When is someone, somewhere, going to stand up and tell Waverley Council it is no longer fit for purpose​!



Screen Shot 2018-04-09 at 21.29.55.png

The residents of Farnham deserve better than to watch this for the first 15 minutes of Waverley most senior planning committee as they debated the details of a major – 120 housing scheme on the old Hopfields that affects the residents of Crondall Lane in Farnham!

You guessed – that webcast that was flogged on E-Bay wasn’t working… again…!

The system is not for purpose and neither is the council!!

Screen Shot 2018-04-09 at 19.05.27.png


They also deserve better than the muddled, confusing, misleading, and according to many councillors the “gobsmacking” apologies for errors, inaccuracies, misinformation and the revelations provided by planning officers. The joint planning committee heard with incredulity last night, that a major developer’s infrastructure contribution for a circa £150/120m development of 120 homes at Crondall Lane, had dropped from an amazing £914,000 at the outline stage of the scheme – to £514,000 at the detailed stage. 

Oh! and guess what – Surrey County Council couldn’t come up with a project for provision of the necessary primary school for the children from those 120 homes, so they just let the developer get away with contributing, – yes, you guessed, nothing! Is that the same county council that has just put up our council tax by 6% because it is strapped for cash!

Suffice to say a member of the public Stewart Edge, raised a shedload of issues; but of course, we couldn’t actually see him! Farnham Residents councillor Jerry Hyman raised another shedload and whenever he bowled a googly at the so-called ‘experts’ he was either fed a fair amount of the stuff we put on our roses or was shut-up by Chairman Peter I tell residents ‘what I think of them only when the mike is off’ Isherwood! And his side-kick Carole Cockburn said, – we are where we are – ‘though I am a bit concerned for the residents of Beavers Close and Beavers Road’ (in other words ignore all the mistakes) and then she said – let’s approve it!

Just as we all just got to the point when Councillor Jerry proposed that the application be deferred – following cries from others of –

the committee was misled at the outline stage” – “Why weren’t we told there was to be a £300,000 reduction in the Infrastructure contributions,” “why have certain conditions been excluded, others are not tight enough.” “Why can’t `I understand the report,” Why aren’t the pages numbered – it is so confusing.” What if our decision here tonight brings on another legal challenge?  And from non-other than councillor Brian Adams the former Portfolio Holder for planning – I am astonished at the scale of the changes,” and so it went on and on… and on!

The Betty BIZ said: “The mitigation agreed remains sound, it is not appropriate to revisit that.”

However, Jerry Hyman said the council’s lawyer Dan Lucas told the Joint Planning Committee  IN APRIL 2017 that the “catchall principle does apply to habitat applications and so the principle of development can be reviewed and, in fact, must be reviewed if an error was made!

And then just as it got really interesting … the WEBcast finally gave up the ghost and died!!

Probably because ‘Your Waverley’ has just cocked up again!



We are putting our bets on with Bet Fred for another Tory whitewash!

Here’s the link to the webcast that starts at 1 hr 25 mins.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIsaHhaW-Hc

Screen Shot 2018-04-09 at 20.27.29.pngWe have the answer from one of our followers:

 Councillors have granted full planning permission for 120 homes on the Beavers Rd ‘hop fields’ in Farnham – despite a dramatic £380,000 cut in Taylor Wimpey‘s infrastructure contributions for the long-mooted scheme. Full story in this Thursday’s Herald.

Waverley/Surrey Conservatives missed £380,000 from Developers on Hopfields!
Local Liberal Democrat Stewart Edge has slammed Waverley and Surrey Councils for giving up £380,000 of available infrastructure development money from the Hopfields development – leaving no contribution for additional primary school places required for children living there.
At the final Hopfields planning meeting, Stewart asked why the proposed ‘Section 106’ infrastructure contribution totalled only £534,152 when the total had been £894,518 at the meeting in 2015 when outline permission was granted.
The startling answer was that Waverley and Surrey’s Conservative Councils between them had failed to specify specific projects that the rules said were needed to claim the full amounts.
So they signed contracts which fixed the contributions demanded from the developers £380,000 lower than available – and in the final planning meeting said they could do nothing legally to increase these now.
What a disaster! £380,000 less for public services; £380,000 more for developer profits.

In memory of what might have been in Farnham?


Remember this Press Release?


Press Release from Council Leader Julia Potts, 5th Sept 2016, celebrating works on the extension to Farnham’s Memorial Hall completing in September 2017!juliapotts_xmas

“The Memorial Hall is an incredible tribute to Farnham’s history and the council is committed to enhancing the space for all. The plaque commemorating those in the community who sacrificed their lives during the First World War has been safely removed and will be reinstated into the new (sic) refurbished hall when it reopens in September 2017.”


