an extra 450 houses of the additional 1,350 houses within the modifications. That is one third, and more than any other settlement. No additional houses are being allocated to Dunsfold aerodrome, not a single one, despite the Inspector saying that they should, and the Dunsfold team saying that they could. As a result Farnham would be taking more houses than Dunsfold, the borough’s largest brownfield site.
Waverley require that the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan be reviewed immediately to accommodate the additional houses or they will allocate the houses through their Local Plan Part 2. Subjecting such a change renders our neighbourhood plan out of date, within four weeks of it being ‘made’ as they officially call it, ie. adopted. Waverley didn’t render our plan out of date by mistake. Other borough councils would, and in fact have, respected ‘made’ neighbourhood plans. Not Waverley.

All those involved with our neighbourhood plan understood, and still understand, the need for plan-led development and for the Local Plan. Our plan was developed to ensure that all development was plan-led in Farnham and Carole Cockburn worked tirelessly with Waverley through the period of its preparation. As a result of Waverley’s actions, housing developers with recovered appeals (to be decided by the Secretary of State) have written to him asking for their proposals to be allowed.

Developers queuing up to appeal

These proposals are on greenfield sites. Developers are queuing up now to appeal.
Sites for housing development in Farnham were selected by a defined methodology with carefully prepared criteria. These were challenged by both the Examiner of our plan, and in the High Court by a consortium of developers, and were found to be both fair and robust. The immediate review of our plan and addition of new sites would question the whole process that has taken place.
Then, without even considering the impact of these additional houses, we have to contemplate years of disruption as a result of East Street / Brightwells and the redevelopment of the Woolmead site. Waverley confirmed, and the Inspector acknowledged, that Farnham’s traffic issues and resulting congestion will be exacerbated by the forthcoming developments. Asking for additional houses immediately is the wrong course of action. Our plan is front end loaded. Let our Town Council review our plan in five years’ time, as Waverley knew was always intended, and deliver any shortfall of houses in Farnham between 2027 and 2032.

We would urge you to respond to the consultation.
We are currently preparing further more detailed information which we anticipate having on this website by Monday 2 October. Alternatively look on the Farnham Town Council’s website www.farnham.gov.uk
Here is a link to Waverley’s website allowing you to see the documentation


This copy was sent to the Waverley Web by members of the Farnham Society.

The man who called in the Dunsfold Park Scheme is now promoting even more housing in the leafy home counties.


Guildford is already quaking in its boots – believing it will be in the Communities Secretaries firing line for a shed load more homes than its town plan currently proposes – will the same apply to ‘Your Waverley’.

If you read the link below you could be forgiven for thinking we are on the planet Zonk where housing is concerned. Governments/local authorities say one thing,  and then do another.

A government White Paper, Planning for the right homes in the right places, could mean that a much higher housing target is imposed.

Under the proposals, unveiled this month,  by Sajid Javid the Communities Secretary, the housing target could be increased by a further 40% in some areas, mainly in the South East  where average homes cost more than four times average salaries.

According to Guildford Borough Council leader, Paul Spooner’s email, circulated to all GBC councillors, the White Paper: “…is only a proposal for consultation … but the steer from senior ministers is that they expect this to be successfully implemented.”

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 23.27.33.png

MP Jeremy Hunt stands up in a public meeting in Waverley and says he will not  oppose redevelopment at Dunsfold, and weeks later  tells a fellow commuter  on the platform at Godalming station, (we have her name and details) says  ‘I am opposing homes at DP, and of course I live very near there’. Well that’s a better boyjeremyreason for asking Sajid Javid to call in an application which was democratically approved by YW’ to build on the largest brown field site in the borough… than Anne Milton.

She claims,  ‘a couple of hundred homes in Cranleigh  would be quite sufficient  for the whole of the Eastern area, (what! 1,800 are already approved and 2,000 are on their way.

Beam her up Scottie.

Having used  her whip to  persuade Javid to call in DP  allowing  another few million pounds to be  squandered and which is now  trickling down  the boroughs drains. And let’s not forget the extra homes that Javid so badly wants, and which, are now delayed or perhaps scotched altogether, or of course, built on Jeremy’s patch here in Farnham.

Wow – only Monty Python could do better.


Click the link here.http://www.ukconstructionweek.com/news/construction-buzz/1791-plans-to-tackle-housing-crisis-announced-construction-buzz-134utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=Read%20More%20%3E%3E&utm_source=UK%20Construction%20Week&utm_campaign=Plans%20to%20tackle%20housing%20crisis%20announced%20%7C%20Construction%20Buzz%20%23134

Oh Carole – every picture tells a story!




I will ignore anything you have to say Mr Hyman – because nothing you have to say either interests me, or has any bearing on my opinion on anything – and I mean anything.  The fact that I took exactly the same stand when you kept banging on about the non-production of the Farnham Air Quality Report that has sat in the Waverley swamp for almost two years, and has now proved to be wrong, has absolutely nothing to do with it. You just keep on, keeping on, and all my Tory Tosser friends ignore you too – except of course Wyatt Ramsdale,  John Williamson and John Ward your fellow Farnham councillors who you obviously managed to stir up. 


Now you have gone too far this time Sir Jerry – I shall close my eyes and  shut my ears to anything you may have to say.

Because I am here to speak up for Farnham – yes me, not you.  I have been here a long time, some may believe too long – but all the time I am here in the Chairman’s hot seat – YOU WILL BE IGNORED! GOT IT… I SAID – I G N O R E D.

OH! And, just in case you believe  I have broken the Council’s respect policy, I have no respect for you, or anyone else for that matter, who disagrees with me.

Can we believe anything ‘Your Waverley’ tells us?



Should we all follow the Leader?


Screen Shot 2017-09-27 at 18.44.38.png

Here’s a Press Release posted to-day! Looks bland and insignificant enough, doesn’t it?  Well, that’s what ‘YW’  hopes we will all think.

Except, here at the Waverley Web, we dug a little deeper and have discovered the sh*t is hitting ‘YW’s fan with a vengeance because it has duped its own unsuspecting councillors, it’s residents and possibly even some of it’s officers with information contained in its air quality monitoring procedure.

No problem there then, unless you happen to have asthma, respiratory problems, or any other health  problems that are acerbated by filthy and polluted air!

What you may ask is the latest little cover-up all about?

