Today is the final day to get your name on a Surrey ballot ahead of this year’s once in a generation election.
Surrey County Council was created in 1889 with the 11 boroughs and districts forming in 1974.
This year, they will be dissolved and replaced with two new mega authorities covering the east and west of the old county as local government moves from the old two-tier system, into two single councils.
This election, set for May 7, will be the first time people get to vote under the new system and today, Thursday April 9, is the final day for any would-be politicians to get their names on the ballot sheets.
The new councils, East and West Surrey, will be responsible for things that make everyday work, such as waste collection and recycling, planning and building control, as well as adult social care and children’s services.
The idea is to move to two councils that are effectively responsible for everything, rather than 12 each with their own agendas. This, the hope is, will simplify local government and improve service delivery – and ideally make accountability clearer to residents.
Other big ticket items the councils cover include highways and transport, housing and homelessness support, environmental health, leisure and community services.
Basically it’s where your council tax goes.
To stand for election you must be at least 18, be a British, EU, or a Commonwealth citizen, and be registered to vote or have lived or worked in the area for at least a year.
Those looking to stand as a member of a political party should contact their preferred groups while independents can reach out to the Local Government Association Independent Group for any tips.
Valid nomination papers must be submitted with at least two people, a proposer and a seconder, who have agreed you are a suitable candidate – these people need to be on the electoral register in the relevant ward.
Councillors elected in May 2026 will sit on shadow authorities for their new councils for the first year.
This will allow them time to develop budgets and service plans, agree staffing and governance arrangements, and prepare for the transfer of responsibilities from the existing councils.
The new East and West Surrey Councils will then formally begin operating in April 2027, when Surrey’s 12 legacy councils will be dissolved.
To stand for election you must email or call the relevant existing council for the area you wish to stand.
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council Email: electoralservices@epsom-ewell.gov.uk Telephone: 01372 732000
Information on Epsom and Ewell Council’s perished parishes plan blocked on cost
9 April 2026
A dispute between a resident and Epsom & Ewell Borough Council over the conduct of its Community Governance Review (CGR) has escalated, despite the Council’s decision to abandon plans for new parish-style community councils.
In March, the Council dropped proposals to create Epsom and Ewell Community Councils after its second-stage consultation produced a decisive result, with around 82% of over 2200 respondents opposing the plans.
However, correspondence seen by the Epsom & Ewell Times shows that concerns about how the consultation was conducted — and how the Council has responded to those concerns — remain unresolved.
Resident raises formal concerns over consultation process
Local government elector Nathan Elvery and a former Council CEO submitted a detailed pre-action protocol letter in early March raising potential legal concerns about the CGR process, including:
• the design of the initial consultation survey and whether a clear “No” option was available • the adequacy and transparency of financial information • whether alternative governance models were considered • compliance with consultation law principles • whether equality duties had been properly addressed
He also submitted a series of Freedom of Information requests seeking disclosure of internal documents and analysis.
In a follow-up email to the Council’s Chief Executive dated 3rd April, Mr Elvery expressed concern that his correspondence had not been substantively addressed, stating that the Council had treated his pre-action protocol letter as “a routine information request” rather than engaging with the legal issues raised.
He wrote that more than four weeks had passed without acknowledgement from senior officers and that “none of this has happened” in terms of the Council’s own commitments to timely responses.
FOI request refused on cost grounds
On 1 April, the Council responded to Mr Elvery’s FOI requests by confirming that it holds the information sought but declining to provide it on the basis that complying would exceed the statutory cost limit under the Freedom of Information Act.
The Council stated that responding would take more than 18 hours of officer time and was therefore not required under Section 12 of the Act.
In his 3rd April email, Mr Elvery challenges this position, arguing that the Council has improperly aggregated multiple requests to exceed the cost threshold and has failed to meet its duty to provide advice and assistance to narrow the request.
He also argues that some elements of the request — such as whether an Equality Impact Assessment exists or whether legal advice was obtained — could be answered quickly and should not have been refused.
Internal review and possible ICO referral
Mr Elvery has now requested a formal internal review of the Council’s FOI decision and indicated that he will refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office if the refusal is upheld.
He has also renewed his request for a substantive response to the issues raised in his original pre-action letter, including confirmation of what steps the Council intends to take to ensure that future consultations comply with legal requirements.