Waverley Press Release 14th March 2018 :
Delays to Memorial Hall opening

The opening of the Memorial Hall is to be delayed following recent weather conditions impacting on the project timetable.
The project was already behind schedule, due to difficulties in procuring the right materials for the build last year. Unfortunately, the council is now faced with considerable delays to the Farnham Memorial Hall refurbishment.
To fully understand what is required to finish the refurbishment the council commissioned an independent survey. The survey has highlighted that, due to the poor weather conditions, a considerable amount of remedial work is also required. This is in addition to the work required to complete the project.

Councillor Jenny Else, Portfolio Holder for Health, Wellbeing and Culture, said:

”I cannot express how disappointed and upset I am that the project is not only much further behind than we expected, but also requires a lot of additional work to rectify damage that has been caused by the weather. I am concerned that this is only going to worsen due to the heavy rainfall that has been forecast for the coming weeks.
“This will also come as a disappointment to the services and the people that will be based in the hall when it is finished. We have informed them of the situation and will continue to provide them with the support they need during this frustrating time.
“We are now considering how to move forward. Sadly we cannot give a revised estimate about when the hall will be open until our consultant and the contractors have identified what remedial work is required.”


So tell us Aunty Elsie – who exactly has cocked this one up?

Have you donned your camouflage outfit in readiness to miss the flack flying?

Virgin caring for Farnham…just! But… what do the changes mean for Cranleigh?


Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 09.18.46

Virgin Care is to continue providing adult community services in one corner of Surrey after winning a contract extension.

Under the deal –  agreed recently – Virgin Care will continue to provide services to Surrey Heath Clinical Commissioning Group’s population, plus those living in and around Farnham for another year.


Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 09.29.31Q So where does this leave the new private nursing home proposed for Cranleigh?

    Q  And exactly who will have access to the community beds Cranleigh Village Hospital Trust has been promising the town for over 20 years?  

Virgin Care provided services to the whole of western Surrey until last April. At that point, CSH Surrey took on services in the North West Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) area. From next month services in Guildford and Waverley will pass from Virgin Care to a consortium of the Royal Surrey County Hospital Foundation Trust and local GP’s.

Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 09.36.44.pngScreen Shot 2018-03-12 at 09.37.24

So, £328,000 was extracted from our health economy because the powers that be couldn’t conduct its procurement process properly!

This left  Virgin Care covering just the 95,000 Surrey Heath population and the area around Farnham, a town of 40,000 people.

Governing body papers for North East Hampshire and Farnham CCG for January show local leaders had been concerned that the much-reduced contract would not be attractive for Virgin Care because of the loss of economies of scale and that the company might serve notice on the CCG.

But in a joint statement, Surrey Heath and North East Hampshire and Farnham CCGs said a £10.8m contract had been agreed with Virgin Care to continue for another year, based on the previous year’s spend but with a small uplift for inflation.

It said: “Both localities are fully developing plans for community services in light of the North East Hampshire and Farnham vanguard and Surrey Heath new model of care, and continue to do so within the Frimley integrated care system. Our intention is to ensure the market is engaged when appropriate as part of this process,” 

Ten of the Virgin Care-run inpatient beds at Farnham Community Hospital are used by patients from the Guildford and Waverley CCG area, including some requiring rehabilitation after stroke.

 So exactly where does this leave Cranleigh’s long-held hopes and dreams?… And why is the town, that raised millions of pounds for community beds,  still waiting for a planning application promised in 2017?

Let us hope some of those complaints are against By-Pass Byham, Peter Isherwood, ​and Carole Cockburn?



Formal investigations have been launched against 14 Waverley Borough Councillors – and the list is growing by the day!

The council’s monitoring officer Herr Taylor has been investigating complaints, ‘we have ways and means of making you talk,’ the council’s standards panel heard recently. Some are still being investigated, including those against borough and parish councillors

Some have been accused of not disclosure of pecuniary interests which mean they were not in a position to make unbiased decisions!

However, the most common allegation levelled against Waverley councillors is their failure to “treat others with respect,” with the majority of complaints coming from one councillor against another, either verbally or in e-mails, or comments posted online. No prizes offered by the Waverley Web for guessing who this is?

Mr Taylor said, “electronic communications can be treated, and widely transmitted in just a few moments and then read and shared with an audience the original author may not have intended. This combined with the absence of tone of voice and context makes electronic communications far more likely to lead to complaints, than any other form, especially when sent in haste.”

Independent Investigators – are currently looking into three of the most severe allegations.

The Chairman of the Standards Board,  Councillor Michael Goodridge, who prides himself on never having to stand in an election in his Wonersh ward, and regularly falls asleep during council meetings, doesn’t believe there is a problem at ‘Your Waverley.’ Surprise, surprise!


But then he can always be relied upon to sweep almost every Waverley wrongdoing under      Waverley Tower’s carpets!  

Our spiders are finding it difficult to find enough space to breathe under them, let alone procreate and increase our little band of arachnids. 