Suffice to say the council has been burying/concealing it’s Air Quality Report for Farnham for around 18 months – and there we were dopey old Farnham residents believing our air quality issues were not as bad as we first thought. Because that’s what we were told. Waverley have AQR reports up until 2015 only.

It doesn’t say anything in the Press Release that the council held an Emergency Meeting, because of course it either wasn’t webcast, or if it was, the webcast wasn’t working.  Even if it was working, we wouldn’t have heard anything, because they don’t intend us too. Because we’re  the voting fodder, and secrecy is endemic at ‘YW’.

It also begs the question? Can we believe anything we hear, like the flood risk assessments, highway assessments, noise and pollution assessments that are carried out in our borough?

Screen Shot 2017-09-28 at 09.53.03.png

Screen Shot 2017-09-27 at 18.05.03.png
The Bias Factor is a technically term for extrapolating the results from these monitoring stations and tubes accounting for temperature and how that affects to NO2 calculation.

Watch this space…. to be continued…

Do our votes count for anything – that is the question?


Judging by the shockingly poor performance of the new webcast system that dropped off the back of a lorry near The Burys, and the inability of ‘Your Waverley’ to allow the public open and  transparent access to its dealings,  the letter below sums up both WW, and many other residents, feelings.

But this doesn’t apply to just Farnham people – below the news cutting is what an Alfold follower had to say about our failing local democratic process.

Screen Shot 2017-08-11 at 20.22.59.png

This letter appeared in the Farnham Herald.

Screen Shot 2017-09-27 at 10.34.54.png

‘Your Waverley’ makes a site visit to Thakeham Homes proposed new development on a floodplain in Cranleigh.



Members of Waverley Borough Council’s Joint Planning Committee are pictured below just after  they took off their waders on  a site visit to a notorious village flood plain.   Thakeham Homes will undoubtedly be given planning consent to build another shedload of homes in Elmbridge Road, Cranleigh.

The application which was deferred in July will be consented by the Joint Planning Committee, no doubt under the Chairmanship of Peter – never turn an application down if you possibly can (‘unless it has a fence around it’)  Isherwood (Conservative) Hindhead  on September 25.  

The landowner, who once  owned strings of Polo ponies was reported to the RSPCA as horses were up to their knees in mud and water. The site, adjacent to the Cranleigh Waters and the Wey and Arun Canal,  is under water most of the winter months.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt!

As you can see they were all issued with special gear to  get them home and dry and all  set to stick their mitts in the air to ensure  yet another development is shoved through by council planning officers over there in the East of the borough.

Sadly as you can see from the picture here a few went missing – swept away on a tide of their  enthusiasm for the scheme no doubt… anyone who wants to buy a set of waders – should  apply to Your Waverley at the Burys, Godalming.

Screen Shot 2017-08-24 at 12.16.20

Liz the Biz hangs on for dear life in case the tide turns!





Dare we say it? Yes we do!


Waverley’s new Managing Director looks like our GP’s our policemen  and even the postman …

Screen Shot 2017-08-07 at 21.01.05.png


Which has delighted the young and the older members our Waverley Web team – because he might just face up to some of the serious issues the council faces. He  might even start listening to the residents  he is here to serve. Or will he kowtow to the old guard like the last chief executive?


Screen Shot 2017-08-07 at 21.03.30.png

Tom Horwood has already impressed residents over there in the East of the borough by arranging to meet with the Cranleigh Civic Society, which has more than a few concerns about the way things are going over there.

Perhaps if he starts talking to all the societies and organisations speaking up for the people of Waverley, he might just inspire a little confidence in the council he has taken under his wing.

Tom Horwood is also Executive Director of East Hants Council and Havant Council.

We wish him well.

Screen Shot 2017-09-25 at 09.55.54.png

Here is an important announcement.


Screen Shot 2017-09-21 at 21.18.41



The important topics which were discussed at the Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee – under the Chairmanship of Jerry Hyman – included –  Blightwells in Farnham; the Local Plan and  air quality issues within the borough, non of which can be communicated.

WHY? Because the new webcast equipment which was quite obviously bought off E-Bay packed up again…

So if you want to watch democracy at work – log onto : 

The People’s Republic of China or The Democratic People’s Public of Korea, where you may have more luck!

Are we all about to play the Waverley lottery?


One way or another they’re gonna getcha.

peter_vickers_waverleyWho is this grinning man? Why is he so happy? What crazy ideas does he have to help our local services? Well he is Peter Vickers – Waverley Borough Council’s Head of Finance no less.  This accountant-in-chief has come up with a thumping good idea of how to reduce the burden of the voluntary services in the borough of Waverley.

How? A WAVERLEY LOTTERY of course!

The Head of Finance can be heard in the clip below revealing his cunning plan to save the council £750,000 by ending funding to voluntary organisations such as the Citizens’ Advice Bureau, Meals on Wheels, and old people’s day centres, and instead throwing the burden onto – yes you guessed US!

Screen Shot 2017-09-16 at 07.36.44

Click Play above to listen to Peter Vickers bright idea. Notice he never uses the words “Cut their pesky grants” but a rather accountant like “switch out their funding”. Such an elegant choice of words. Clearly the man is in a hole, and needs any suggestions you can make to balance the budget, without which Waverley will be bankrupt in 3 years time. If you do have a cost cutting idea, please help a man out and phone him on 01483 523539.

Has another vital Surrey service bitten the dust.


Have you  noticed that many of Surrey’s road-side verges haven’t been cut this year. Some of our rural lanes and narrow roads are taking on a tunnel-like appearance as the banks grow closer.

This is a typical minute taken from just one parish  council in Waverley explaining that they have received notification from the county council that the Lengthsman Scheme has been dropped.  In the small village of Bramley the service, or, now lack of service, amounts to around £5,000,  in other much larger parishes, it will be considerably more.

Screen Shot 2017-07-28 at 08.55.59.png

So Bramley Parish Council has decided to do the work itself, with help from Waverley Council – so in other words the buck is passing ever downwards … again! After all why would Surrey highways want to continue to keep the drains and culverts of our owns and villages clear?

Perhaps, because it is now the leading flood authority!

At the same time this same parish council is stumping up yet more cash to stop development at Dunsfold Park! Do you sometimes think the world has gone stark staring mad.

Screen Shot 2017-07-27 at 23.53.55.pngScreen Shot 2017-07-27 at 23.50.24.png

Do Cranleigh people ‘care’ whether its fledgling civic society bites the dust?