Although he confirms that he will not pursue judicial review following the Council’s decision to abandon the CGR proposals, he states that the procedural issues identified remain relevant to how the Council conducts future consultations under local government reorganisation.
Consultation outcome settles policy but not process
The Council’s decision not to proceed with creating community councils has resolved the immediate policy question. However, the issues raised in the FOI correspondence highlight continuing debate about the consultation process itself.
One recurring point is that the CGR consultation did not include Neighbourhood Area Committees (NACs) — currently being piloted elsewhere in Surrey — as an option for residents to consider.
Epsom and Ewell Tines (EET) survey suggests alternative preference
Alongside the Council’s consultation, the Epsom & Ewell Times conducted an independent reader survey.
Although based on a smaller sample of only 112 respondents, the survey found:
• around 75% support for NAC-style local engagement structures • a similarly high level of opposition to community councils as reflected in the Council’s consultation
Unlike the official consultation, the EET survey invited respondents to compare different models of local representation.
Transparency and future implications
The Council’s use of the cost exemption under the Freedom of Information Act is a lawful mechanism where a request requires disproportionate time and expense. However, the refusal has left a number of substantive questions unanswered in the public domain.
These include how consultation options were framed, what alternatives were considered, and how financial information was developed and presented to residents.
With Surrey’s local government reorganisation continuing, and new governance structures still to be defined, the issues raised in this case may have implications beyond the now-abandoned community council proposals.
The outcome of the internal review — and any subsequent decision by the Information Commissioner — may determine whether further information is disclosed.
For now, while the policy proposal has been withdrawn, the debate about process, transparency and future local representation in Epsom and Ewell remains ongoing.
Plans for 130 Kingswood homes ‘absolute disgrace’ as nearly 700 objectors speak
9 April 2026
Plans to build up to 130 homes on protected green belt land between Kingswood and Burgh Heath have sparked a fierce backlash, with nearly 700 objections lodged by residents.
Developers want outline planning permission for the scheme on 13 hectares of farmland off Canons Lane, with details like layout and design to be decided later. The proposal includes a mix of homes, nearly half classed as “affordable”, alongside green space, play areas, allotments and a community orchard.
Lightwood, the developers, state the land presents a “opportunity to create a high-quality, thoughtfully designed place to live, work and connect with nature”.
But the scale and location of the development have become the biggest flashpoints. The site sits in the Metropolitan Green Belt and an Area of Great Landscape Value, currently made up of open fields used for farming. It also borders existing homes and is criss-crossed by public footpaths used by walkers and cyclists.
Residents say building here would mean sacrificing one of the last stretches of countryside before Greater London.
One objector called the plans “an absolute disgrace”, warning they would “start the loss of the last remaining parcels of farming land” and harm wildlife. Others pointed to records of protected and declining bird species on the land, arguing the development would fragment habitats and disrupt migration routes.
Traffic is another major concern. Access would come from Canons Lane, with opponents saying the rural road is not fit for the extra cars likely to come with 130 households. Nearby routes, including the busy A217, are already under pressure at peak times.
There are also doubts about whether the scheme would genuinely tackle the housing crisis. Some residents argue that so-called affordable homes (typically priced below market rates rather than at social rent) would still be out of reach for many.
Despite this, developers say the site is in a sustainable location, within walking or cycling distance of schools, shops and transport links, including Kingswood railway station. They argue it would form a logical extension to the existing built-up area and deliver much-needed housing.
The plans also promise environmental measures, including new tree planting, upgraded footpaths, and sustainable drainage systems designed to reduce flood risk.
In planning terms, the application is only seeking approval ‘in principle’, with all detailed design matters reserved for a later stage except for the main access point.
Supporters say the benefits, particularly new homes and affordable housing, should carry significant weight. But with objections outnumbering supporters almost 175 to one, the council faces a contentious decision over whether those benefits outweigh the loss of protected countryside.
View of the outline of the proposed development site between Canons Lane and Doric Drive, Kingswood. (Credit: Lightwood planning documents)
Surrey tech pioneers get £25k boost in start-up drive
9 April 2026
Surrey’s emerging tech entrepreneurs have been given a significant boost after more than 30 early-stage innovators completed the first cohort of a new county-wide startup programme.
