Has your Waverley had a “Culture Shock?”

`Or… has it joined Screen Shot 2016-09-18 at 20.38.11.png


A few days ago, or maybe it was longer – time goes so quickly when you are enjoying yourselves!  We posted the following: Probably best not to read it as you may lose the will to live!

Do we have a Cultural Strategy or do we have 230 pages weighing over – 600 grams – of expensive tripe?

Well the answer in a nutshell is? We do not have a Daft Cultural Strategy! – However, what we have is hundreds of pages of gobbledygook, a delightful Cultural Officer called “Charlotte” and a lot of very confused borough councillors! Who… don’t know whether they are  “Metroculturals,” “Commuterland Culturebuffs,” “Dormitory Dependables” or “Up Our Street.” Or fall into one of  the other dopey Audience Spectrum categories into which  all our residents fall, and for that matter most of the rest of Surrey/Sussex and Hampshire. 

 Consultants employed by “Your Waverley” have been paid a load of dosh, with  money collected from developers through their 106 agreements, in other words, money collected from planning permissions granted!  

At least most councillors at the recent Community Overview & Scrutiny Committee were honest enough to admit they hadn’t  even begun  to wade  through the report   prepared for  them by the delightful “Charlotte,”  so claimed they couldn’t really begin to “properly scrutinise.”

But having now debated  the new Daft Cultural Strategy that is there to underpin The Daft Local Plan, when thousands more houses are built, a few interesting facts were revealed.

  • Bramley is a cultural desert. Why,? Because it was not even included in the Daft Cultural Strategy, which has really upset By-pass Byham, because the council’s culture officers have By-passed Bramley,  altogether. Which is probably the only way it will get a By-Pass.” The strategy doesn’t even mention our library, a large private school, how on earth was this data collected,” asked BPB?
  • The borough’s residents are totally confused, only slightly less than “Our Waverley” councillors.  
  • Farnham is totally pi***d off because the DCS has revealed that it is  less “cultured”than the village they describe as “poor old Cranleigh.” Could it be something to do with the affluent over there smelling the effluent that turns them into “Commuterland Culturebuffs?”  All 61% of them compared with Farnham’s 31%. How dare they!
  •  Councillor Jerry Hyman admitted he obviously wasn’t  a Farnham “Culturebuff” because he couldn’t understand the methodology included in the document, so he would probably need to be included in the “Philistine ” category, because he didn’t know his “Arts from his Elbow.”
  • Some said they couldn’t understand why Sport had been included at all in the DCS. Others said why shouldn’t it be included. They would rather watch a cricket match than a concert any day!

Everyone agreed there were lots of nice words in the huge document, but it was a bit “ambiguous” and they couldn’t quite get a handle on what it was trying to achieve? Said Christiaan Hesse, “If it is  to be a workable management document then it needs “an awful lot more work!” Awful lot, you bet?

Despite further debate councillors couldn’t decide whether “Sport should be  in or out, but all agreed the document was: Too wordy, needed to be more succinct and readable, and reminded those responsible for it  that they were “spending scarce council resources.”

However, our Elsey, who can always be relied upon for a few words of Wisdon (as in cricket bat) said the Culture Officer was doing a “marvellous job” and in  her usual Lamonic Bibble – reminded everyone that  Waverley didn’t have a theatre? and that  residents’ had to make do with what we have got.” We wonder why Elsey?

As for our Waverley Web webcast watchers verdict : They said they were “Totally Conflambulated,” and couldn’t wait to turn the webcast  off!

So our advice. – Please don’t watch it or there could be blood all over the borough!


Focus on “financial position?” What’s it all about Alfie?

Sock it to em Our Cilla.

The Boards of the Royal Surrey County, and Ashford & St Peter’s Hospitals  NHS Foundation Trusts  decided last year  to pause their proposed merger to allow more time to focus on their “financial position.” The Guildford hospital, used by many Waverley residents,  brought in a “turnaround director” rumoured to be receiving in excess of £60,000 a month – yes, a month, to improve its £12m deficit. to help? The Board won’t reveal the man’s salary, probably because it is “commercially sensitive, more like, “insensitive!”