We hear from our followers over there in the East that there is a chance that the Civic Society, that,  ‘Speaks up for the people of Cranleigh’, and which prompted a vote of no confidence in ‘Your Waverley’ is now suffering from a crisis of confidence in itself.

Screen Shot 2017-09-18 at 10.08.55.png

The organisation that, in two long hard years, has boldly gone, where none  have dared to go  before, is so sick and tired of shouting into the wind, and of being ignored by ‘Your Waverley’ and others – it is holding an Extraordinary Meeting to determine whether it should live on… or die!

Over here – the Farnham Society too has had its ups and downs since it was formed in 1911 by Charles E Borelli and Harold Falkner. These founder members had a profound influence on the town, Borelli as Chairman of Farnham Urban District Council for many years and Harold Falkner, an architect. It is now one of the oldest and largest conservation and amenity societies in the country.

Just like the Eastern villages the beauty and charm of Farnham are threatened by the constant pressures of new development and traffic, which are placing an increasing strain on this historic town. But it believes, it is up to the people who live in it, to ensure  that its particular qualities are maintained, while working for  the best possible results where changes must take place. It believes great care is needed to see that the best of the old is protected and that the right sort of development is encouraged for the future, including infrastructure. It has no intention of giving up – regardless of how often it is ignored, and ridiculed. Because it cares about the Town and people of Farnham.

So, Cranleigh people its make your mind up time – you could sit back and ignore everything that is going on around you, as you did before the CCS was born. Or you could get out there tomorrow night and vote with your feet. this is not a time for complacency this is a time to stand up to Cranleigh’s motto – which are followers tells us is : ‘CRANLEIGH CARES’.Screen Shot 2017-09-18 at 10.10.03.png

Or of course, you could stay at home and watch Eastenders?

Thanks to the Cranleigh Civic Society you have just won a battle to save the Nanhurst  recycling centre. Ok! we hear you cry, it has lost many other battles, but it’s not the dog in the fight that counts, it’s the fight in the dog! And… the Cranleigh Civic Society is not alone in the failure game – no-one listens to the parish councils any more – in fact no-one listens to ‘Your Waverley’ any more because our destiny is  defined by The Government – who have decided to cover the South-East of England in concrete – whether we like it or not!

Some come on Cranleigh/Ewhurst/Alfold/Dunsfold and all the other villages around – Stand up for your Civic voice – your Society needs you NOW.

Cranleigh’s fight back has begun.

The county council has dropped its ‘foolish’ bid to close some of Surrey’s recycling centres.




All Surrey’s community recycling centres are to be kept open following a backlash from  residents.

But we suspect some centres will still close on quieter days of the week.

The final decision  will be made at the Cabinet meeting on September 26, which means the council  will not now be able to achieve it’s hoped-for savings of £2 million, just part of  the £100 million savings it needs  to make to balance the books.

Liberal Democrats welcomed the announcement to scrap the previous “unpopular plans” under which recycling centres in Bagshot, Cranleigh, Dorking and Warlingham would have been closed.

The decision came after the largest ever NO VOTE came from the public who raced to sign a petition set up on-line. All over the county borough, parish and town councils opposed closures warning fly-tipping would increase and they, not the county council, would be forced to pick up the bill for the resulting clearance.

Mike Goodman, Surrey County Council’s cabinet member for  environment and planning, said: “We’d like to thank residents for their feedback on our proposals – we’ve listened and as a result I’ll be recommending to the Cabinet that we keep all our community recycling centres open.

“With the county council facing huge financial pressure, due to growing demand for adult social care, children’s services and school places, we expect that we’ll need to close some of our recycling centres on quieter days in the week. And we’ll also have to end the free daily allowance for residents’ construction waste.

“We are finalising the plans at the moment but it is clear that we’ll not now be able to achieve all of the hoped-for £2 million savings. And with the council having to find more than £100 million of savings overall this year we’ll still need to find ways of meeting that shortfall.”

According to a Liberal Democrat press release, the county council has confirmed it will proceed with its plans to reduce the opening hours of all the centres across the county as well as dropping the daily free waste allowance which residents currently enjoy.

Cllr Stephen Cooksey, Lib Dem environment spokesperson, said today (September 14, 2017): “I welcome the news that the Conservatives have backtracked on their unpopular plans to close recycling centres in Bagshot, Cranleigh, Dorking and Warlingham.

“However, I remain concerned that they still plan to significantly reduce the opening hours of all of the sites which makes it harder for residents to do the right thing and dispose of their waste responsibly.

“I also think that the removal of the daily free waste allowance is a huge mistake and could lead to a large increase in fly-tipping. I will continue to campaign for increased opening hours and to scrap the counter productive charges that the Conservatives are intent on implementing”.

Many Waverley residents’ believed the move was badly thought out, and ‘very foolish’ bearing in mind that building construction was continuing apace in the borough of Waverley.

The pictures and some content has been produced from the amazing on-line newspaper – The Guildford Dragon. 

‘Your Waverley’ is about to make the biggest decision in a decade! WOW!



We wouldn’t suggest for one moment that you attempt to watch this – most enlightening – meeting of the Corporate Overview & Scrutiny Committee on the link below:
Screen Shot 2017-09-16 at 07.36.44

This cosy little get-together was almost inaudible , nobody was named, (no names – no pack-drill, as they used to say to us in the army), and the sound reception was awful. The only plus – web watchers were able to see the whole meeting which is more than can be said for most webcasts at Waverley Towers these days. Did they buy the new equipment on E-Bay? It has not gone unnoticed here at the Waverley Web that the committees set up to ensure  backbenchers get a chance to apply the essential checks and balances that are required for good governance, were poked away in a committee room with no web casting throughout the summer. Thankfully, Incy Wincy hanging in the dark and dusty corners, was able listen in. Heaven help us when they start clening properly!

If ‘Your Waverley’  can’t sort out the basics, how is it  going to set up an investment company which aspires to  invest up to £250 million of our money! Still WW gives them ten out of ten for trying.

Or, is this another cunning plan to prevent us knowing what they know?

So forgive us, as we attempt here to pick out the bones of the latest Overview & Scrutiny meeting.  

Firstly, for background: ‘Your Waverley’ decided in July to create a property company to invest ‘our money’ in residential and commercial property. OK so far?  The rationale is to bridge the gap in the council’s deteriorating finances. If it doesn’t do something  it will be £2.8m in the red in three years and then …  bankrupt. 

