Outline plans for 60 homes on the edge of a Surrey village have been scrapped again in a bid to stop “London creeping towards us”.

Elmbridge councillors said the land north of Raleigh Drive in Claygate is green belt not ‘grey belt’ and ruled it unsuitable for housing at a planning meeting on September 16.

They also said the plans failed the flood risk ‘sequential test’ meaning safer sites should be looked at first before building there.

The scheme would have seen new homes (up to 50 per cent affordable), open space and landscaping built on the land north of Raleigh Drive and to the east of Claygate House.

The application triggered more than 300 objections from residents, alongside opposition from Claygate Parish Council. Concerns centred on traffic, flooding and the loss of open countryside.

Cllr Janet Turner said: “I have seen over the years how London is creeping towards us.” The member for Hinchley Wood explained: “When you come out of London to Hinchley Wood or Esher or Long Ditton, you will immediately relax because you have an open aspect.

“This is what Elmbridge and Surrey are all about. This is the entrance into our cultural area and we must protect it. Once it’s gone you cannot bring it back.”

Other members agreed, arguing if you weakened one patch of the green belt, you weakened the whole metropolitan ring. Cllr Alistair Mann described it as “death by a thousand cuts” to the green belt if piecemeal applications keep being approved.

The site, next to Claygate house, once home to a bowls green, pitch and putt course and tennis courts, has reportedly fallen into disrepair.

A similar plan was refused in 2023 and dismissed at appeal last year with inspectors at the time ruling it was inappropriate development in the green belt.

Planning officers initially recommended the new scheme for approval, arguing that housing demand and national policy around the green belt has changed.

Elmbridge can currently only demonstrate a 0.9-year housing supply- well below the five years required by the government. Elmbridge currently has a house building target of 1,443 homes annually.

“Our housing need is so critical now, I don’t think this scratchy bit of land is putting green belt in danger,” said Cllr Elaine Sesemann.

She explained: “I would protect greenbelt forever along with every other councillor in this chamber but the world of planning has changed so dramatically.”

Council leader Mike Rollings admitted the local housing need has dramatically increased since 2023 when the plans were first put forward. However Cllr Rolling still determined the square patch of land was not appropriate for house building.

Emily Dalton LDRS

Illustrative view looking south of application site (left) and former Claygate House with Shanly Homes Oaklands Park development to the rear (Credit: Elmbridge Borough Council)

Guildford could soon see one of its biggest housing developments in decades, with fresh plans submitted to build up to 1,800 new homes at Gosden Hill.

Developers Martin Grant Homes want to transform farmland off the A3 into a new neighbourhood complete with schools, shops, sports pitches, and even a Park and Ride. 

The outline applications sets out a long-term vision for the site, which would include:

• Up to 1,800 homes, including 40 per cent affordable housing
• Six Gypsy and Traveller pitches 
• A new local centre with shops, health and community facilities
• Land for both a primary school and secondary school 
• Around 10,000sqm of employment floorspace
• A 250-space Park and Ride near the A3
• Large areas of green space, including allotments, play areas, and a new woodland walking rout

Developers say the project would create a “gateway for Guildford” for drivers coming off the A3. The site, covering more than 130 hectares of farmland and woodland, sits between Burpham and the A3. If approved, the first phase 150 homes would be built with access from Merrow Lane. 

The bulk of the site will be housing in a mix of family homes, apartments and some specialist accommodation. Planning documents detail the homes will be built in phases including a mixture of sizes from smaller flats to larger family homes, around 720 affordable homes, space for self-build plots and some elderly care housing.

Most of the higher density housing, like apartment blocks, would sit around the centre and the main street of the new community, while the rest of the site would focus on family housing with gardens.

Not everyone will welcome the idea of more traffic but the scheme includes a new A3 junction, cycle paths, and upgraded bus services to ease the pressure on local roads.

About 34 hectares of open space is planned including a big new woodland walking area at Cotts and Frithy’s Wood. Developers say overhead power lines will be buried underground and much of the existing woodland kept to help the site blend in with the landscape. 

Guildford Borough Council cannot currently meet government housing supply targets so the developers argue the project should be green-lit to help tackle the housing shortage.

If given the green light, Gosden Hill would become home to thousands of people, with the developer promising it will be a “healthy, happy and sociable” place to live.

Only eight people have objected to the scheme so far with the majority of comments slamming the construction traffic plan as “wholly inadequate” for the road and likely to cause “intolerable disruption”.

Emily Dalton LDRS

Outline of the proposed development on Gosden Hill Farm. (Credit: Guildford Borough Council/ Martin Grant Homes)

Families have been left worried sick and children devastated after Surrey County Council decided to sell their homes “to ensure best value” in the “disposal of public assets”.

Residents say the council is putting profit before people as it seeks to cash in on their homes through its private company—insisting upon selling them as vacant possessions and giving them until July to move out.

They claim the council is refusing to consider offers from the families who have built their lives there and instead told them they must leave so the properties can be placed on the open market.

One family has lived in Norbury Park, Mickleham, since 2003 under a long-term lease when it was owned by Surrey Wildlife Trust, prior to being taken over by the county council’s private company, Halsey Garton Residential Ltd (HGR). In that time, the family invested significantly in repairs and improvements, believing their tenancy was secure. They say they even made an offer to buy the property, but it was rejected, with Surrey insisting the house must be vacated first.

Helen Wood, who lives in one of the Norbury Park homes said she the council-created company took on the properties from the Surrey Wildlife Trust in 2022.     Families have been left worried sick and children ‘devastated’ …”

Mrs Wood said: “Our children are devastated at the thought of losing the house, their home. My 12-year-old has asked why this is happening, and we have tried to explain it to him, but even he says it makes no sense—they want to sell and we want to buy. We can’t move on with our lives or plan anything and are just stuck in limbo. It is pretty hellish and worse than that, it just seems really unfair and nonsensical.”

She added: “We saw other neighbours were being evicted and had to force a meeting to find out our own situation. Ridiculously, we can’t buy it. I’m a fit and healthy 54-year-old with two kids but I’ve ended up on blood pressure tablets. I’ve never had an issue and now I’ll be on them for the rest of my life. It’s horrendous. All I’m doing is thinking we’re another day nearer, and another week nearer, another month nearer, to losing our home. We can’t buy in the area. We’ll lose our workshop and my husband will lose his job. I’m just trying not to think about it as it just makes us anxious.”