Recently the RSCH  announced the arrival of a new Chief Executive, on another plump  salary, who says she is,  equally determined to bring down the deficit, improve A & E waiting times, deal with all its other problems, bed blocking, and cancelled operations.

At the time merger talks collapsed one of our followers said:

When merger talks collapsed, one follower said:  – “thank the one above” – he has been listening to us! Anyone seen the trolley waits at St Peter’s – resembles  a war zone?

So what is one of the first things they do?

Stick up the parking charges.Twice this year. The minimum two hour charges is now up from £3.50 to £4. 

Screen Shot 2016-09-15 at 10.04.39.png

Or, in other words, tax patients and visitors. What a great idea? Deputy Chief Executive Alf Turner says  the money will be used to build a new multi-storey car park. Oh really?  Pull the other one it’s got plaster on!   What have they been doing with the millions they have gathered in car parking fees over many, many years? And below is what the public think of this little earner in a poll conducted by the brilliant on-line newspaper The Guildford Dragon.

Now.. what we at  WW are wondering is? Why won’t the RSCH reveal  how much it already collects in parking  fees?

It just claims, the increase is “necessary” – necessary for what? To help balance its books? Help pay it’s plumply salaried senior staff, certainly not nurses or junior doctors? And the deputy chief executive admits the rise won’t be  popular – not popular you bet it isn’t Alfie! 

A private management company runs the car park employing lots of people, on a contract soon  to be renewed. The Trust won’t say how much it collects because it is “commercially sensitive” rubbish! It means, like  “Your Waverley’s common practice ” it is publicly sensitive” more like. Why? Because the public is getting very sensitive  about knowing just how much  dosh they pour into the Trust’s machines and where it actually goes?

The Royal Surrey serves a population of 320,000  for emergency and general hospital services. St Luke’s Cancer Centre serves 1.3 million people for cancer services across Surrey, West Sussex and Hampshire through the St Luke’s Cancer Alliance.

In other words, patients often travel long  distances just to get there. 

The hospital has an annual income of £326 million and employs around 3,500 people. Every year it sees around 336,000 outpatients, admits 90,000 patients for treatment and 73,000 patients attend A&E. 

So are all us dummies pouring money into machines to improve  parking facilities ? Or, are we paving the way for the RSCH to balance its books to pave the way towards  a merger.

Because here’s what they said last year:

“Current predictions however mean that the merger plans – as they are currently described – would not be able to realise the anticipated benefits needed to make the merger viable, and thus the benefits to patients. The deteriorating financial position at Royal Surrey is a significant contributing factor, which both boards have taken into account as part of their review of the current situation.

“Both boards still believe that creating a bigger, stronger organisation is one of the best ways to secure and protect high quality services for patients. During this pause, we will continue to pursue those areas where it is sensible to look for savings and better ways of working together.” ”The  Royal Surrey’s chairman, John Denning, said: “This is not a decision our boards have taken lightly, particularly as we have put a lot of work and effort into these plans to date.“We are both clear that resolving our immediate financial difficulties has to be our priority over the coming months.”

Screen Shot 2016-09-15 at 09.46.07.png

Ewhurst girl becomes the new Leader of UKIP

You can listen to the result and her post election speech here:



She cut her teeth as the Waverley Borough Council member for Ewhurst and representing  the  Eastern Waverley village as an Independent  and then as its first  UKIP councillor where she soon gathered a small coterie of disaffected Tories around her.

Having  been regularly pilloried by her colleagues  at Waverley Towers – bit like the way Farnham Residents’ are currently treated,  taking over the UKIP leadership  will most likely be a doddle.

Despite the feisty Ewhurst lady’s success after    fighting  and almost winning the Eastleigh Parliamentary By-Election,  her Waverley colleagues could not bring themselves to congratulate her, with adding a few insults.  Undeterred she went on to become a South East  Member of the European Parliament . where she has worked tirelessly standing up    for herself and the British people. Her  fluent use of French and German has served her and the British people well.