Chairman John Williamson  said the [committee] is picking over the bones whilst the animal is dying.. if we continue with what we are doing we are going to end up bankrupt” 1:57.20 in the clip above.

Many councils are well ahead  of  Waverley in playing the Casino game. Surrey County Council has invested £300/400 million on various ventures for a 1% return. Yippee – let’s all go down to Bet Fred with our winnings.

Now it isn’t our style to be meanies about the huge efforts made by  our council to keep us  in the black, because it is – quite  simply – between a rock and a hard place.

Surrey and Waverley Councillor Peter Martin said Waverley is suffering  similar problems to the county council: ‘At Surrey first we cut out the fat, then the muscle and now we are now down to the bone.’ “I have no magical ideas. – the situation we are in is shocking it appears Surrey’s the victim and it is quite preposterous – we have to put up council tax by 6% just to stand still or find more savings – it’s OUTRAGEOUS and we have told the Government – UP WITH THIS, WE WILL NOT PUT.’

Negative Rate Support Grant   Surrey MP and chancellor Phillip Hammond is not only scrapping the central government grant to councils – he is asking for cash back of £800,000 from Waverley. Whilst Peter Martin says Surrey has lobbied the Surrey Tory MPs who all say that’s terrible, they won’t do anything about it.

Well, how mean is that!  Because, if they won’t listen to a true blue Tory – why would they listen to us!

However, we are slightly anxious after listening to the debate it appears our great  white hope new investment company has :-

  • Has no business plan.
  • Wants to buy property nationwide in an uncertain market.
  • Can only pay peanuts for non executive directors and hopes to rustle up a few local volunteers.
  • Will have to shell out £25,000 to set up the company. Could that be gold-plated business cards for councillors?
  • And…  will be run by an Advisory Board on which the chosen few will sit and  will decide where ‘our money’ is to be spent.
  • And will  rely on a third party property manager.

Nothing to worry about there then!

 Jaws dropped when Councillor Nick Holder mentioned that Surrey County Council had invested THREE BILLION POUNDS IN PROPERTY AROUND THE COUNTRY, a figure that was quickly scotched by Waverley and SCC Councillor Peter Martin who said it was only between £3 – £400 million which  was, currently producing an income of 1%. Phew!Before appointing external specialists and external advisors, the Overview & Scrutiny Committee was asked to agree the way forward.

Councillor Peter Martin saw no reason for a Business Plan – as  the most important thing  was to just ‘borrow cheap to invest.’ Councillor Ged Hall suggested  ‘if the right thing comes up, we’ll snap it up.’ Perhaps they should remember this banner headline.

Screen Shot 2017-07-27 at 10.24.57.png

Councillors John Gray,  Stephen Mulliner and Mike Band, John Williamson were far more circumspect believing A business plan was essential and saying  they had  some ‘very real concerns’ about the current economic climate, suggesting investments should be mostly local, where local knowledge could prove invaluable.

 Councillor Holder suggested others should follow the lead of Godalming Town Council and  raise more income themselves. It had borrowed from the Public Works Board (what they  themselves were suggesting earlier in  Item 1 on the Agenda ) to fund the rebuilding and extension of the Wilfred Noyce Hall as they were making a profit out of it. When he started reeling off figures he was reminded by Chairman John Wilkinson ‘not to read out the legal bits as the meeting was being webcast.’ Worry not Councillor W – it was practically impossible to hear the illegal legal bits!!

‘When we switch over later I’ll come  back to it said Solicitor Daniel Bainbridge’.

Perhaps the WW should mention that making a profit on the approximate £900,000 investment is not entirely true. Bearing in mind the low interest rates and increase in council tax,  tax payers over time are expected  to pay off the loan over 20 years.
Stephen Mulliner cautioned – everyone, that if the properties purchased remained empty, they would still have to  pay council tax to someone  and issued another warning about Waverley’s parlous state.

The Chairman said this was the biggest decision WBC would make for a decade, and it was essential both  governance and all the necessary checks and balances were in place. The Committee agreed to tell its  Executive it had not provided it with enough detail. 


Try asking anyone at Thames Water or Waverley a question and getting an answer this quick!



We respectfully suggest you don’t listen to the audio if you have  a weak bladder!

Two days ago one of our followers asked another of our followers a question regarding Cranleigh’s collapsing water pipes…

Screen Shot 2017-09-12 at 14.21.37.png


Dear Waverley Web,

Thames Water’s tests were purely on samples of pipe (samples of broken pipe that had been collected from areas of pipe that had burst). The tests were done to establish if the pipes were made from white (crysotile) asbestos or blue (crocidolite) asbestos.

Asbestos fibres enter the water supply in two ways:

1. As pipes near the end of their design life, the inside surface gets worn away exposing and releasing free fibres. This process is called “exfoliation”.
2. When pipes burst, there is a sudden potential for volume fibre release. Eventually, when the burst gets repaired, often several hours later or in the coming days, Thames Water flush out the the pipe runs in the vicinity, but by then loose fibres would already have been dispersed deeper into the the network.

Thames Water and Cranleigh Civic Society have discussed doing tests to find out the concentration of asbestos fibres in Cranleigh’s water supply network. It would involve a lot of test samples from around the village over a long period to get accurate results. We already know that 29.6% of the drinking water supply pipes in Cranleigh are old asbestos cement pipes (though we don’t know how much is white asbestos and how much is made from blue asbestos), so if the results confirmed the presence of free asbestos fibres in the network, so what? It’s not going to surprise anyone.

Kind regards,


ps I used to work at the Building Research Station in the 1970’s / early 1980’s researching new materials to replace asbestos fibres, so I understand the issues here.

Is anyone out there listening to ANYTHING that the civic society says on behalf of the people of Cranleigh?

No – it’s not the heavy rain or Irma – it’s just the Cranleigh scourge – more burst water pipes!

We’ll all be shopping/supping and sitting in Farnham’s Blightwells – before we know it. Won’t we?



Every now and again ‘Your Waverley” gives us here at the Waverley Web a damn  good laugh – and laughing is so good for us all, isn’t it? So we want to share it with you all.

animated-spider-image-0201.gifOur Incy nearly fell off his web with shock after hearing that…

‘Your Waverley’ is ‘hoping’  – a question mark does mean a ‘hope’ doesn’t  it,  to have rental income from Blightwells in two years time… Er without a spade being used in anger? What are they going to do? Surcharge the vandals, the pigeons and the bats to bring in the income?