The families are asking Surrey County Council to allow an independent valuation of the homes and to be given first refusal to purchase and remain in the properties.

Charles Maxlow-Tomlinson, managing director of Halsey Garton Residential Ltd—a company registered at Surrey County Council’s headquarters and specialising in the letting and operating of owned or leased real estate—responded: “Surrey County Council is the freeholder of various properties which are managed by Halsey Garton Residential Ltd under a strategy approved by SCC’s Strategic Investment Board. HGR is a subsidiary of the council and has a long leasehold interest in the properties. HGR was established to help generate commercial returns, providing an alternative revenue stream that supports the Council’s broader financial resilience.

“HGR remains deeply committed to responsible and balanced property management. We have been actively engaging with tenants to listen to their concerns regarding the proposed sale of properties and lease arrangements. We understand how unsettling this situation can be for families and, where appropriate, we have offered new lease terms with more tenant-friendly conditions, extending occupancy until June 2026.

“We fully acknowledge the personal impact this may have on individual tenants. While HGR and SCC are not housing authorities and do not retain residential properties for long-term housing provision, we are committed to treating all tenants with dignity and respect throughout this process. Tenants have been informed of the proposed sales, and we want to clarify that there are no current eviction notices for the properties in Norbury Park. To ensure openness and transparency, when properties are placed on the open market for sale, anybody can make an offer to purchase, and the most proceedable offer will be accepted.”

Councillor Natalie Bramhall, cabinet member for property, infrastructure and waste, said: “Surrey County Council has a statutory duty to ensure best value in the use and disposal of public assets. In fulfilling this responsibility, and to maintain transparency and fairness, the council and its subsidiaries have followed a consistent approach over the past five years: selling its properties on the open market with vacant possession. This ensures that we can secure the best possible return, which is vital for delivering essential public services to the wider community.

Helen and Grant Wood together with their dog (Image Helen Wood)

A former Surrey care home is being given a new lease of life – not for elderly residents but as a mix of hotel rooms and shared housing.

The Elders, on Epsom Road, Ewell, will now officially become a 12-room guesthouse with an 8-bed HMO (house of multiple occupation), plus a manager’s flat, after councillors approved the proposal on September 4.

The decision by Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s planning committee follows a rocky planning history of previous refusals, enforcement notices and accusations the owners were running it without permission.

Cllr Clive Woodbridge said: “Moving it from a sort of limbo where it’s operating as it is but without any ability to be regulated – because it’s not supposed to be happening – it probably tips my balance.”

The building has been empty for several years and developers argue it is no longer suitable for modern care needs.

The scheme has divided opinion with some councillors saying they were uneasy about losing a care facility at a time when demand is only growing. Members noted the loss of the care home – capable of housing up to 24 residents – would also mean a loss of housing.

HMOs tend to have a bad reputation and are sometimes attributed for noisy neighbours and anti-social behaviour. But Cllr Phil Neale admitted this one looked “more for professional people” than “itinerant” workers.

Planning documents reveal the HMO rooms are aimed at housing staff employed by the owners in local care homes, providing affordable accommodation for new workers before moving into the housing market.

Cllr Alison Kelly argued the units could help newcomers find their feet. She said: “It’s quite a reasonable use of a HMO.”

Not everyone was convinced. Cllr Jan Mason tore into the design, claiming: “It looks like it’s been produced on a packet of cigarettes.” While Cllr Neale raised concerns about sustainability. He said: “I’m disappointed again that we’ve missed the opportunity to push solar panels.”

Outside the former care home on Epsom Road. (Credit: Google Street View)

The future of Swail House in Epsom, a landmark housing estate for visually impaired people, has become the subject of debate as residents and the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) present differing perspectives on redevelopment plans.

Swail House, opened in 1952 and named after Martha Swail, was one of the first estates in the UK designed specifically for blind people. With flats laid out to aid navigation, landscaped grounds, and facilities for social activities, it was hailed as a flagship initiative. Over time it has included social rooms, a restaurant, and a Chelsea Flower Show award-winning garden.

Residents’ Concerns

Some residents and supporters have voiced fears that redevelopment will diminish the estate’s original character and reduce the number of flats for visually impaired tenants. They argue that facilities such as communal spaces, gardens, and the on-site Epsom & Ewell Talking Newspaper (EETN) studio, which has operated from Swail House for over 40 years, are at risk.

Complaints have also been made about the consultation process, with claims that residents’ questions have gone unanswered and that accessible formats, such as tactile scale models of proposed buildings, have not been provided.

Russell Bailey, Chair of the Swail House Association for the Visually Impaired, told the Epsom and Ewell Times:

“We are very keen for the development to go through. We are not so keen about the way it’s being done – i.e. selling off land to pay for the new development – and we are certainly not keen with the fact that there’s going to be fewer flats for visually impaired people. If the RNIB were more financially secure, they could have lent money against the value of the property, kept the land, and built more flats.

I don’t think residents feel they have had the opportunity to input into how it’s going to develop. One real concern is that there will be no communal lounge and no facilities for recording the Epsom newspaper which has been going for many years.”

RNIB’s Position

The RNIB, however, says it has engaged with tenants and will continue to do so. Kathryn Sherratt, RNIB’s Chief Financial Officer, said:

“In March 2025, RNIB submitted an outline planning application to redevelop land at the back of Swail House to build 48 units, and we’re currently waiting for a decision on the planning proposal.

RNIB has consulted with tenants on the planning proposal and will continue to share information and consult as the proposals develop, subject to the outcome of the planning decision.”

Wider Concerns

Supporters of the estate point out that Swail House is more than just a residential complex. Its natural grounds provide quiet areas for guide dogs and for residents to experience sounds of nature in place of visual cues. Campaigners say this unique environment is at risk if large sections of the site are sold.

Local residents outside Swail House have also raised objections to the design and scale of the proposed development, citing environmental and aesthetic impacts.

Next Steps

The future of Swail House now rests with Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s planning process. Whatever the outcome, the debate highlights tensions between the need to modernise housing stock and preserve the historic vision and facilities that made Swail House a pioneering model for visually impaired people more than 70 years ago.