The 56 year old is, without doubt, the first Waverley borough councillor to reach  high office. So perhaps folks…. though don’t hold your breath … at the next council meeting when Leader Julie Potts climbs onto the rostrum in the borough hall chamber, she will be gracious and remember Diane James, whose first public service was  to the people of “Your Waverley,” and congratulate her on her success.

The Ewhurst villager and Waverley resident will now go on to serve, as Leader serve the 3.8  million  UKIP voters across the United Kingdom.

Screen Shot 2016-09-17 at 00.20.09.png


Screen Shot 2016-09-17 at 00.15.39.png

Farnham’s David & Goliath type fight goes up a notch?



‘Your Waverley’s” Bully Boys think that may have got the better of those damnable residents dubbed by councillors as ” people with too much time on their hands.”

This oh, so predictable Council of ours, has decided to try and kick Farnham residents’ into touch even before the real fight  begins – typical?

The Farnham FIG, has  been given leave for a judicial Review of just some of “Your Waverley” dodgey dealings with the even dodgier partner/developer Crest Nicholson – {what a dastardly duo?) But now the BB’s, as we shall now refer to them, are claiming the local ratepayer has no right to challenge the power crazy Council over the way  their taxes are used. So…the BB intends to give them a good drubbing – in their pockets – where it hurts!

Screen Shot 2016-09-15 at 14.10.27.png

Challenging Waverley is exactly what you mustn’t contemplate, according to “Our Elsey” who told her Overview and Scrutiny colleague as she laid into  newly elected Farnham Residents’ Jerry Hyman.  He could be a “critical friend,” but no “Challenging” thank you very much. Read it for yourselves  here: Oh really “Elsey” – you are awful?

So if their own councillors can’t  Challenge “Your Waverley” who the bloody well can? Certainly not the upstart residents of Farnham who are too far above themselves for their own good. Or, for that matter, those tenants  who dare challenge, The Egan’s of Milford who challenge BB’s  underhand dealings with “that fraud”… the organisations in the voluntary sector that dare to question … in fact anyone who challenges the iron fist that is “Your present day Waverley”

And… as the writer of this letter to the Farnham Herald claims, what exactly is Goliath and his developer friend afraid of? Being found out by little old David?


You know what folks, maybe we should all be dipping into our pockets to give these brave souls a helping hand, in the name of fairness and to protect what’s left of our local democracy? 


Village leaders meet the public- face to face.

Screen Shot 2016-09-13 at 18.53.48.png

Has  the whiffy tink wafting over the high street, and  concerns about “Your Waverley’s” Daft Local Plan stirred village leaders into action?

Faced with taking 48% of Waverley’s housing development Cranleigh parish councillors want to hear residents views  at a “drop in.” The event takes place at Cranleigh Village Hall from  6p.m. and has opted to speak to villagers personally rather than opt for the usual   public meeting, which it was feared could turn into a shouting match. 

 We have heard from our mounting band of Cranleigh WW contributors that the general unease about Cranleigh’s worsening image is giving councillors cause for concern. Some  doubt  the village’s borough councillors are concerned enough to turn up to answer to the public. The Stennett duo have gone roo hunting in Oz, following their successful planning coup on their land in the  Green Belt and others are unwell.  But everyone hopes Alan “of the secret meetings with developers – all except Dunsfold Park – Young,”  will be there to reassure villagers they have no worries?


Waverley Borough’s Planning portfolio holder and other councillors invited to come face to face with Cranleigh residents have turned down their invitations! But who knows – the chief Executive “Paul WenamIleaving to collect my pension?” may turn up with Damien “The Omen” Roberts? but don’t hold your breath punters, because the WW does not believe any of them will have the guts to show their face over there.

This is the public notice: So if you Care about Cranleigh’s future, better turn up, or forever hold your peace… that is… until someone sends the diggers onto a green field near you, in which case it may be too late? In fact with almost 800 already in the  bag, with extant permissions granted,  and another 500 in the pipeline, sadly Cranleigh’s fate may already be sealed. 

