Is ‘Your Waverley’ looking under the sofa to find its 5-year housing supply?

The recent announcement that Trinity College Cambridge is selling its stake in Dunsfold Aerodrome has sent an Exocet missile into Waverley’s Local Plan. A plan that took donkey’s years for the Tories to get off the drawing board.

As a result, housing delivery of many hundreds of houses a year in a new garden village with 2,600 homes, and infrastructure including a new school, road, transport and leisure improvements will be delayed. 



Hacked off Farnham Bourne Cllr Carol Cockburn as she awaits the result of an appeal by Cala Homes for 140 homes proposed in Lower Wybourne Lane, in Farnham. A decision that could blow a hole in Farnham’s Neighbourhood Plan.

Here’s what Carole Cockburn thinks after the council was forced to concede that it doesn’t have the 5.3 year supply required by Government at an important appeal held recently in her hometown.

 Waverley Planning Officer Beth Howland-Smith told the Western Planning Committee that the council had been forced to concede to developers claims that it did not have a 5.3 housing supply – but only 4.99. She said “whist this was only slightly below the five-year figure.  The degree of the shortfall was a material consideration and officers were now working on a new HLS Statement as of 1st April 2021.


Chief Planning Officer Zac Ellwood said he agreed with Cllr Cockburn’s concerns saying:

“You either have a Five-year housing supply or you haven’t.”

However, he stressed a great deal of work was going on behind the scenes to ensure the data on housing completions in Waverley. Officers, including several new posts, would ensure in future the housing figures were more robust. Going forward with Local Plan Part 2 would also help to deliver more housing.

“To be blunt – we are going to fight fire with fire when we have the evidence – and we are leaving no stone unturned to find the numbers- and if we can’t – it won’t be for the lack of trying.”

Cllr Simon Dear said it was quite simple, Waverley has to build 11,000 homes in the planning period, and it must retain control to influence where and what that development is.

Without the five year supply – we have no control!


 With developers lining up their diggers all over the borough …

As Cllr Cockburn says, “It is not a good place to be!”




One thought on “Is ‘Your Waverley’ looking under the sofa to find its 5-year housing supply?”

  1. Oh WW… Really?? Wasn’t this a car crash waiting to happen? Couldn’t anyone see it? – It simply beggars belief with all the delays at DP with Reserved Matters and the huge increase in filming – that “someone” knew it was all going belly-up… –

    The writing has been on the wall for ages (excuse mass of Platitudes!) Trinity College have always preferred the option of Science/Business Parks it works with their ethos and pretty much what they have been doing in Cambridge for years (with limited exceptions)

    It isn’t a good place to be – But we put ourselves IN IT – By putting so much on the DP Development.

    I am afraid your description of all the wonderful things this Wretched NON-Garden Village was supposed to provide did NOT include Schools, (Minimal) and Transport Infrastructure in any way that could have fundamentally improved what is a rubbish LITTLE A-road (Remember the no. of Numbers after the “A” Letter indicate the SIZE of the road – making the A281 just short of a “B” Road.

    You can change the traffic lights and Roundabouts – But it is still the A281 which if you are stuck behind a cyclist you are stuffed. Bus routes were supposed to be provided but not until hundreds of New homes were built. As for the Medical centre I could be wrong but even that wasn’t approved by Local Health Authorities or the Policing??

    I hope Zac et Al can sort this mess out – But I think with the best will in the world it is unlikely.

    I don’t know if things have changed since I last posted this to you MANY years ago when LPP1 came in but the figures simply do not add up

    I cannot post the file on this website so will email to the WW Website in case you think it is relevant – But in case you don’t summary below (taken from 2011 Census):

    For the FOUR Towns: ( I know when I post this it will all get skewed but trying)

    TOWN % of Housing Allocated % to Size of BOROUGH

    FARNHAM LPP1 Allocation 2780 25% Percentage Size of WBC 32%
    GODALMING LPP1 Allocation 1520 14% Percentage size of WBC 18%
    HASLEMERE LPP1 Allocation 990 9% Percentage size of WBC 14%
    CRANLEIGH LPP1 Allocation 1700 15% Percentage size of WBC 9%

    So for example Cranleigh being only 9% of WBC Population has had to take 15% of the Housing (and that EXCLUDES DP) – How was this ever FAIR? – It never was and never will be and now we will all be scrabbling around looking for PDL/Brownfield and no doubt WILDWOOD Golf Club would fit in Nicely wouldn’t it? in Alfold despite it taking over 200% of its allocation of min 125 new homes.

    This is a mess and someone needs to be accountable for WBC’s Lack of 5 Year Land Supply.

    Cranleigh has had enough, as have Alfold and Dunsfold and the other Eastern Villages – It is time WBC looked again at what contribution they will make to getting our 5 Year Plan up to a level that will stop this indiscriminate Development is areas that ARE UNSUSTAINABLE

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.