Image: Swail House aerial – Google Maps.

Campaigners in an Epsom village have hit out at proposals to build on “pristine farmland”, warning the plans will destroy a cherished stretch of countryside on the edge of the Surrey Hills. The outline application covers more than five hectares of agricultural farm land at Langley Bottom Farm, adjacent to Langley Vale village. Developer Fairfax Aspire Ltd has envisioned the 5.2 hectare field on Epsom Downs for 110 new homes. Although the exact height, design and layout will be determined later, planning documents suggest the new houses will be predominantly two-storey to eaves.

Dubbed ‘the valley’, locals are baffled that the agricultural field could ever be considered as a grey belt. The land has been classed as ‘low-quality land’ that could be prioritised for development, but residents say the designation is nonsense. “[Grey belt should be] for scrappy old car parks, not pristine farmland,” John Mumford of the Woodcote Epsom Residents Society and Save Langley Vale said. He pointed out the combine harvester in the field and explained it is still being used for agriculture. “We shouldn’t be sacrificing the green belt for land for land-owning interests,” he added. Fairfax Aspire Ltd stated in the application: “The site represents an opportunity for modest, sustainable development on the edge of the settlement boundary.”

The proposed development site sits down the road from Epsom Derby race course and is part of a landscape known for its race horse culture and rich ecology. Matt Dunn, who grew up in Langley Vale, described how buses only visited hourly, and horse riding and jockey training were common pastimes in the close-knit community. He said: “This scheme is tacked on, not integrated into the village.” Planning documents state most of the existing hedgerows and important trees will be retained and enhanced with native planting, with other features including new ecological improvements like wildlife corridors linking to the nearby woodland at The Warren. But campaigners say it is home to deer, badgers, and protected bird species like buzzards and skylarks, and that horse riders, dog walkers and ramblers make frequent use of the fields behind the village.

“It will completely destroy a much loved valley,” Matt said. “Ecology mitigation doesn’t mean anything if it doesn’t change the wrongs and the impact on wildlife.” The dispute comes amid national concerns over habitat loss — in England, the abundance of wildlife species has fallen by around 19 per cent since 1970. Matt accused the developer of trying to “whip up houses which don’t meet local need,” describing the affordable housing element as a “tick-boxing exercise”. The 29-year-old explained that selling houses at 80 per cent of the average Epsom house price (£559k according to RightMove) does not make the homes remotely affordable.

Langley Vale currently has around 400 houses, and campaigners fear the development could swell its size by more than 20 per cent, straining the roads, utilities and services. A new access road would be created on Langley Vale Road to get into the site, but residents warn this could exacerbate traffic issues in their rural community. Campaigners have also launched a petition against the development which has gained more than 1,000 signatures already. Mr Mumford has also set up a fundraiser to help pay for the campaign, gathering £3,700.

Planning documents state: “The opportunity exists for the creation of a high quality landscape and ecology led residential scheme to be provided in this sustainable location. The illustrative material demonstrates how a residential scheme, including new affordable homes, can be delivered without having undue impact on the site’s immediate neighbours, the wider area or key landscape and ecological features. The site is available, sustainable and importantly, deliverable, and will link to Langley Vale and the wider area.” The developer has been approached for further comment.

Related report:

110-Home Scheme at Langley Vale Sparks Green Belt Fears

Campaigners, Matt Dunn (left) and John Mumford (right), in front of the proposed development site. (Credit: Emily Dalton/LDRS)

Tripling the number of houses on a brownfield Epsom site vexed Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s Planning Committee on 10th July.

The Application from Nuro Homes Limited proposed the erection of 9 new dwellings on adjacent plots of land acquired by the developers in the Whitehorse Drive and Bucknills Close roads of Epsom off the Dorking Road.

A previous application for this development had been refused by the Planning Committee in April 2024 and the developers appealed to a Planning Inspector. The appeal was refused where the Inspector was in agreement with the Council’s refusal on the ground of highway safety but the objection concerning hazards in waste collection the Inspector stated could be addressed.

A revised application came before the Planning committee with a widened access from the development onto Whitehorse Drive. RA Councillors Neil Dallen, Jan Mason, Phil Neale and Humphrey Reynolds were not convinced that the revisions were sufficient to address safety concerns for pedestrians and in particular school girls attending Rosebery School in Whitehorse Drive.

Kate Chinn (Labour Court) emphasised the need for more housing – though this development was not providing anything affordable for those on low incomes, she added. With the improved access she stated people are mindful and the fears of pedestrian vehicular collisions should not be overstated.

The officers of the Council recommended the Application be granted.

Cllr Dallen proposed the Application be refused. The Chair of the Committee, Cllr Steven McCormick (RA Woodcote and Langley Vale) required him to cite the planning policies that justified refusal. As Cllr Dallen floundered through his papers an officer identified the reasons given at the meeting that refused the original application in 2024 and Cllr Dallen repeated them.

Cllr Julian Freeman (Liberal Democrat College) questioned the procedure of having a vote on a motion to refuse when the matter to be voted on was the recommendation to grant.

In a bizarre dance on the voting 2 voted in favour of refusal and two voted against refusal. The Chair cast his vote against refusal. This was followed by a vote on granting the Planning Application with 4 voting in favour and 4 voting against. The Chair voted in favour of granting the Application and therefore the officers’ recommendation was carried.

Image: Top plan original with narrow access on Whitehorse Drive. Bottom plan revised plan showing proposed housing and widened access. Epsom and Ewell Borough Council planning documents.

Over 2,000 new homes could be built on the Surrey border, to the right of Claygate and Esher, and above Epsom and Ewell. Plans for 2,003 new homes and a 104-bed care home are in the pipeline at Hook Park in Chessington, to the east of the A3 Esher Bypass and south of the A309 Kingston Bypass. If approved, residents say it could bring at least another 5,000 people into the area. Developers Poppymill Ltd envisions transforming the so-called derelict site into “a new family-friendly neighbourhood that centres around a huge public park and community spaces”. Around 50 per cent of the new builds could be affordable housing, of mixed tenures and with more than 600 homes for families. The proposed development site covers approximately 50 hectares of land and includes Chessington Equestrian Centre, ‘The Dell’ building and former scaffolding yards.