Screen Shot 2016-09-13 at 18.54.11.png

Taken from the Cranleigh Civic Society website. 

A Cranleigh housing scheme described as “bonkers,” “appalling,” “that should never have been allowed”… has been deferred .

 Developers Cala homes has been told by “Your Waverley” to go back to the drawing board and come back with something of which “Cranleigh can be proud!”

With outline permission already tucked under its belt, Cala Homes  detailed scheme was  considered tonight  by Waverley Planners. It included   the design /layout, tenure, landscaping and access to the site for 125 homes. But the Amlets Lane scheme,  failed to find a single supporter. 

“Unless of course you count the officers, who quite predictably, were right behind it!

Yesterday an eagle eyed Cranleigh follower of the Waverley Web pointed out that the confusing drawings  showing  two accesses from the controversial site, was in fact only a pedestrian and cycle access through Roberts Way. But, this did nothing to assuage the fears of speakers from the Cranleigh Society,  parish council and the lone voice of a Cranleigh borough councillor.They were horrified that all the traffic will spew out onto the  narrow country lane opposite St Joseph’s Special School for children.

Despite repeated warnings  she was over the  four minutes allowed, an utterly determined Cranleigh Civic Society  spokesperson Liz Townsend, refused to halt her tirade against developers who, she claimed, had made revision after revision to the agreed outline plans.

  • The design was poor.     
  • Three storey buildings were out of character.
  • The bungalows at Copse Edge were overlooked with inappropriate  car parks on their boundary and a prospect of flooding.
  • Amlets Lane was a dangerous road along which a traffic count conducted this week between 7 a.m. – 9 a.m.had revealed 820 cars.
  • Evidence showed two HGV’s could not pass.
  • SUDS information not supplied.
  •  Outline permission for 76% affordable homes had now been reduced to 50%
  • No  traffic movement plan,showing how construction traffic would enter and leave.
  • Concern about discharge of sewage…

and despite being breathless,she  ignored the chairman’s repeated attempts to  interrupt.. and  rattled out even more!

 Chris Bryant outlined  Cranleigh Parish Council’s concerns including the ongoing maintenance of – a community building; open spaces; and allotments. He criticised   the tenure and number of affordable  homes proposed. And the  unwelcome   change from self-build to  custom built homes all  significantly different from that granted at the outline stage.

 Building apartment blocks eleven metres high was “unacceptable” and  was “urbanising a site adjoining  an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.”

But a  spokesman for the developers disagreed, describing  the scheme as “Landscape Rich” with only 9.6. dwellings per hectare – where normal development was at least three times higher. There was a high proportion of public open space, allotments, orchards and a community building. “it is a very special development -and  a development of which we are proud.”

One councillor agreed saying where he lived in Waverley the density of development was 54 dwellings to the hectare!

Ye God’s where’s that Waverley Web wonders?

As  no other Cranleigh borough councillors were presentCouncillor Brian Ellis, Jeannette Stennett, Stewart Stennett or the Cranleigh North and Shamley Green councillor Mike Band,  it remained for the stalwart villagers have dubbed ‘ Cranleigh’s Boudica’ to slate  the scheme she claimed “ should never have been granted in the first place.”

 Assurances  from  officers that a Grampian Condition would prevent occupation of dwellings until a satisfactory way of dealing  with sewage had been approved by Thames Water did nothing to mollify, Councillor Foryszewski.

She  called for a deferral arguing, ” no new homes should be built before residents could be sure they could flush the toilets in their homes!”

One councillor after another lambasted the poor design, describing it as bizarre, unimaginative, on a beautiful site with very real potential.  Allotments weren’t needed and affordable homes should be built there, car parking should be provided on individual plots, not in car parks.

“The apartment blocks are like something out of an Adams Family film,” said Councillor Pat Frost, who was only marginally less critical than her fellow Farnham colleague Councillor Carole Cockburn who said they were – “simply appalling.”