Surrey Venture Studios (SVS), a business growth initiative backed by the University of Surrey and partners, has supported participants through workshops, mentoring and pitching opportunities aimed at turning early ideas into viable technology businesses. The programme offers selected founders £25,000 in funding alongside six months of expert support to help launch and scale their ventures.
First cohort builds momentum
Organisers say the inaugural cohort brought together a diverse range of innovators working across multiple sectors, all benefiting from access to experienced mentors and investors. Participants attended intensive workshops designed to refine ideas and prepare them for pitching to expert panels.
Ody Bassioukas, manager of Surrey Venture Studios, said the programme had already demonstrated how quickly ideas could develop with the right support: “It’s been incredibly energising to see just how much progress can happen in a matter of days… ideas gaining clarity, confidence building, and new pathways starting to take shape.”
Among those taking part was Elizabeth Baldwin, founder of Puzzle Proof, a digital system aimed at supporting survivors of domestic abuse. She said the programme had helped validate her idea and encouraged her to take it forward.
Industry figures have also backed the initiative. Iain Jamieson, chairman of the S100 Angel Investment Club, described the programme as “exactly the kind of support that is needed” to help new entrepreneurs succeed.
Applications open for next round
Following the success of the first cohort, applications are now open for a second intake, with a deadline of 8 May and workshops scheduled for June.
The programme is open to people living, working or studying in Surrey and includes an initial two-day workshop and pitching process, with successful applicants progressing to the funded accelerator stage.
Caroline Fleming, director of the Surrey Innovation District ecosystem at the University of Surrey, encouraged prospective applicants to come forward: “This is your opportunity to realise your tech entrepreneur ambition, supported by our world-class innovation ecosystem.”
Addressing a gap in startup support
Surrey Venture Studios has been developed in collaboration with Royal Holloway and the University for the Creative Arts, alongside Surrey County Council, to address what organisers describe as a longstanding gap in support for very early-stage innovators.
By combining funding, mentoring and structured development, the programme aims to help bridge the gap between concept and commercial readiness for new technology businesses.
A webinar for prospective applicants is scheduled for 21 April, offering further information on how the scheme works and how to apply.
Caterham will try to force a rental of long empty Post Office
9 April 2026
A long-empty post office building in the heart of Caterham could finally be brought back into use under new council powers despite concerns over cost, risk and whether it will work.
Tandridge District councillors approved plans on March 26 to use a Government-backed High Street Rental Auction to force the former Station Avenue site to be let after years of vacancy in a prominent town centre location.
Members said the building has become a “significant eyesore” and a source of frustration for residents and businesses. Cllr Rob Spencer said: “You come to Caterham and you’re looking at a dead, old building,” adding the council had reached “the end of our tether” waiting for it to be occupied.
How the scheme works
Under the scheme, the council can designate the town centre for a High Street Rental Auction and formally notify the landlord. If the owner fails to secure a tenant, the council can step in to market and auction the lease, with a tenant potentially in place within around six months.
If successful, the move could bring the building back into use, boosting footfall and improving the high street.
However, officers warned the situation is complex. The property has multiple owners, and high asking rents and sale prices have deterred interest so far. They added it is still possible no suitable offers will come forward, even through an auction process.
Concerns over cost
The project is expected to cost around £15,000, with some money potentially recovered through grants and fees. Officers also noted the council cannot guarantee it will recover costs, with much of the expense tied up in staff time.
However, councillors raised concerns about where the funding would come from. Cllr Jeremy Pursehouse said: “It does sound like we’re rummaging down the side of the sofa.”
Mixed views from councillors
Opinion among members was divided. Cllr Mike Crane backed the proposal, calling it “a no-brainer” and suggesting the committee was “over-thinking” the issue.
But Cllr Perry Chotai warned the move could “set a precedent” and criticised the lack of detailed analysis. “This sounds a bit like a Trumpian style of analysis,” he said, calling for clearer evidence on risks and outcomes.
Despite reservations, councillors agreed to press ahead, viewing the auction as a potential way to revive the town centre even if success is not guaranteed and public money may be at risk.
Former Caterham post office. (Credit: Google street view)
Box Hill’s Zig Zag Road Leads to Straight Ban on Antisocial Riding
9 April 2026
Motorcyclists near Box Hill are being targeted despite the “vast majority” who visit the Surrey beauty spot being “considerate people who behave respectfully”. A Public Spaces Protection Order is being introduced around the National Trust site following efforts from residents in Mickleham and Westhumble over what they said was excessive noise and acts of anti-social behaviour. Mole Valley District Council then carried out consultation on whether to make certain behaviour an offence within the defined area.