Just read the last line of the Budget Review for 2017 and look at the  line of question marks!

  Before you pop out and stock up on shopping bags,  according to the Overview & Scrutiny meeting’s cosy little chat held in a committee room during which they all forgot it was being webcast, it was revealed that ‘Your Waverley’  would have  a £2.8m deficit next year and in three years time the council would be bankrupt!  So be fair, our councillors really do deserve ten out of ten for trying. That extra income from Blightwells could make all the difference. 


Screen Shot 2017-09-12 at 11.21.01.png

So far the only thing Waverley has built is this little model. How much for firewood?! Oops, sorry this was built by the Farnham Society wasn’t it?


Is anyone out there listening to ANYTHING that the civic society says on behalf of the people of Cranleigh?



Does anyone out there ever wonder when the planners are going to start listening to the people they are there to serve?

The Waverley Web seldom prints verbatim comments received on our posts. When we do, there has to be a very good reason. This particular comment, written by a Cranleigh resident is just that – because it has been thoroughly investigated, is accurate, to the point, and is extensively researched. It also speaks volumes so we have included it below.

We understand Adrian Clarke is a highly respected professional in his field, and as far as we are aware, he is also a highly regarded member of the Cranleigh Civic Society- which will hold its AGM on Monday 19th September.

He has spoken up on the water/sewage issues, which are stalking  Cranleigh, at numerous public planning meetings  attending numerous meetings at ‘Your Waverley’ both in public and in private.

He must  sick to death of working on behalf of the people in the East of the borough  and of being ignored. 


Or possibly and much more likely, they will start listening when people stop buying the new homes in and around Cranleigh because they are….

Screen Shot 2017-09-11 at 17.52.16

Screen Shot 2017-09-10 at 19.58.40

Just another manic Sunday.

Screen Shot 2017-09-12 at 12.24.50.pngScreen Shot 2017-09-12 at 12.25.08.pngScreen Shot 2017-09-12 at 12.25.32.png

No – it’s not the heavy rain or Irma – it’s just the Cranleigh scourge – more burst water pipes!

No – it’s not the heavy rain or Irma – it’s just the Cranleigh scourge – more burst water pipes!



Screen Shot 2017-09-10 at 19.58.40.png

Just another bit of damp for Cranleigh residents. 

Screen Shot 2017-09-10 at 20.01.40.png

Burst water pipes are no stranger to the residents of Cranleigh, and particularly for  those living along, and off,  the Ewhurst Road. But a burst water main in Taylors Crescent had residents struggling to keep water from seeping into their homes yesterday.

Residents  say they waited more than six hours for Thames Water to send engineers to deal with the situation, and even tried to find their own ways to stop the flooding.

Recently when MP Anne Milton hosted a flood forum in Cranleigh Village Hall a Thames Water spokesman attempted to quell residents’ fears, saying that Craneigh was not exceptional, and had no more burst water mains than other parts of the area!

This is what he said at the meeting:

Screen Shot 2017-09-11 at 12.43.24.png






You can read about it by clicking on the link below:Screen Shot 2017-08-17 at 16.21.28.png


Mistress Milton brings to heel all the local authorities to face up to the East’s burgeoning water, sewerage and flooding problems.

Now here’s a bit of common sense – considering the health of the nation.


MP’s are calling for health to become a key consideration in planning decisions.

Not before time! But will their calls be heard?

Our MP’s, does that include  our MP and Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt,  believe health issues should be enshrined as material consideration in planning decisions to better enable public health professionals to influence decisions, according to a Commons select committee report.

It recommends local authorities should be given greater powers to improve the health of their communities and reduce health inequalities.

Perhaps this could also apply to ensuring that there are sufficient GP’s and surgeries close to all those thousands of homes already consented in the borough of Waverley.  Surgeries, that boast sufficient health visitors, district nurses etc, and opening hours to suit everyone including  those  poor souls like us here at the Waverley Web who that actually need to travel distances to our places of work!

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 15.43.15.png

Is the tail wagging that Waverley dog…again?




WAVERLEY’S Tory administration has been accused of denying residents “proper scrutiny” after a bid by the council’s watchdog committee to call-in controversial modifications to the borough’s emerging Local Plan was scuppered at the 11th hour this week.

According to this article taken from  The Farnham Herald  an un-named Conservative councillor initially proposed the call-in to the September 18 meeting of the environment overview and scrutiny (O&S) committee, after Waverley’s executive signed off plans to share an uplift in housing across the borough’s existing settlements rather than raise the allocation at Dunsfold Park. 

It was hoped this would allow backbenchers to review the modifications to ‘part one’ of the Local Plan prior to a public consultation, and the call-in was supported by Farnham Residents councillors Jerry Hyman and John Williamson, who had hoped that councillors other than the Executive would have their say. 

However, just hours before the deadline to initiate the call-in on Tuesday afternoon, the aforementioned Conservative councillor allegedly withdrew the request having received “reassurances” from council leaders over Waverley’s housing allocations.

It comes after Waverley leader Julia Potts reassured the chairman of the environment O&S committee, Mr Hyman, at the August 22 executive meeting that “there is no whip here, we are not talking about party politics, we’re talking about having a sound Local Plan”.

Waverley’s opposition Farnham Residents group holds the chairmanship of all four of the council’s O&S committees, but relies on Tory members to provide the three votes required to ‘call-in’ a decision by the council’s executive.

Opposition party leader, Mr Hyman said: “The residents of Waverley have been denied the opportunity to scrutinise  the Local Plan modifications before they all have to comment on the consultation document. It’s wasting everybody’s time and money yet again.

“The value of that scrutiny would have been to ensure that what is being put forward for consultation is lawful and reasonable and the best option for the borough, and a chance to question other options they haven’t considered – such as, do we have the option of questioning the overall numbers and the distribution of the numbers?

“Our own officers tried to question the inspector, Jonathan Bore, at July’s examination hearings when he stated that Woking and Guildford have greater environmental constraints, and yet now we’re being told by the Conservatives we have no choice but to accept the numbers.

“I think any councillor would have to question whether that is true.”

Mr Hyman confirmed that the environment O&S committee is set to receive an update on the Local Plan on September 18, and he hoped to raise the issue of housing allocations then.