But residents claim the land is actually green belt status, preventing the urban sprawl of Chessington into neighbouring Surrey and providing an important green space. While the site is green belt, Poppymill argued the land is “compromised and inaccessible to the public” rendering it ‘grey-belt’, the developer claims. Details on the proposal are scarce, but initial planning documents indicated new terrace houses could be between two-four storeys tall, and apartment blocks could range from four-eight storeys high. No concrete plans have been announced, but Poppymill Ltd. has submitted a screening request which outlines the potential scheme.

The developer has asked the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames Council for a formal opinion on what information it should supply for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) – this is called ‘scoping’ – ahead of a planning application. But Elmbridge Borough Council has also been asked for their view on the application, given the massive potential development is close to the authority’s patch. The prospective plans also hint at community space including room for retail or leisure uses, employment space, a public house, community centre and an active travel hub. Plans also include highway improvements such as a new vehicle access road from the Kingston Bypass and Clayton Road, pedestrian and cycle access and car and bike parking.

Residents who wish to comment on the scheme can do so on Kingston council’s planning website. Comments are open until July 24, 2025.

Aerial view of the Hook Park site outlined in red. (Credit: Poppymill Ltd consultation website)

“Surrey’s biggest cul-de-sac” will be built after hundreds of new homes were approved next to the M25. Developers Wates was granted planning permission to build up to 270 homes to the south of Ermyn Way in Ashtead by Mole Valley District Council’s development committee. The plans, which include 108 affordable properties, a community building, and space for Gypsy and Traveller pitches, were green lit by six votes to five with two abstentions much to the disappointment of many who attended the July 2 meeting.

Wates, though, said the scheme would go a considerable way to alleviating housing pressure in the area. Director of planning, John Tarvit, said Wates had been working on the proposals since 2014 with both the council and planning inspector agreeing it was a sustainable site. He added: “Mole Valley is one of the least affordable places to buy a home with about 680 households currently on the waiting list. This planning application represents a real opportunity to offer young people and families the chance to either own a home or with affordable rent securing a stable place where they can thrive.”

The still-to-be-determined final layout will include a purpose-built community building with potential for a children’s nursery, 30 acres of open space with green corridors and children’s play areas, and cycling facilities. The developers will also make a financial contribution towards Surrey Connect – an on-demand bus service.

The item was not without its controversy with committee chair, Councillor Jo Farrar-Astrop (Liberal Democrats: Capel, Leigh, Newdigate & Charlwood) recognising it was contentious and reminding members to stay focused on the planning matters. She would also, repeatedly, warn the public gallery over its outbursts before eventually clearing the chamber and moving onlookers to watch from a room next door.

Speaking against the plans was Steve Drake who urged the committee to reject the proposals as there was “only one route into the busy cul-de-sac” already congested with incoming school-run traffic. He said: “With this development the cul-de-sac would become almost 500 dwellings with over 1,000 vehicles, doubling the traffic load on Ermyn Way.” Worse, he said, was that the council had earmarked a further 140 homes for the site meaning it would eventually grow to more than 600 dwellings. Dave Beresford of the Ashtead Residents Association said: “Adding 580 residents would be unsustainable, the character of the area will certainly be harmed.”

Nearby schools have told the council there is enough capacity to take on the expected increase in children moving into the area. Cllr Gerry Sevenoaks (Independent: Ashtead Park) said: “It will have a devastating impact, increasing traffic pollution and loss of biodiversity but more importantly there would be a devastating impact on the residents living close to this development. He added: “Given that this is going to be the largest Cul de Sac in Surrey I wonder what those emergency services feel about coming down the road to be clocked with traffic and trying to actually get people to hospital or deal with fire.”

280 homes plan for Ashtead (Image Wates)

A neighbour has spoken out against early proposals by developer Fairfax to build up to 110 new homes on farmland at Langley Bottom Farm in Langley Vale, describing the plans as a “devastating blow” to the character and heritage of the area.

Langley Vale, nestled between Epsom Downs and surrounding ancient woodland managed by the Woodland Trust, is described by residents as more than just a location — but a cherished community shaped by its open fields, green spaces, and rural setting.

“This isn’t empty land up for grabs,” one local resident told the Epsom and Ewell Times. “Our green belt is a living, breathing asset — a habitat for wildlife, a natural break from urban sprawl, and a place for families to enjoy the countryside. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”

The concerns centre on potential impacts including increased traffic, pressure on schools and GP surgeries, and the loss of valuable farmland that has been cultivated for generations. Neighbours fear that if this initial consultation leads to formal planning permission, it would “irreversibly alter” the area and set a worrying precedent for green belt development.

In their public exhibition materials, however, Fairfax describes the proposals as sensitive and environmentally responsible. The scheme, which is subject to local consultation, would deliver up to 110 homes on 5.2 hectares of land, with half of the properties designated as affordable housing.

According to Fairfax’s consultation website and exhibition documents, the proposals include:

• a biodiversity net gain of at least 10%
• significant landscaping and green planting
• electric vehicle charging points
• improved footpaths and cycle storage
• a children’s play area
• new public green space
• contributions to local infrastructure
• funding to extend the Surrey Connect on-demand bus service

Fairfax argues that the site, currently an arable field, scores “relatively low” for biodiversity and offers opportunities to enhance wildlife habitats while protecting the adjacent ancient woodland with buffer zones.

The developer also points to the pressing local demand for housing, highlighting that Epsom and Ewell Borough Council faces strict targets for new homes, including affordable units. The homes would be built using energy-efficient methods and aim to promote sustainable travel, Fairfax says.

Residents were requested to give feedback by 16th June but the comments link is still live at the time of this post. Online at langley.your-feedback.co.uk or by contacting the project team by phone or post.

The plans are at a consultation stage only, but campaigners fear they could soon turn into a planning application. “The green belt is supposed to protect communities from precisely this type of development,” the neighbour added. “If we allow this, it will change Langley Vale for good.”

Image: Langley development layout. Courtesy Fairfax Homes.

The final planning application of the 1,200-home Deepcut regeneration project has been approved. The massive housing project was given the initial green light back in 2014 when Surrey Heath Borough Council agreed the site was suitable for the major residential development. Now, nine years later, the final reserved matter has been signed off, with members at the Thursday, June 5, planning committee bursting into spontaneous applause in celebration of the milestone.