This includes, revving engines, keeping engines idling, speeding, stunts, driving in a convoy, exhaust popping or backfiring, racing, for sudden or rapid acceleration. The area covered includes the world famous Zig Zag road and the roundabout near Denbies wine estate.
The decision was taken by the council’s March executive committee after 603 people, 62 per cent of those who took part in the consultation, backed the measures – compared with 29 per cent who were against and nine per cent who were undecided. It will remain in place for three years unless renewed with the council estimating it will come into effect this summer once necessary signage is installed.
Councillor Caroline Joseph (Liberal Democrat: Fetcham) said: “The consultation revealed a polarised view about whether a PSPO should be introduced ranging from citing behaviour that it disrupts residents’ lives and threatening safety to viewing it as unenforceable and being harmful to local businesses and long-standing biker traditions. “Motorcycle riding at Boxhill and the surrounding area dates back to at least the 1920s from early racing and trials, and the Surrey Hills area remains a popular destination. “It is important to recognise that the vast majority of motorcyclists in this area are considerate people who behave respectfully.”
Bike groups are concerned it will impact their long-standing enjoyment of the area and groups. She added: “It’s not aimed at spoiling those traditions but it’s meant to encourage less antisocial behaviour by those who don’t respect the traditional activity of bikers in the area. “The purpose of the order is only to prohibit the behaviours that cause a public nuisance.” “The introduction of the PSPO will benefit visitors to the local area and those residents and businesses whose quality of life has been affected by vehicle noise all while not affecting responsible and considerate drivers and riders who use Mole Valley’s roads.” The council said it was open to extending the order’s coverage but would require further consultation – which would need to be done outside the upcoming election period.
Epsom’s Rainbow Centre former operators drive up Leatherhead Leisure Centre visitor numbers
9 April 2026
BBC reports: Visitor numbers are booming at Leatherhead Leisure Centre on the back of major investment to rebuild the site’s reputation, staffing, and facilities. GLL Leisure (former Rainbow Centre contractors) took over management of the centre last year – which at the time had just three full-time staff. Knowing this would be a major issue, the company began recruitment months before the contract took over – leading to it having full management staffing from day one. That, and investing “well over” what they bid on refurbishing the site, together with timetabling tweaks, has seen memberships soar with almost double the amount of visits on last year.
The encouraging figures were presented by GLL Leisure staff to Mole Valley District Council’s March 24 external scrutiny committee. The first phase had been to turn the ship and rebuild reputations. They said: “Leatherhead Leisure Centre had a poor reputation under the previous leisure contractor in respect that the building had deteriorated – and the preservation of the building was the first priority. We also wanted to make sure that we had enough staff to run the building as previously there was a lack of staff. There were literally two lifeguards that we took on and one manager.”
So far the numbers have shown the effort has been worthwhile with memberships at Leatherhead at 4,600 – up 1,800 in just a single year. Visitor numbers soared as well from 260,000 per year in 2024 to 508,000 last year. They believe a similar approach at Dorking Leisure Centre – which GLL Leisure also run, should see similar results.
They added: “We knew Leatherhead was a destination many many years ago and we wanted to get that back. We invested well over what we put in the bid but we had real confidence that it was going to work, and it really has. A lot of people have come from private health clubs to come and use the leisure centre, as part of the new gym development so that’s a real good indicator that people are coming back to public centres rather than spending over the top on private health club provisions.”
GLL used to operate the Rainbow Centre but were replaced in October 2025 when Epsom and Ewell Borough Council awarded the contract to Places Leisure. In the coming weeks Epsom and Ewell Times hopes to complete an investigative report on circumstances surrounding the management contracts between Epsom and Ewell Borough Council and the Rainbow Centre operators.
£200 sports bursary launched for Epsom & Ewell teenagers
9 April 2026
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council has launched a new bursary scheme aimed at helping young people overcome financial barriers to taking part in sport.
The “Access to Activity” bursary offers up to £200 to help cover the cost of sports club memberships, subscriptions and match fees for 12–15-year-olds living in the borough. It is open to families where children receive free school meals, or where parents or guardians receive Universal Credit, as well as those with care experience.