But the council’s planning officers didn’t agree and stuck to their recommendation to approve the scheme which they stressed had been “achieved” with a great deal of thought and effort by them and the  Waverley design officer.”

Ah – well there you are then – now we all know why it all went so terribly wrong?

To read more details the scheme read yesterday’s post:






Earwig-o, here we go, here we go-ho?

One of our Wily Webbers  has sent us this picture of diggers preparing to tear up another of one of Cranleigh’s green fields in the East of the borough.

At least it’s a change for us to be posting on something other than its “Sh**gate.” Mind you – how is Cala Homes going to dispose of the poo from its scheme for 125 homes?  Maybe it has a cunning plan? There doesn’t appear to be a Planning Condition on disposal of waste in Wednesday’s  Joint Planning Committee report tough it refers to a Grampian condition. (Witch means the houses cannot be occupied until the drainage is dealt with.)  

We just love the way the officers describe Cala Homes detailed planning application  which builds over another of Cranleigh’s treasured green fields.  With access onto a  narrow lane that floods, that serves two major public schools and backs onto homes and bungalows. For them it is all sweetness and light, and  everything fits into the rural scene and “respects the character of the area,” Birds, bunnies, and Zip -a-de-doo-dah!

However, there are now plans to remove part of the tree screen covered by Tree Preservation Orders!  But then what’s a few trees between neighbours?

Perhaps, to serve as a tree screen?screen-shot-2016-09-08-at-16-47-24

On Your marks get set go? The Diggers are already in at Amlets Lane, Cranleigh.  it’s get your name down time? Good times they’s a comin?

Far be it from us here at the Waverley Web to have all those people in the village now dubbed “poor old Cranleigh” choking  on their cornflakes, or spilling their coffee, but really, can you Adam and Eve what is going on over there? You can see from the site plan that the access is  on the narrow Amlets Lane.

and – you couldn’t make it up if you tried… hunndreds of cars all spewing out onto a narrow lane opposite a special school for children!

 Well – that sounds like a really good traffic move!  Is Surrey County Councillor Alan, of the “secret meetings,” Young, in on this one? screen-shot-2016-09-08-at-18-07-56

Traffic Chaos – here it comes? 

 But don’t fret chaps he’s heading up the Flood Forum… so no worries there then?  So who will be at Wednesday’s meeting to stand up for the people of Copse Edge, Amlets Lane, Barhatch Lane, Summerlands, The Glebe Estate… Well? We’ve heard Cranleigh Councillors have either gone AWOL – (Australia with Our lolly) or absent due to sickness. So, all Cranleigh’s hopes could be resting on  Shamley Green’s  Band! Let’s hope he bounces in to bat for Cranleigh?

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.00.14.pngScreen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.10.44.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.11.19.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.11.44.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.12.02.png

These are the apartment blocks.

Don’t worry – the officers will impose a 40 mph speed limit, but don’t consider there will be a flooding problem towards the homes on the South of the site at Cops Edge and aren’t a bit worried about the lack of public transport; or road flooding; or the fact that construction vehicles cannot pass; or that…

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.16.46.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.25.24.png

So there you are Cranleigh – that’s alright then, isn’t it?  If you can bear it, read the other excerpts from the report below!

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.26.59.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.27.43.pngScreen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.33.50.pngScreen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.32.57.pngScreen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.31.57.pngScreen Shot 2016-09-10 at 21.28.52.png

So, that’s alright then – the flooding issue (mentioned in the last paragraph) is nothing to do with ‘Your Waverley” though it has  “recognised local concern.”  It’s all down to Surrey County Council as the Lead Flood Authority. 

Remember that Cranleigh folks!

Oh really “Elsey” – you are awful?

Now  let’s get this straight – the Waverley Web is not in the business of telling an ageing  granny how to suck eggs…but Councillors are told when they are inducted that they should be respectful at all times of – their colleagues, council staff and members of the public.

It is called the Council’s ‘RESPECT POLICY.’

So, when a new boy joins the Waverley team, turns up at The Executive – acts responsibly and asks politely for clarification, and explanations on behalf of the people who have just elected him …

Wouldn’t it be quite nice if he was treated  with the respect he deserves!

 The WW wrote the script for the debut  of Farnham Residents’ new boys – read here: Place your bets on “Your Waverley” treating Farnham’s Magnificent Seven” with a modicum of fairness.

Just in case you missed it Elsey?  You proved we were, spot on! 

 When  the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s credibility  was  questioned and heavily criticised by your colleagues, you were part of the  working group who heard that the present system was both defective and flawed. Some even wondered why they bothered to turn up, because nobody listened!  Just in case you need reminding: Read this: TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGING?

When Councillor Hyman said: The committee was there to “Challenge” recommendationswhat was your spiteful  response?

“I don’t know how much training Councillor Hyman has had but the O & S Committee is there to support, not “challenge.” and.. “he may have a better understanding of the process once he has had some training?”

“Better to keep quiet and be thought to be a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt?”

If it was your intention to belittle a new Councillor “Elsey” – you failed, miserably. Read your papers and listen to what backbencher Jim Hawkins said: “We felt we were not being listened to!”  Because this is how the Centre for Public Scrutiny Good Scrutiny Guide describes Scrutiny!

Screen Shot 2016-09-12 at 13.16.44.png         NOW WHO NEEDS L  PLATES? Hyman or our Elsey? Answers on a postcard please.

Executive Committee Papers September 2016 

Screen Shot 2016-09-06 at 22.19.41.png

Do we have a Cultural Strategy or do we have 230 pages weighing over – 600 grams – of expensive tripe?

If you don’t feel like a crazy frog before you read after you’ve read it you surely will!

If you want to lose the will to live – try reading ‘Your Waverley’s’ New Daft Cultural Strategy.Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 21.35.07.png

The Waverley Web is quite sure if you do… you will want to slash your wrists, lie in a warm bath and let your life blood ebb away! 
Oh! and if this drives you to drink – Surrey comes second in the country’s dearest places to buy a pint – £3.72p a pint (average.) First: London £4.08p. ye God’s we can’t even drown our sorrows! 
Here’s Why?
This document that goes before the Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s 15 members,  and then goes on to the Full Council’s 57 members, is, quite possibly not worth  the cost of second class postage (£ 2.50p – approx ) and the reams of paper it is written on?
This giant  envelope of tripe  that’s  winging its way into  councillors’ post  boxes, –  never a post box invented that could accommodate it!  will then be debated, passed and become “Waverley’s Cultural Strategy.
Beam us up Scottie? Onto the Planet Zonk!
In a nutshell everyone in Waverley  has  been divided into groups of: Metroculturals, Commuterland  Culturebuffs, Dormitory Dependables and all the rest of  the dopey Audience Spectrum categories printed below:-
The details taken from the committee papers are below.
Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 20.12.53.png


This is the description for just one category.

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 20.13.48.pngSo there you are then Cranleigh people you are the most cultured Culturebuffs in the borough with 61%.  Twice as many as we have here in Farnham.

However, don’t get too far up yourselves  over there in the East, about to be heavily dumped upon, with 48% of Waverley’s housing!
Why?… Because. * As defined by “Your Waverley” in Cranleigh East you live in “an Area of Deprivation” but don’t chortle at poor old Cranleigh’s misfortunate Elstead – because you too are most definitely deprived!
And so is Witley and so is….. Merthyr Bloody Tydfil in South Wales!
Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 20.14.11.png

We are really sorry folks, but you will have to go onto the Waverley website Community O & S for the explanation for this, because we just cannot take the stress! Around about page 206 OF 230 PAGES! You get a bonus mark if you try…ok? Oh! and a Pointless Trophy! Because….