The former Princess Royal Barracks covers 114 hectares. What was once a military site has been slowly transformed into 1,200 homes, public open spaces, community buildings, a primary school and new retail and commercial opportunities. The decade-long project was divided into three housing phases, and three non-residential ones. All had been agreed with the exception of last Thursday’s.

Councillors unanimously approved Weston Homes’ bid to transform the redundant security hut and Sergeants, together with car parking, into 37 new homes, of which five will be marketed as affordable. Planning officer Sarita Bishop told the meeting, in between the cheers: “Members, I am delighted to bring this application to you this evening. It is the last reserved matter on Deepcut. We have finally got there. This is phase 4H, and unlike the rest of the scenes that we’ve looked at, this is actually quite separate to the main Deepcut site.”

The process has moved slowly but surely towards the finish line as the different stages got approved. In August last year, the council signed off on a new sports pavilion as part of the final application for infrastructure, to sit alongside the sports hub and play area. More recently, in November 2024, a care home that will act as a gateway to the development was granted permission.

Image: Final reserved matters approved for Deepcut (Surrey Heath)

Imagine starting a new homes project and not being able to drive onto the site. That could be the reality for one Surrey council which has got into a road row with neighbours over access to a street.

Residents down Fairview Road claim Epsom and Ewell Borough Council are not legally allowed to drive into the old builder’s yard at the end of their road. The council has launched a scheme to place three ‘shipping container’ homes on the land to provide temporary accommodation for families on the housing register. The plans were agreed in November last year.

“It’s a real David and Goliath situation,” said Debbie Ransome, who has together with the neighbours challenged the council’s right to enter the site, by Fairview Road. She argued that it is wrong for the council to claim they have the access rights when she believes they are not entitled to use the road.

HM Land Registry has accepted the resident’s application to block the council’s right of way, and is now considering the claim. A spokesperson for Land Registry said: “Unfortunately, it is beyond HMLR’s remit to comment on whether or not the Council are legally allowed to access their land from Fairview Road.”

She has accused the council of “bullying” and “intimidating” behaviour as residents have challenged their right to access to the site- and now Ms Ransome is heading to tribunal. “I’m a single parent, I pay my taxes,” she said

Ms Ransome, who lives next to the site in Epsom, explained herself and the neighbours have also allegedly received a solicitor’s letter from the council threatening police action if they continue ‘disrupting’ the development.

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council state they intend to fight the claim as they head towards tribunal with Ms Ransome. The local authority state it rejects the allegations and said it is following the process laid out by the Land Registry.

An unusual situation, Fairview Road is a private street with a mystery owner. So the council (and future occupants) are not technically allowed to drive down the road to get to the former builder’s yard- even though the local authority owns the site.

In September 2024, the council applied for a right of way on the site based on the long-term use from the previous occupant, Mr Adrian Giles MBE. Under a legal tool known as ‘lost modern grant’, people are able to claim if they have continually used the access route for 20 years without permission or by using force.

But Ms Ransome is disputing Mr Giles was in a position to claim access, saying she believes he forfeited access when he moved his business from the road some time ago. She also claims Mr Giles’ late father agreed to sublet the land to a roofer – not part of the rent agreement with the council – and gained money from it.

Documents and emails seen by the author show Mr Giles admitting and apologising to the council he had not told them about the roofer subletting the land in his Land Registry statement. The roofer reportedly left the site in 2014, and the land was given back to the council in 2016.

Calling the council’s actions as “deplorable”, Ms Ransome said it is “completely wrong” and “not fair on the residents” that the council would try to get access to the site this way. She claimed: “They have got the [access] by lying and they’re supposed to be the council. They’re supposed to be the people that we trust to follow rules and regulations.”

The council approved the application to develop three new ‘modular’, or pre-constructed, homes to support local families at risk of homelessness on 7 November 2024.

A long-time opponent of the pre-constructed home scheme, Ms Ransome said the development will be “detrimental to hundreds of school kids” who use the road as a cut through to Glyn Secondary School and Sixth Form. With a width of 3.55m, Fairview Road is 10cm below national standards so cars have to mount the curb to carefully pass each other. Objectors said this could be a serious safeguarding risk to children walking to and from school.

Councillor Steven McCormick, Chair of the Planning Committee, said: “The new homes are planned to be located alongside Fairview Road, making use of brownfield land and contributing to the borough’s temporary housing availability. These units would allow the council to house local families facing homelessness within the borough, close to schools and local support networks.”

The Residents’ Association member clarified pedestrian safety concerns were recognised and discussed at length in the planning meeting where the application for temporary accommodation was considered.

He said: “In coming to a decision about the development’s use for the provision of temporary accommodation, the Committee noted the comments from the County Highway Authority who were satisfied that: the development would not result in a significant increase in traffic generation, or result in issues of highway safety, or cause issues with the operation of the existing highway network.”

Cllr McCormick added: “The council has followed the process laid out by the Land Registry. Residents have challenged the Land Registry’s decision, but the council remains confident in its position. The council refutes any further allegations.”

Adrian Giles MBE declined to comment and referred back to the council’s response.

Link to planning portal: https://eplanning.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=RQ0JVVGYIQR00

Related reports:

Fair view Decision

Epsom’s homelessness crisis

What are the solutions to Epsom’s homeless crisis?

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council has approved plans for hundreds of new homes. The former SGN Gasworks site on East Street in Epsom will see all of its buildings and infrastructure demolished to make way for new homes. The town’s “biggest planning application in years” has been approved. Members of Epsom and Ewell Borough Council planning committee agreed to the outline scheme for 456 homes by a majority vote on April 24. The development will see five high rise blocks, ranging from eight to twelve storeys tall. A performing arts centre, educational buildings and an open public garden are also included in the plans. Of the proposed 456 homes, according to planning documents, 210 will be one-bedroom, 180 will be two-bedroom, and 66 will be three-bedroom units. A further 46 of the 456 homes will be social rent units and 21 wheelchair accessible, according to planning documents.

“You cannot build a nine-storey building behind someone’s back door,” said Richard Coles, an Epsom resident speaking against the scheme. He explained it would be “60 metres from my back door to someone’s balcony, for some hundred or so properties”. Mr Coles argued the new builds will make life significantly worse for those living immediately around the blocks. “We’re not delivering for Epsom if we’re not delivering for all our residents,” Cllr Kim Spickett said. “We’re not talking about overlooking buildings, we’re talking about human beings.” Responding to concerns, council planners said fears of overlooking is not such an issue in practice because neither resident can really make out the features or activities of a person that far away. Officers accepted sunlight would be reduced for six neighbouring homes and 23 student rooms but said the benefits of the scheme would outweigh the impact.

Wrestling with the application, Cllr Julian Freeman appreciated the residents’ concerns but said “fear is often much worse than the reality”. He added the borough is in a “housing crisis” and “for the greater good” the development will provide new homes for 600 or more people. Cllr Kate Chinn slammed the council for not building enough homes or social housing over the last five years. “We’re now asking residents to pay the price for the failures of the past,” she said. With only 68 car parking spaces for 456 homes, councillors urged for something to be done. Members worried about tradesmen needing to use cars for work or families driving to school. Around 21 spaces would be designated for wheelchair users which Cllr Freeman challenged as “excessive”. Cllr Jan Mason said: “People living there actually will be defranchised.” She claimed future residents might not be able to have people visiting the house or getting the work men round.

Officers said fewer parking bays would help “champion a change in attitude” to using cars and support the council’s “ambitious target” of becoming carbon neutral by 2035. But some councillors said it was “unrealistic” to demand people to change their motor habits by restricting parking spaces. Just a 10 minute walk from Epsom train station, the applicants argued the development would be an immensely sustainable location. People can get to London Waterloo station in around 35 minutes. Members agreed conditions to the car management plan so it could come back to committee for further approval if needed.

Also included in the scheme, Laine Theatre Arts College will be replaced by a modern building. The development will be further detailed in separate planning applications, the report said. The site has been used as gas works for more than 150 years, according to documents, while a separate application for the same site has stated the storage facility for natural gas “has been permanently decommissioned and purged”.

Image: Site Masterplan (Aerial) Formation Architects

A surprise decision by Surrey County Council (SCC) to auction off a cherished woodland in the heart of Cuddington has sparked uproar among residents and elected councillors, who are now rallying to save the green space from the threat of large-scale development.

The 13-acre site, situated between Grafton Road and Old Malden Lane and bordering Linden Bridge Special Needs School, was discreetly marketed for potential development of up to 40 homes by commercial estate auctioneers. The move came without prior consultation with Epsom & Ewell Borough Council or even the local Surrey County councillors representing the area.

Local County Councillor Eber Kington (RA) , alongside RA Cuddington ward councillors Kim Spickett, Graham Jones and Phil Neale, and the Cuddington Residents’ Association, have launched a campaign urging SCC to reconsider its course of action.

“This woodland isn’t just a patch of land – it’s a vital green refuge in our urban landscape, a space of peace, biodiversity, and community value,” said Cllr Neale. “We’re asking residents to stand with us and help protect it for future generations.”

The woodland, known locally for its mature trees and diverse wildlife, lies adjacent to the Grafton Park Road estate and has long been considered a buffer zone preserving local environmental quality and character.

The auction concluded in late January, but SCC is yet to announce a winning bidder. The auctioneers stated that the highest bid would not necessarily be accepted, leaving room for alternative proposals to be considered.

One such alternative comes from a joint venture involving the Cuddington Residents’ Association, the Wandgas Sports & Social Club, and a local developer. Their bid proposes a modest housing scheme to fund the creation of a community-led sports and recreational space, including public woodland access for walkers and cyclists. The vision includes safeguarding the majority of the natural landscape and establishing long-term protections for its use.

Campaigners argue that SCC’s recent adoption of a Community Asset Transfer (CAT) scheme—championed by Epsom & Ewell’s own county councillor Eber Kington—should provide the framework to enable this type of locally-driven project.

“Transparency and local accountability are vital when it comes to decisions that affect our shared spaces,” Cllr Webb added. “We’re calling on the County Council to respect the CAT process, consider our community proposal seriously, and honour the values of environmental stewardship and public trust.”

Residents are now being asked to sign a petition backing the community bid and urging SCC to reject blanket housing development in favour of a sustainable, locally-beneficial plan.

The petition can be signed online and will be submitted to Surrey County Council ahead of a final decision.

For more information or to add your name to the petition, visit: Change.org

Dorking’s former Aviva building has been put up for sale. The offices in Pixham Lane are being marketed by Savills – with the asking price only available on application. Currently owned by Stonegate Homes, it was set to play a key role in Mole Valley District Council’s housing targets, having sat empty for years following the decision of insurance company Aviva to leave the Pixham Lane site in the town at the end of 2016. Failure to meet its targets can have a lasting impact and leave boroughs open to unwanted development.

Owners Stonegate Homes were contacted but did not respond, and calls have been going straight to answer machine. Planning permission was granted for the site – often referred to as the former Aviva Building – for 369 homes in a mixture of flats and townhouses. Savills describes the land as “a substantial former office building”. Built in 1957, it was eventually bought by Dorking-based developers Stonegate with a view to converting it into homes, but its future is now shrouded with uncertainty.

Savill’s marketing brochure reads: “The site is considered to be an excellent opportunity to acquire one of the most prominent development sites in Dorking to deliver a mix of flats and houses that are in close proximity to Dorking Station. The location enjoys views of the Surrey Hills and is within close proximity of open countryside. The site has potential for some additional planning gain for further additional houses to be delivered, subject to planning and any technical constraints. There is the option to acquire the whole or to purchase phases with offers invited on an unconditional and subject to planning basis.”

Senior Mole Valley District councillors have said they are keeping a close eye on the sale and how it will affect housing delivery. Councillor Margaret Cooksey, portfolio holder for planning, said: “We need the homes to be built; they were supposed to be affordable homes on the site plus other community facilities. We need those to happen. We will be watching closely.”

Image: Former Aviva site in Pixham Lane, near Dorking (image Google)

“Critical” details on nearly 5,000 homes across 35 sites in Epsom and Ewell have been laid out after the borough council submitted its planning masterplan.