Responding, council leader Miss Potts said: “Councillor Hyman’s accusations are unfounded. I did not send letters to individual Conservative councillors in regard to this issue. On the contrary I made it very clear at the Executive Committee that there was no whip or party politics involved and therefore any councillor could call in the decision about Local Plan modifications.”

That’s funny – according to the rules that we at the Waverley Web have seen; only  members of the council”s Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee can call it in. 

Call-In for scrutiny should not be confused with PoW’s request

Waverley has since confirmed a public consultation on the proposed modifications will commence to-day  (Friday).

As part of the ongoing examination, the council has prepared modifications to the plan in liaison with the Planning Inspector conducting the examination. These include increasing housing numbers from 519 to 590 new homes per year and some changes to the Green Belt.

The consultation also includes details about how the council proposes to distribute these homes in accordance with the spatial strategy set out in the plan.

Brian Adams, Waverley’s portfolio holder for planning, said: “We have to make the modifications for the Inspector to find the plan sound and to enable the plan to be adopted.

“The six-week consultation is part of the examination process and is an opportunity for towns, parishes, local people and businesses to have their say on the proposed main modifications.

“We absolutely have to make sure our plan is sound and deliverable. Without an adopted plan, Waverley will not have a policy framework setting out how future developments are delivered.

“Instead we will end up back at the drawing board, with inappropriate developments across the borough. We want plan led development, not appeal led development.”

http://www.waverley.gov.uk/lpp1examination )

• Emailing your comments to mailto:planningpolicy@waverley.gov.uk

The consultation document is also available from the planning reception of the Waverley Borough Council offices, The Burys, Godalming, GU7 1HR, and at locality offices and public libraries within the borough.

The deadline for responses is 5pm on Friday, October 20.


Longhurst Park- Why not Heath Robinson Way?


It will not have gone unnoticed in the East that ‘Your Waverley’s” new best friend (NBF) in Farnham –  Crest Nicholson – is now digging into both the East and the West of the borough!

Perish the thought that the Waverley Web should ever be labelled a meanie but WHY has (NBF) called the first Phase of development on Horsham Road – Longhurst Park when almost opposite the entrance to the site – is the former home of none other than the hugely famous – William Heath-Robinson?

Did the developer consult the locals on the chosen name? Maybe the developer local connection 

Screen Shot 2017-09-07 at 10.02.28.png



The 249 homes, many of which are ‘affordable’  like those in the list below, are now under construction, and shortly could be followed by another 120 more on adjacent fields on the site in Horsham Road, Cranleigh.  Funny isn’t it that when the homes are priced up they knock off £50.  £499,950 looks so much better than £500,000 or half a million pounds, they  look almost cheap!

We at the Waverley Web believe the venerable inventor Heath Robinson might have been quite impressed with the way these developers are flogging off their wares at a knock-down price!

Even he could couldn’t have come up with such a creative way of extracting dosh from unsuspecting buyers who have to pay a £500 annual management fee for the upkeep of parts of the estate. Which we understand from prospective buyers goes up and up over the years. We also understand from the locals that non of the roads will be adopted by the highway authority – Surrey County Council – so the management fee could prove quite an expense in the years to come!

Oh! and by the way the NBF’s new plans to extend the estate by yet another shedload of houses will be considered by Waverley planners shortly and the betting is… consent will be granted. Despite the fact that even more poo pits will be required and even more pipes laid to sent the affluent’s effluent slowly and gently into the main sewer to prevent the already overloaded sewage system, being overloaded.

Cranleigh resident update letter – 10-04-2017

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 20.26.30.png

Screen Shot 2016-12-06 at 20.15.06.png

Why not charge the disabled to park at one of our local hospitals? Isn’t everyone fair game for our local highwaymen – including ‘Your Waverley?’


Charging the disabled, particularly wheelchair users, to  pay in our car parks is one thing – enabling them to do so is quite another.

Screen Shot 2017-09-06 at 10.01.58.png

Everyone is well aware that car parks are just another way of taxing the public, but surely if the perpetrators of increased charges had consulted – they might have discovered that many disabled people cannot reach the pay machines. Kerbs, road gradients and just the height of machines are making life even more difficult for the very section of our community that have a big enough struggle with everyday tasks as it is.

So has the Royal Surrey County Hospital and Waverley Borough Council had a compassion by-pass?

Hospitals charging disabled drivers to park could be in breach of the law, a leading lawyer says.

Some 37 NHS trusts charge disabled drivers to park, with some saying all drivers should be treated equally.

But disability rights lawyer Chris Fry says  this was a misreading of UK equality law.The Department of Health said patients who went to hospital often, or for long periods, had a right to fair and appropriate car-parking concessions.

Screen Shot 2017-09-06 at 10.02.30.pngOur MP Jeremy Hunt says the sick and disabled shouldn’t have to bear increased parking charges – oh yea! So what he going to do about it then?

This article is taken from that amazing on-line news site The Guildford Dragon. 

Screen Shot 2017-08-19 at 17.46.00.png

 Indeed, why would they wish to engage with Healthwatch or disability groups? After all the head honcho’s at RSCH  aren’t interested in what they have to say, ‘because they re not required to do so’, well, at least they are honest enough to say so!  The same goes for ‘Your Waverley’ who believe the sick are fair game.

Screen Shot 2017-08-19 at 17.46.30.png


Is another ‘horrendous’ scheme on its way to the MAD WORLD THAT IS THE.. East of Waverley?


A £20 million pound brick and tile factory could soon be on its way to yet another  country lane in the East, on the outskirts of Ewhurst!

The residents living over there in the East of the borough could be forgiven for thinking that the lunatics were taking over the Asylum! The scheme has already been described by the locals as a ‘bombshell’ about to hit them.

Look back a year or so, and one of the most famous clay tile making factories in the South of England – Swallow Tiles – was closed down – and million pound Linden Homes were built alongside a roundabout nicknamed ‘Kamikaze Corner’ in Ewhurst Road, Cranleigh. Some of which homes are already on the move!  The developer even provided a footpath to Ewhurst!  THEN…

  • Rudgwick Brickworks – CLOSED.
  • Cranleigh Brick & Tile CLOSED and  grab lorries  from all parts of Surrey will thunder along the A281 and through the country lanes every seven minutes for the next five years infilling the site with their spoils – so homes can be built off Knowle Lane. Cranleigh. 