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 21.57.34.png

this link will take you to the unadultred cra*!
Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 20.23.52.png
If you happen to be in Cranleigh or Haslemere you are a Parish Clark, CLARK .. however  if you live  in Godalming you are most definitely a Parish Clerk – CLERK! Probably something to do with being deprived or perhaps more to do with being Dormitory Dependable?
Oh and by the way – don’t even try to add the columns up! Because the Kaleidoscope Creativity Crew has been at work and the figures don’t add up.
And The Chantry’s column 5, is not in Wrecclesham it’s in West Farnham – but now we really are being picky – because we have just lost the will to live!!!
Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 20.30.46.png

Oh No! Not another round of Sh**gate in Cranleigh?

Never mind the Coffee Capital of Surrey – Poor old Cranleigh is now being dubbed “Surrey’s Sh**ville” and shopkeepers and  estate agents are beginning to panic.

And… to tell you the truth even the Waverley Webbers are getting a bit browned off  talking about it!!!

And…you know us – we hate poking our noses into other people’s business! But needs must because the affluent are worried about the Effluent! Ok?

Screen Shot 2016-09-05 at 23.06.55.png

Could this because all the fish are dead in Cranleigh Waters?

It’s bad enough that some homes in the “luxury market” have failed to find buyers due to rumoured subsidence problems – now “Sh**gate” is truly hitting the fan  and village leaders are getting very worried.

One anonymous follower of the Waverley Web (name and address supplied – but afraid to identify himself due to possible reprisals from Cranleigh Chamber of Trade,) said the sewage scandal is beginning to take its toll on the economy of the “once popular”  Surrey/Sussex border village.”

He said: Facebook is full of it, local civic groups are full of it, the local sewage works is overloaded with it – and now it would appear its flowing into drains, fields, and backing up in residents’ toilets! But, to have the drainage authorities admitting drains have been incorrectly connected-   IS BEYOND THE PALE!

A very detailed description of the problems facing Cranleigh are included on the Cranleigh Civic Society website  which is certainly,

Screen Shot 2016-03-26 at 10.51.29

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 16.44.31.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 16.45.25.png

The brook is once more full of you know what!!! Cranleigh Society meeting Waverley Environmental Health today. This has been going on for some 12 years now, it’s just not good enough.Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 16.45.51.png



Samples of water from the ditch were taken and sent for analysis to an independent laboratory, South East Water Scientific Services, who found the ammonia level to be 270 times the limit and E.coli levels to be 24 times the limit.

E.coli and Enterococci which can indicate the presence of faecal solids and high levels of ammonium are representative of urine contamination.

The Cranleigh Society has taken villagers’ findings  to the Environment Agency who immediately put the ditch onto their ‘Priority hot spot list’.

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 16.45.07.png

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 16.46.16.png

Are the authorities going to s*it back and take no notice, or will they act?

Unable to get the problem resolved by Thames Water, residents approached the Cranleigh Civic Society four weeks ago for help.

A spokesperson for the Cranleigh Civic Society said “We took a look at the brook and it is immediately obvious from the smell and the presence of sewage fungus that significant amounts of sewage are being discharged into it from a nearby surface water drain.

The Government’s Water Framework Directive 2010 states that the level of ammonia in “good” rivers and streams should be less than 0.3 mg/l, and Tesco and Marks and Spencer both state that the presence of e coli in irrigation water used for “crops likely to be eaten uncooked” must be less than 1000 cfu/l, this seemed to be a reasonable basis to start from.

The EA advised  initially that they were working with Thames Water and had identified a property in Cranleigh High Street, where the raw sewage outlet was directly connected to the surface water drain instead of the main sewer. We understand that they have now served a 30 day notice on the property to get this problem rectified. The Society is getting regular updates from Thames Water as to  progress.

However, from the quantity of sewage entering the brook, Thames Water now believe that there may be more properties incorrectly connected. They now have a crew working overnight dye testing the system to see what is flowing into the surface water system. They now think they have identified a group of houses where the foul water drains are connected to the surface water drainage system. They will be carrying out further dye testing on each house to fully assess the situation over the next week.

NOT GOOD  just another 700 plus houses are about to join the system.

No wonder Cranleigh Paish Council is holding a meeting in the Village Hall next Thursday eveningto hear villagers’ views about the infrastructure situation and the Daft Local Plan!