The local plan will shape the future of the borough’s jobs, environmental protections, and leisure development – as well as allocating land for new homes and much-needed infrastructure improvements, the council said.

The single largest development will be in Horton Farm, between Horton Lane and Hook Road, where more than 1,250 homes are earmarked to be built alongside business spaces, a community building and park.

The plan will go before public examination by an independent inspector later this year for sign off.

Councillor Peter O’Donovan, chair of the licensing and planning policy committee, at Epsom and Ewell Council said “I am very grateful to officers who have worked diligently to reach this milestone, ensuring that the local plan is assessed against the framework to which it was developed.

“Overall, it has been a huge undertaking.”

The council has been set housing targets of about 4,700 homes with the local plan identifying a supply of 4,914.

He added: “I know that the plan will not please everyone. 

“However, I believe it is a huge step forward for our borough and our communities, and if adopted it will help ensure that all Epsom and Ewell residents can enjoy the benefits that this strategic plan aims to deliver – whether their focus is on access to affordable homes, leisure facilities and green space, to jobs and economic growth.”

Included in the target are 456 homes that have already been built. Green belt land will be used to provide 1,580 homes.

The council says its planning bible will create “new vibrant communities” centred on currently underdeveloped transport hubs or development of larger sites.

It hopes these new developments will “form new communities and grow to be distinct places with their own identities.”

To support this, they will need to be “supported by appropriate investments in community and transport infrastructure to ensure existing and new residents are supported in terms of movement, health, education and other services.”

Epsom town centre will also be redeveloped to create improved retail space. 

“It is important that the town centre continues to diversify and attract uses other than retail to the town centre to reflect the social and economic changes that have affected demand for retail and office space and investment. 

“Developing the night-time economy is a key opportunity, with recent investment in a new cinema and the Playhouse Theatre”, the submitted plan read.

So far 35 sites have been allocated for redevelopment. Some, such as the 455 homes and a bespoke performing arts centre for the Laine Theatre Arts at the Southern Gas Network Site have already begun working through the planning system.

The 35 site allocations the council hopes will  deliver a significant proportion of the Local Plan’s housing requirement.

• Southern Gas Network Site Allocated for: Approximately 455 dwellings  and a bespoke performing arts centre for the Laine Theatre Arts
• Hook Road Car Park Allocated for: Approximately 150 dwellings
• Solis House, 20 Hook Road Allocated for: Approximately 20 dwellings 
• Bunzl, Hook Road Allocated for: Approximately 20 dwellings
• Epsom Town Hall Allocated for: Approximately 90 dwellings
• Hope Lodge Car Park Allocated for: Approximately 30 dwellings 
• Former Police and Ambulance Station Sites Allocated for: Erection of a new 85 bedroom residential, nursing and dementia care home for the frail elderly 
• Epsom Clinic Allocated for: Approximately 30 dwellings
• Depot Road and Upper High Street Car Park Allocated for: Approximately 100 dwellings and a decked public car park
• 79-85 East Street Allocated for: Approximately 35 dwellings
•  Finachem House, 2 – 4 Ashley Road Allocated for: Approximately 20 dwellings 
• Global House Allocated for: Approximately 75 dwellings 
• Swail House Allocated for: Refurbishment of Swail House for residential use and the provision of replacement purpose-built specialist accommodation for the RNIB consisting of approximately 45 dwellings (net) located to the rear of Swail House
• 60 East Street Allocated for: Approximately 30 dwellings 
• Corner of Kiln Lane and East Street (101b East Street) Allocated for: Approximately 5 dwellings
• Land at Kiln Lane Allocated for: Approximately 40 dwellings
• Hatch Furlong Nursery Allocated for: Approximately 30 dwellings 
• Land to the Rear of Rowe Hall Allocated for: Extra Care Accommodation comprising 96 self-contained apartments, staff and communal facilities
• 7 Station Approach Allocated for: Approximately 5 dwellings 
• Esso Express, 26 Reigate Road Allocated for: Approximately 10 dwellings
• Richards Field Car Park Allocated for: Approximately 7 dwellings
• Etwelle House, Station Road Allocated for: Approximately 20 dwellings 
• 140-142 Ruxley Lane Allocated for: Approximately 12 dwellings
• Garages at Somerset Close & Westmorland Close Allocated for: Approximately 6 dwellings
• 64 South Street Epsom Allocated for: Approximately 6 dwellings
• 35 Alexandra Road Allocated for: Approximately 8 dwellings
• 22-24 Dorking Road Allocated for: Approximately 18 dwellings
• 63 Dorking Road Allocated for: Specialist Care Home with ancillary nurses accommodation (equivalent to 6 dwellings)
• 65 London Road Allocated for: Care home up to 81 bedrooms
• Epsom General Hospital Allocated for: Approximately 305 units older people’s accommodation (Use Class C2), 24 key worker dwellings and a children’s nursery 
• Land at West Park Hospital (South) Allocated for: Approximately 50 dwellings 
• Land at West Park Hospital (North) Allocated for: Approximately 150 dwellings 
• Land at Chantilly Way Allocated for: Approximately 30 dwellings
• Hook Road Arena Allocated for: New Sports Hub for the borough to include playing pitches (grass and artificial), a new pavilion and changing facilities. The provision of approximately 100 dwellings on the eastern part of the site
• Land at Horton Farm Allocated for: Approximately 1,250 dwellings including some specialist housing and self-build plots, 10 gypsy and traveller pitches, business incubation space, community building and a public park of approximately 7ha in addition to other green and blue infrastructure.

Related reports:

Epsom and Ewell Local Plan Submitted for Examination

The Local Plan plot thickens after revised NPPF

Council minority vote Local Plan to next stage with Green Belt in

Epsom and Ewell’s Draft Local Plan goes to Full Council

and many more….. search “Local Pan”

Over 200 homes will be built on a golf course in an “epoch making moment” for Surrey’s green belt. Elmbridge Borough Council’s planning committee approved developer Claudel Venture Holdings Ltd’s vision for the 43 hectare site in Hersham on Wednesday, March 11. 

The former 18-hole golf course off Assher Road will be transformed into a mix of 57 houses and 164 apartments with 246 parking spaces. Half of the homes will be affordable including social and affordable rent as well as shared ownership. 