Leading Tory says Farnham appeals will be rejected? But a big question mark hangs over whether or not POW will seek a judicial review!

Confidence voiced that appeals will be rejected

WAVERLEY’S new portfolio holder for planning has expressed confidence Farnham’s Neighbourhood Plan will “kill” five upcoming appeals for more than 500 homes in the town area, despite councillors agreeing Waverley’s new higher housing target this week.

Christopher Storey, the Tory councillor for Weybourne and Badshot Lea, took over the reigns as Waverley’s executive member for planning from Brian Adams this month and has been immediately thrown in the deep end – presiding over key landmarks in the development of the borough’s Local Plan and Farnham’s Brightwells redevelopment.

Last week Waverley invited members of the press to a briefing on the Local Plan, just weeks after a government planning inspector declared Waverley’s planning blueprint “sound” subject to a series of major modifications including raising the borough’s housing target to 590 homes per year.

This includes an additional allocation of 450 homes in Farnham, on top of the 2,330 already proposed over the plan period up to 2032, forcing an early review of Farnham’s own Neighbourhood Plan, adopted just last July, to find new housing sites.

Responding, architect of the town plan, town council leader Carole Cockburn told the Farnham Herald the inspector’s decision represented a “cruel blow” to the community-led planning document and the 10,000-plus people who voted for the plan in a referendum last April. 

However, Mr Storey took a different stance to Mrs Cockburn, echoing inspector Jonathan Bore’s comments that: These changes [to the Local Plan] will not diminish the importance or relevance of the work carried out to produce the Neighbourhood Plan, which will remain part of the statutory development plan.”

Addressing specifically five pending appeals for more than 500 homes spread across sites in Waverley Lane, Monkton Lane, Lower Weybourne Lane, Folly Hill and behind Farnham Park Hotel in Hale Road, Mr Storey added: “I am very confident that the Neighbourhood Plan and the Local Plan will kill all five of those.”

His comments came just a day before 11th-hour protests failed to force a rethink last Tuesday, and the new higher housing target of building 590 homes a year in 14 years was agreed by Waverley Borough Council.

Following a special executive meeting at 5pm, 41 members of the full council meeting at 7pm voted in favour of the inspector’s changes to part one of Waverley’s local plan in order to speed up its adoption and “take back control” from speculative property developers.

Farnham Residents opposition leader Jerry Hyman was a lone objector, again arguing there was insufficient evidence for the mitigation measures proposed to protect the borough’s Special Protection Areas, while councillors Andy MacLeod (Farnham Residents), Kevin Deanus (Alfold, Tory) and Paul Follows (Godalming, Lib Dem) abstained.

Responding to a last-minute challenge by Protect Our Waverley (POW) campaign that last wek’s  decision was unlawful, because the council had potentially breached its constitution by holding the local plan meetings too close together, Waverley leader Julia Potts (Upper Hale, Tory) said it would be “very disappointing” if POW pursued its challenge.

“Waverley can proceed provided it is aware of the risk of challenge,” she said.

POW had previously called on all borough councillors to defer a decision on whether to approve the modified local plan, until the appeal decision on whether 1,800 houses can be built at Dunsfold Park – which has been allocated 2,600 new homes in the local plan. The verdict is due by March 31.

Taken from the Farnham Herald.

However, nobody dares to mention what if… The Dunsfold Aerodrome application is refused by the Secretary of State!

Result: One great big black hole in the Local Plan and one great big green hole in the borough of Waverley?



Farnham’s not a pretty sight these days!​

Here are just a few of the fifteen, and counting,  empty or closing, retail outlets in Farnham.

But worry not!- Soon there will be lots of new ones to take their place and all funded by the county and borough councils. Happy days! Because quite soon we will ALL be paying more council tax! And, there are suggestions that Waverley’s ‘high worth individuals could pay even more.’















27539994_10157099379761632_1125427590713679859_n.jpgScreen Shot 2018-02-11 at 22.27.14.png

Has this highly respected architect​ come up with a better town plan for Farnham?

Has Michael Blower, a former Waverley Mayor, borough Councillor, highly respected Farnham architect and a former partner of Guildford’s Scott, Brownrigg & Turner, devised a scheme that could bring about a volte-face to the presently proposed town redevelopment? 


26805223_10156035936391613_1347500226118123481_n.jpgScreen Shot 2018-01-12 at 22.27.26.png

Screen Shot 2018-01-12 at 22.29.15.pngScreen Shot 2018-01-12 at 22.29.31.png

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…

They cannot make the Farnham Herald’s letters page big enough to take the complaints against ‘Your Waverley.’

Buy that Great Farnham Newspaper and read it!  

Here at the Waverley Web we want the whole borough to be aware of the Balls Up Of  Blightwells – about to be built on Flood Zone 3 in East Street, Farnham.