Screen Shot 2017-08-05 at 14.58.47.png

Not a word of course from By-Pass Byham and the Bramley crowd, because the Parish Council trousered a golden egg for allowing the lorries to thunder through its hallowed high street along the A281 to Knowle Lane.

Now Weinberger Limited has submitted a Consultation application to Waverley Planners seeking consent  for a new tile and brick factory, adjacent to its existing brickworks, and including Norman Marshalls scrapyard, in a narrow country lane in Horsham Lane, Ewhurst. The entire scheme, if allowed, will start in 2019, just in time to provide millions of bricks and tiles for the thousands of homes to be built in ‘Your Waverley’ and the many thousands more elsewhere in the South of England!

Some years back, 2006 to be precise, this site was earmarked for potential gravel extraction and landfill. Major objections were raised concerning a site of ecological value and the impact of lorries, etc on narrow rural roads.
Nothing has changed yet Wienerberger obviously feel they have.

We cynics at the Waverley Web would love to identify how much money Weinberger  have made in political donations over the years and to whom – that would throw up an interesting aspect, WOULDN’T IT?  We understand from the locals the company has masses of existing capacity so we can’t quite understand any justification for expansion unless of course they intend on supplying house building bricks for the whole of the South of England. Which, of course, we expect is exactly what it  intends as its’ other plant is in Doncaster! 


Screen Shot 2017-09-04 at 18.29.07The entire project which includes the extraction from over 43 hectares of land, has a proposed end date of WAIT FOR IT…WAIT FOR IT!

We can see it now – thousands of lorries hurtling through, Rowhook, Wallis Wood, Cranleigh and perhaps even Bramley’s Barmy By-Pass Byham’s patch – delivering their wares to builders countrywide for the next half century! Even through Ewhurst village across Winterfold and through the Shere Cut! Or, perhaps through Forest Green onto the A24?

So the site where dinosaurs roamed millions of years ago – could soon be churning up even more fodder for the Natural History Museum – and the dinosaurs at Ewhurst Parish Council, who haven’t posted anything about the scheme, at least not that we can find on its  website – or on the village notice boards – Secrecy seems to be the name of the game these days – (even with parish councils). No doubt the Parish Council is too busy constructing  its’ Neighbourhood Plan! 

Might find their consultation meeting, to be held this month, attracts a  good attendance.

For more information: www.waverley.gov.uk/planning

Here’s a map of the site:  All we can say is WOW!Scan 3.jpeg


The Farnham Lion roars!



Unfortunately you cannot hear Councillor Carole’s initial roar at the Special Executive Meeting – because would you believe it – yes, we know you would, – due to cock up or conspiracy – either of which are no strangers at Waverley Towers, the first 20 minutes was cut off the webcast!

Suffice to say the lady from Farnham is, in true Blackadder style, mad, even madder than Mack McMad the winner of last year’s Mr Madman competition! 


Pictured here – Farnham Town and borough  councillor Carole Cockburn is angry – very angry – because she can see ‘her’ Neighbourhood Plan about to bite the dust! Be afraid WBC, be very afraid – her bite is worse than her roar!

Thankfully the Farnham Herald, which still turns out to cover council meetings, documented why she was so angry. You can read it here:Screen Shot 2017-08-24 at 18.37.54

Click here: 17.08.24- Waverley accused of sabotage copy

and here, are in her  reasons why she doesn’t want ‘Your Waverley’ to tear up Farnham’s cunning plan. 

Screen Shot 2017-08-31 at 13.23.32.png

Screen Shot 2017-08-31 at 13.24.16.pngScreen Shot 2017-08-31 at 13.24.40.png

Maybe, like so many others in the borough – Farnham’s Carole doesn’t realise that adding another 400 or 500 or 600 or ….. homes into Dunsfold’s cunning masterplan at this stage, to rescue her Neighbourhood Plan, could completely scupper the recently examined Local Plan – and everyone would then be sent back to the drawing board.

Except of course all the wannabe developers who would be sticking in their applications into the planning system faster than…Baldrick could wipe his nose.

Unfortunately Carole, as we suspect you have come to realise during your long and distinguished (most of the time) political career, that life is strewn with the cowpats from the devils own satanic herd –  The Waverley Webbers  believe that Blackadder’s  response rhymes with something like  Clucking bell’. 

It’s no news to us here at the Waverley Web that Incy Wincey has hit the headlines.




 If you read it in  the Sorry Advertiser,  then it must be true!

Except  the  Incy Wincey’s on our team   are out and  about borough-wide whatever the weather!    And they’re  not looking for mates!

But, yes, we have to admit they do have some friends, in high places, in Farncombe, Godalming, Haslemere, Cranleigh, Ewhurst, Shamley Green, Wonersh, Farnham, and all the other villages around – even a couple tucked into the dark and dusty cornices of Waverley Towers!

Screen Shot 2017-09-01 at 10.15.18.pngScreen Shot 2017-09-01 at 10.15.36.png


Is silence golden Councillor Povey?


Maybe, just maybe, Councillor Povey has decided that rather than being a Kodak Pete, like his county council predecessor (whom we won’t name because we never speak ill of the de-selected), he is working quietly in the bowels of County Towers on behalf of Cranleigh and Ewhurst?

Or maybe he has found life in those county council back benches a little lonely and intimidating after years as its head honcho, especially now it’s being run by Hodge The Bodge – the man he dislodged?

Far be it from the Waverley Web to remind wannabe-councillors of their manifesto pledges – because we all know that they mostly resemble pie-crusts, that are easily broken – but you did say, didn’t you Andrew Povey, that you would fight against any further development in the villages you wanted to represent?

Ah, well, your time has come! Or has it?

Our collective memories fail us about what you actually said: But didn’t it go something like this?

” I believe quite enough development has been dumped on Cranlegh and I will work to ensure it is not forced to take any more.”

Ah, well, that was way back when Waverley Borough Council was expected to take just its own unmet housing need, and not the un-met needs of Woking and parts of London. Now the Government, (the one you support, Councillor Povey), has nominated an Inspector who has ruled that Waverley is expected to take another 1,800 homes and  the borough council has earmarked another 200  in addition to the 1,580 already given consent in your particular patch in Cranleigh!

Ewhurst ‘s housing numbers are also to increase from 65 to 100 and if borough council permission is granted on dozens of other sites earmarked by wannabe developers – there will be quite a lot more than that. The residents of Ewhurst  rely  for almost all their services  on Cranleigh!