As well as the 221 homes, the plans feature a GP surgery, café, play areas and a natural green space in the form of a country park. 

Debates around the proposal centred on whether the golf club was previously developed grey belt land or not. “It is almost an epoch-making moment,” said Councillor John O’Reilly. “It is probably the first major application where the green belt will be so compromised.” 

Green belt land keeps countryside spaces free from development and stops the urban sprawl of towns merging together. Building on the green belt is only allowed when special circumstances can be demonstrated. But planning officers found the scheme would not undermine the openness of the green belt.

Michel Phillips, a professional adviser speaking against the scheme for the objectors, called it a “fallacy” the golf club is developed land as it was recognised as green belt land in a 2016 review. He told the committee: “There is no policy for Elmbridge to slice and dice the greenbelt to please development objectives.

“You have all been elected on a promise to protect the greenbelt. [The residents’] plea to you is to honour your commitment to Elmbridge citizens.,

The decision was made despite over 800 objections (some from the same address) were sent against the plans, criticising the loss of countryside views for the neighbours and invasion of privacy. 

Doubts were cast over whether a GP surgery would want to move into the proposed medical building. The developer acknowledged that it cannot ‘force’ the NHS to set up a new surgery on the site. Instead Claudel Venture Holdings said it would add another ten affordable units , in the shape of one and two-bedroom homes, and contribute £150,000 towards the NHS. 

Speaking for the applicant, Mr Edwards said: “The planning inspector concluded that the need for affordable housing is acute and ever worsening and exceeds the council’s assessment that 296 affordable homes need to be built annually.” He told the committee that the proposed affordable homes are “important as Elmbridge is one of the most expensive boroughs in the country”. 

Ward councillor for Hersham Village, Cllr Wendy Gibbs said the affordable housing on the development “doesn’t go far enough” to provide much-needed three-bedroom homes. She slammed the developer for not flats not being inclusive enough with lifts and areas for prams. Some councillors raised concerns whether housing associations would take up new affordable properties. 

Although Cllr Judy Sarsby said she disliked the “overbearing building”, she acknowledged there are 2,500 families currently on a housing waiting list and a hundred families which are homeless. Members from either side of the political spectrum, from Conservative to Liberal Democrats agreed the proposed housing development was in a useful location near the station and would provide social and economic benefits in the area. 

Currently private land, only golfers and those using the public footpath to the River Mole are allowed to access the green. But the applicant has proposed a green space of 21.8 hectares as part of the development to help mitigate the new homes on the former golf course. 

Residents complained the site floods every year from rain and stressed the flood waters could be redirected to the surrounding homes. To combat the flood risk, the applicant is proposing to raise the level of the land meant for residential development to deal with the water run off. 

Transport improvements include new footpaths, bus stops and a signal crossing on Molesey Road is also part of the development. Around £110k is being put towards Hersham station for rail improvements. But some councillors said the money “won’t touch the sides” of what is needed and that the station is from a “bygone” era.

Artist\’s impression of proposed Hersham golf club development. (Credit: Claudel Venture Holdings Ltd / Elmbridge Borough Council planning documents)

Homes will be built on the former green belt gateway into Dorking – forever changing the character of the picturesque town.

Plans to turn more than eight hectares on the edge of the Surrey Hills into housing were approved on appeal in 2023 but details of what it would look like were only given the go-ahead last week. The decision was made despite many at the Wednesday, March 5, meeting airing concerns over traffic on the “poor” A25 and the impact of school coaches being pushed into the town’s one-way system. Councillors were hamstrung in their efforts to mitigate against the impact of the added traffic following the appeal ruling and could only vote on the plan’s layout.

Developers Taylor Wimpey, however, said the scheme, which would include 72 affordable homes, was an “exciting scheme for Dorking.” Speaking on behalf of the application was James Newton. He said the proposals bring “much-needed homes for the district” with “77 per cent of the mix being one to three-bedroom properties.” He added: “The affordable tenures include social and affordable rent, shared ownership and first homes and the mix has been agreed with the housing services team. The design has been amended over time with input from heritage officers… and takes cues from the Dorking vernacular and the wider area.” Homes, he said, will be sustainable with air source pumps and solar panels while the project as a whole would bring in more than £3million into Mole Valley District Council through community infrastructure payments. He finished: “This will be an exciting scheme for Dorking.”

The L-shaped site will take up two fields west of Dorking. The land was originally in the green belt when the decision to allow the homes was granted on appeal. Since then, it has been put into Mole Valley District Council’s local plan as a site designated for development. As well as the 144 homes, there will also be parking for ​​The Priory Secondary School, including staff and coaches. Officers told the meeting they were happy with the project and that it would not harm the character of the area – with red tiling used to help it blend in with existing homes in the town.

Speaking against the plan was Nicholas Tinker, who highlighted the 60 letters of objection. He said: “144 dwellings will create, at least, 144 additional vehicles. More realistically, double that figure, most people leave for work at the same time every morning. The congestion on the Westcott Road and around town will be totally unacceptable.” Air quality, he said, would degenerate and reach dangerous levels for schoolchildren, with the coach drop-off point creating a particular problem and forcing them to use the one-way system. He said: “It’s going to be absolute chaos.”

Cllr Abhiram Magesh (Liberal Democrat; Mickleham, Westcott and Okewood) said: “I’m generally pro-affordable housing. Housing means more people, more people means more council tax for front-line services, more customers for local business, however, I’m quite torn on this particular development because I do feel it’s lacking in a number of ways. We’ve discussed quite adequately in the past that the highways assessment is quite lacking. We all know the trouble on the A25 – especially at peak time. I’m frankly torn about this because its layout is effectively a cul-de-sac which I think is generally quite poor planning strategy. So while I laud the affordable housing commitment, I’m extremely worried for a lot of my constituents in Westcott and Abinger who have to essentially travel every single day to get any form of amenity in Dorking. The A25 is of a poor quality as it is right now, so I’m not sure how at minimum 144 extra cars – how the road is going to be able to handle that.”

The designs and layout were approved by eight votes in favour, with two against and three abstentions.

Taylor Wimpey plans for 144 homes outside Dorking (image Taylor Wimpey/ Mole Valley Planning Portal)