Applications will open on Monday 30 March 2026 and run until 31 December 2026, or until the available funding has been allocated.
The council says the scheme forms part of its Health and Wellbeing Strategy, which aims to increase physical activity and reduce health inequalities locally. A range of local sports clubs are expected to take part, with more invited to join throughout the year.
Councillor Clive Woodbridge, Chair of the Community & Wellbeing Committee, said: “We know that for many families, the cost of taking part in sport can be a real obstacle. By helping to ease financial pressures, the Access to Activity bursary can help ensure 12–15-year-olds can take part in a sport they enjoy, feel included and thrive.”
He added that the scheme builds on the council’s earlier “Young Legends” programme, extending support to older children while continuing efforts to boost confidence, skills and social connections through sport.
How the scheme works
Eligible applicants must first arrange a taster session with a participating sports club. If they wish to continue, they then complete a council application form, after which the council will confirm next steps.
The grant is a one-off payment, with priority given to residents who have not received similar council funding for physical activity in the past five years. Successful applicants will then enrol directly with their chosen club.
The council notes that awards are discretionary, with no right of appeal for unsuccessful applications, and may be closed early if demand exceeds available funding.
Local sports clubs and community organisations are also encouraged to signpost eligible families to the scheme as part of a wider effort to increase participation in sport among young people in Epsom & Ewell.
Carers “left with nowhere to turn” after Surrey cuts support services?
9 April 2026
Charity warns of risks to 1,500 carers as safety net withdrawn
A Surrey charity has warned that unpaid carers across the county are being pushed “beyond breaking point” following the withdrawal of key support services by Surrey County Council (SCC), a move it says could leave vulnerable residents at risk and increase pressure on hospitals and emergency care.
Crossroads Care Surrey says two critical services — Emergency Care Provision and End of Life support — are being removed, alongside the ending of the Carer Emergency Planning service at the end of March, affecting around 1,500 carers who rely on it as a safety net in times of crisis.
The charity says the decision was made with little notice and without consultation, leaving carers uncertain about what will happen if they are suddenly unable to provide care.
Under the existing system, carers can create emergency plans with named contacts and a guaranteed back-up response if those contacts are unavailable. Crossroads says it is this final layer — the guaranteed emergency response — that is now being removed.
Terry Hawkins, CEO of Crossroads Care Surrey, said: “In an emergency, carers don’t need signposting, they need someone to step in.”
“A false economy” and fears of increased hospital admissions
The charity argues the cuts risk shifting pressure onto already overstretched NHS and social care services, warning that without preventative support, more vulnerable people could end up in hospital or crisis care situations.
It says the current emergency planning service costs around £200 per carer per year, compared with more than £1,200 for a single day in a hospital bed, describing the move as a “false economy”.
Concerns have also been raised about the reliability of alternative arrangements. Crossroads says that in some cases the council’s Emergency Duty Care Team has failed to respond to emergency requests, even with advance notice, citing lack of available resources.
The charity is now launching its own paid-for emergency support scheme, but warns this risks creating a two-tier system where only those who can afford to pay will have access to reliable back-up care.
Human impact: “Without support, families reach breaking point”
The potential consequences are illustrated by the case of Eleanor, 53, who cares for her 13-year-old son Tom, who has severe autism and OCD.
Under intense pressure, Eleanor attempted suicide, triggering an emergency response from Crossroads Care Surrey, which stepped in within hours to care for Tom for over two weeks while she recovered. Without that intervention, Tom would likely have entered emergency social care.
The charity says this is not an isolated case but an example of how quickly carers can reach crisis point without adequate support.
Council response: “Services did not achieve expected impact”
Surrey County Council has defended its decision, saying the contracts with Crossroads Care Surrey are not being renewed because they “failed to achieve the impact we expected” and had lower-than-anticipated take-up.
Sinead Mooney, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, said: “After careful review, we’ve decided to end – or not renew – contracts with Crossroads Care Surrey for carer support services because the contracts have failed to achieve the impact we expected. Take-up has been lower than we intended and we can’t justify continuing to fund the arrangements.”
She added: “We’re absolutely committed to making sure that the transition from these contracts for carers is smooth, responsive and supportive, and we encourage any carer with questions to contact the council directly. In Surrey we go above and beyond our statutory duty to support carers and are committed to using our resources as effectively as we can.”
The council says it will introduce a revised approach, including a one-off £300 wellbeing payment for carers and closer working with NHS partners, and maintains that emergency support will continue through existing social care processes.
Questions over consultation and transparency
Crossroads Care Surrey has questioned how decisions affecting thousands of carers could be made without public consultation or Cabinet scrutiny, and is calling on the council to explain how the changes align with its duties under the Care Act.
The charity warns that unpaid carers — who collectively provide care valued at an estimated £162 billion annually across the UK — are an essential but often overlooked part of the health and care system, and that reducing support risks undermining that foundation.
With the changes due to take effect imminently, carers across Surrey now face uncertainty over what support will be available when they need it most.
Epsom & Ewell voters urged to prepare for historic Surrey elections
9 April 2026
Residents in Epsom & Ewell are being urged to “get ready to vote” ahead of major local government elections on Thursday 7 May 2026, which will shape how the borough is governed for years to come.
The vote will determine who represents the area on the new East Surrey Council, one of two unitary authorities set to replace Surrey’s current two-tier system in April 2027. Epsom & Ewell will join Elmbridge, Mole Valley, Reigate & Banstead and Tandridge within the new East Surrey authority.
The change marks the end of Epsom & Ewell Borough Council as a standalone authority, with all local services — from bin collections and housing to roads, education and social care — brought under a single council structure.
A decisive moment for local representation
The councillors elected in May will serve for five years and will initially operate as part of a “shadow authority”, taking key decisions on budgets, council tax, governance structures and staffing ahead of the new council formally taking over in April 2027.
For Epsom & Ewell residents, the elections carry particular weight. The borough has long been dominated by Residents’ Association councillors, but the move to a much larger East Surrey authority — covering a wider political landscape — is expected to dilute that local dominance.
With 72 councillors representing 36 wards across East Surrey, voters will elect two representatives per ward under a first-past-the-post system. The outcome will influence not only local priorities but how strongly Epsom & Ewell’s voice is heard within the new regional structure.
What changes — and what doesn’t
Despite the scale of reform, day-to-day services will continue as normal until April 2027. Existing borough and county councillors will remain in post until then, meaning residents should not see immediate changes to service delivery.
However, decisions made by the newly elected councillors over the next year — including financial planning and organisational structure — will shape how services are delivered in the future.
The elections are also part of a broader shift towards devolution, with proposals for a Surrey-wide strategic authority expected to follow, potentially bringing additional powers over transport, adult education and economic planning.
Key deadlines for voters
To take part in the election, residents must be registered to vote by midnight on 20 April 2026. Voting can take place in person, by post or by proxy.
Those voting in person will need to bring valid photo identification, such as a passport, driving licence or older person’s bus pass. Voters without suitable ID can apply for a free Voter Authority Certificate by 5pm on 28 April.
Applications for postal votes must be submitted by 5pm on 21 April, while proxy vote applications close at 5pm on 28 April.
“Don’t miss your chance”
Election officials are encouraging residents not to miss the opportunity to shape the future of local government.
Mari Roberts-Wood, Returning Officer for the East Surrey elections, said: “Don’t miss your chance to have your say in these important elections. This is your opportunity to choose who represents you on issues that directly affect your day-to-day life in your local area.”
With Epsom & Ewell set to lose its borough council and be absorbed into a much larger authority, the May vote represents one of the most significant changes to local democracy in the area for decades.
Fennies Epsom Continues To Support Local Families As Demand For Quality Childcare Grows
9 April 2026
Established Fennies nursery on 1a Hook Road, Epsom, KT19 8TH, strengthens its role in the community while a new Fennies setting opens nearby in Cheam.
For families across Epsom, access to reliable, high-quality Early Years education remains one of the most important decisions in the early stages of parenthood. At Fennies Epsom, Hook Road, that responsibility is one the team takes seriously. Over recent years, the nursery has become a familiar and trusted presence within the local community, supporting working parents while providing a nurturing environment where children can build confidence and a strong foundation for learning.
Situated on Hook Road, the nursery is designed to nurture every stage of a child’s development. Children aged three months to five years can explore carefully curated rooms, including:
· Two Explorers rooms, with dedicated milk kitchen and nappy change areas · One Discoverers Room designed to encourage independence · One Creators room with dedicated reading areas · One Inventors room with free-flow garden access · A dedicated studio space for young chefs and budding artists to explore · A vibrant outdoor space that encourages curiosity and creativity
Fennies Epsom follows a child-led approach, giving children the freedom to explore their interests while building independence and essential life skills. Families are invited to make the most of communal spaces such as the Parent Room, while practical touches like on-site buggy parking make everyday routines easier.
At the heart of the nursery’s approach is a carefully considered curriculum designed to reflect both the needs of modern families and the curiosity of young children. Practitioners at Fennies Epsom, Hook Road focus on creating meaningful learning experiences that feel engaging and relevant, balancing structured opportunities with space for children to explore their own interests. The emphasis is on nurturing adaptable, confident individuals who feel secure in their environment and excited about learning.
“Blending child-led exploration with purposeful guidance, the curriculum celebrates imagination, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, and STEM-inspired discovery,” said Eleanor Richfield, Head of Education at Fennies. “It empowers children to communicate confidently and adapt to change, supporting children to enjoy the now whilst developing the lifelong skills they need to thrive.”
Fennies Nurseries is also proud to announce the opening of its newest setting just 15 minutes down the road in Cheam. Fennies Cheam marks the group’s 25th nursery, continuing more than three decades of delivering outstanding early learning experiences across London, Surrey, Kent, Middlesex and Berkshire.
With its passionate team, inspiring spaces and a focus on each child’s individual journey, Fennies Cheam is ready to help families in the area feel supported and inspired every day. Located at 91 Worcester Road, Sutton, SM2 6QL, the nursery is accessible for busy, commuting parents.
“The garden at Fennies Cheam is amazing, and so much natural light fills the building,” said Emma Carrington, Nursery Manager at Fennies Cheam. “We have lots of new resources, and the dedicated studio space will be a fantastic learning environment for the children.”
To learn more about Fennies Cheam, book a tour, or register your interest by contacting enquiries@fennies.com.
Sponsored article Fennies Nurseries
Photo: Fennies Nursery in Hook Road Epsom
Oxshott Uproar as 800 Object to Green Belt Housing Plan
9 April 2026
More than 800 objections later, a controversial plan for 250 new homes on green belt land in Oxshott is set to be decided by a planning committee, and the recommendation is for approval.
Amidst traffic concerns, infrastructure worries and wanting to protect the green belt, councillors must decide if this huge village expansion in Oxshott is to go ahead.
Elmbridge Borough Council’s planning committee will consider the outline application for Clouds Hill Farm on Wednesday, March 25.
The proposal would see existing buildings on the 23-hectare site demolished to make way for a new housing estate, along with roads, parking, public open space and a “suitable alternative natural greenspace” (SANG).
At this stage, only the access points from Leatherhead Road and Woodlands Lane are being decided, with details like layout, design and landscaping to come later if permission is granted. The homes are expected to be two to three storeys high.
Planning officers have recommended approval, arguing that, on balance, the benefits outweigh the harm.
They say the scheme would help deliver new housing, including affordable homes, and could meet national planning rules for building on so-called “grey belt” land. Surrey County Council highways officers have also raised no objection, subject to improvements.
But the application has sparked a major backlash locally. More than 800 letters of objection from over 600 households have been submitted, citing worries about traffic, safety and pressure on local services.
Residents say the area’s roads are already congested and fear an extra 250 homes would make things worse, particularly along the busy Leatherhead Road.
Others argue that the village lacks the infrastructure of schools, GP surgeries and public transport to support a development of this size.
Environmental concerns have also been raised heavily. Objectors warn the plans would mean the loss of Green Belt land, wildlife habitats and trees, and question whether the development can genuinely deliver the required biodiversity net gain. Some have also flagged flood risk and drainage issues.
Campaign groups and residents’ associations have gone further, claiming the site is not in a sustainable location and that the project could permanently change the character of the area.
People claim there is not much public transport in the area so there will be a heavy reliance on on cars, making the quiet Surrey village busier.
Support for the scheme has been far more limited, with a small number of submissions pointing to the need for more housing and potential improvements to walking and cycling routes.
If councillors agree with officers, outline permission will be granted, but only if the developer signs a legal agreement to secure key contributions, including affordable housing, environmental mitigation and transport measures.
If that deal is not finalised within six months, the application could still be refused.