So how do you feel about that Councillor Povey? Oh, and whilst we come to think about it, you’ve been remarkably quite about the proposed closure of the Recycling Centre at Nanhurst, too – we know Silence is Golden but don’t be shy – we are all sitting here waiting, with baited breath, to hear what efforts you are making on your electors’ behalf to stop Dumb and Dumber from closing down these vital amenities.What a load of rubbish!

Screen Shot 2017-09-01 at 10.40.57.png“The die is cast,” said the Lady of Shalott – at least we think it was her! – and ‘Your Waverley’ Is about to go out to public consultation on the Local Plan – including higher housing numbers to satisfy Woking and some of London’s  unmet need. So speak now – or for ever hold your peace!

Click here if you want to read more.

The die is cast – and ‘Your Waverley’ goes out to public consultation on the Local Plan – including higher housing numbers to satisfy Woking’s unmet need.

NOW… POST – ELECTION stress disorder epidemic hits Ewhurst and Cranleigh.




…. OR is it just doing what it does best – everything in its power to protect its own arse? … and bugger the rest of the borough?

Here is a letter that has been circulated to Waverley Borough Council, the borough’s Town and Civic Societies, parish councils  and – would you Adam and Eve it – to the Waverley Web! This scurrilous little blog that is much derided and sneered at by the worried-well-to-do supporters of Protect Our Little Corner (POLCOW) because it doesn’t support their naked ambition to protect their own little enclaves and has made no bones about its support for BROWN FIELDS FIRST.

Open Letter from POW regarding OAN (pdf)


Having spent around £270,000 of Waverley taxpayers’ money fighting the Dunsfold Park planning application for 1,800 homes – and opposing another 600 which have been included in the Local Plan on a brownfield site – (POLCOW)  – now wants the Secretary of State to rule on the Local Plan – and reassess the Objectively Assessed Need the (OAN) and deflate, what it claims are, the inflated housing numbers now proposed.

Despite weak and very vapid claims to the contrary, (POLCOW) rose from the ashes of Stop Dunsfold Park New Town. Its supporters – many of whom had supported its earlier incarnation, (SDPNT) or was it (SPENT) – were acutely conscious of the criticism it received for being a one-trick-pony – It’s all about Dunsfold, stupid! – so it cobbled together the caring, sharing nom de plume, PROTECT OUR WAVERLEY – in a half-hearted attempt to deflect criticism from the wider borough and persuade (for which read FOOL) residents over here in the centre and West of the Borough that they cared, really, really cared about us!

And now they’re having a fit of the vapours and trying to lock the bedroom door after the bride has bolted!

Or do we detect just a smidgen of guilt creeping into the psyche of the Cash & Clout brigade that persuaded their duplicitous MPs, Mistress Milton and Jeremy SHunt, to twist the arm of Sajid Javid, the Communities Secretary, to call in the airfield application? Pity they didn’t exercise their caring, sharing principles a little more widely – as their name aims to suggest – and persuade them to get the Knowle Park Initiative development called in whilst they were at it! (Lots of brown envelopes passed hands there of course)  Silly us! They didn’t because they don’t care about Cranleigh. It’s all about Dunsfold, stupid!

But we digress! Is (POLCOW) now more than a little fearful that its tactics may have backfired spectacularly and its  determined efforts to stop brownfield development may now result in plastering the remainder of the borough – even their own precious little corner of it (Heavens to Betsy! Wash your mouth with soap and water at the very idea!) – in a carpet of concrete?

We don’t like to say we told you so but … – oh, go on, then we will! What have we been telling the worried-well-to-do of Awfold/Kerchingfold/Duncefold/and Where-has-all-the-traffic-come-from?

(Forget Bramley – the Bramley Babes are going to be on the receiving end of increased traffic regardless of where the homes go over there in the East.)

We told them, time and time and time … and time again! BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!
Along with MPs Mistress Milton and Jeremy SHunt, the Cash & Clout brigade may just have dealt the biggest disservice to the entire borough of Waverley in its long and chequered history.

And, you know what, future generations of Waverley residents – our children and our grandchildren – may well point to the members of Protect our Waverley and ask them what they actually did to prevent the concreting over of the borough and all just because they were determined – whatever it took, no matter what the cost to the rest of the borough – to stop the largest brownfield site in the borough from being developed?

Of course, when the battle is over and they are vanquished, they will up sticks and move away to greener pastures. Leaving the not-so-well-to-do to make the best of the carpet of concrete they left in their wake!

What a load of rubbish!


What an utterly depressing picture featured below – and it could be coming to the country lanes near you! Thanks to these guys.


…come up with half baked ideas that will result in scenes like this one below.


Screen Shot 2017-08-24 at 10.36.50.png

England’s green and pleasant land – including ours here in the borough of Waverley – could become anything but if the dummies at Surrey County Council continue unabated with their plans to close our recycling centres!

Charging residents for tipping their household rubbish is one thing, reducing opening hours is another – but closing sites down altogether is ridiculous, particularly as the towns and villages have been told by Government that just like Topsy – they must grow and grow!

Fly tipping is harming the rural environs, harming animals and wildlife and the ugly heaps  of mouldy bedspreads are growing faster than fungus.

The clearing up operation has been passed more neatly to local borough and district councils than Conor Murray  can pass the ball to Jonathan Sexton. Not only are they forced to collect the stuff of other people’s lives but they have to put up CCTV cameras at the flipping tipping black spots to catch the perpetrators. Of course  once the word get around that Big Brother is watching them they move to pastures new.  A perfect example of that is the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty at Winterfold near Shere where the landowners were forced clear up the mess!

Clearing up the waste is now reputed to be costing councils nationwide £49 million a year.

So, Surrey County Council is short of cash?  RUBBISH – it has decided under the helpful guise of none other than South West Surrey Conservative Association now Ex Chairman Councillor Denise Le Gal’s good housekeeping to invest £57m of ‘our money’ in the Blightwells East Street retail and housing scheme. In a town where shops are closing due to  rapidly rising business rates forcing them out of a high street  where shoppers choke on exhaust fumes!

So whilst Dumb and even Dumber   Pictured above  continue on their reckless way – let’s all march on County Towers and dump the rubbish on our  doorsteps onto their doorsteps – and then perhaps… just perhaps … they might THINK AGAIN!



%d bloggers like this: