Category Archives: Crest Nicholson

Death of the Grampian Condition

Share Button

It won’t have gone unnoticed to residents that both Crest Nicholson on the Horsham Road and Cala Homes on Amlets Lane have started developing their sites.

Both these sites had Grampian style conditions.  This was meant to prevent the start of the development until off-site works were completed on the sewerage network, including the sewage treatment works on Elmbridge Road. However, we were recently advised by planning enforcement at Waverley that the Grampian Condition wording is too woolly to enforce and doesn’t specifically mention the words sewage “TREATMENT”,  so no work to the sewage works are apparently included – another nail in the coffin for Cranleigh.

To say that we felt let down by the lack of rigour exercised in the planners’ wording of the Grampian and the lack of ability by Waverley to enforce it, is an understatement!

There is no consideration being given to existing residents, who after all fund the borough council, in the scramble to achieve a housing number at all costs.  We don’t need to remind you, that you will have to bear the brunt of polluted rivers, congested roads, odour nuisance from the sewage works, an over burdened GP surgery, the list goes on.

As you might remember Cala Homes had applied for their Grampian condition to be removed, however, Waverley Borough Council, in a rare moment of what seemed common sense, refused their request. Surprisingly, this did not stop work on Cala’s show houses.

Amlets 8 Jan 2017

The bungalow on the Horsham Road, which was acquired by Crest Nicholson to provide an access road to the site, was demolished long before their Grampian Condition was even discharged (such as it was), and work was also immediately commenced on the green fields to build 149 houses.  Grampian, what Grampian?

It was also pointed out that Crest’s Grampian was a little more lax than that for Cala Homes, despite all the initial concerns Thames Water had about this site and the need for huge on-site sewage storage tanks. These worries seem to have been a mere flash in the pan!

Not long after the first Crest spade was in the ground, they were plotting to build 121 more houses in the pristine green fields adjacent to this site.

Crest describes Cranleigh on their website:

“Cranleigh is a pretty Surrey village where one can enjoy a relaxed pace of life yet benefit from daily conveniences aplenty on the doorstep, including a selection of shops, cafes and restaurants.”

Crest Nicholson demolish Bungalow Horsham Road

Sounds idyllic, and surprising how keen developers are to emphasise that we are a “village” in their marketing literature.

Despite the unsustainable location of Cranleigh, on a rural road network, with little public transport, a heavy reliance on the use of the private car, limited employment opportunities, water quality issues, a high percentage of asbestos cement drinking water pipes, an inadequate sewage treatment plant, and on green fields to boot,  none of this matters, as long as the houses are built.

The ONLY reason for these dwellings is because we have NO GREEN BELT protection, nothing else, and national planning policy will be twisted at the whim of the planners to suit their ultimate plan for this area, which is CRANLEIGH TOWN.

However, before you start thinking, how bad can that be, it will be bad!  We are the only community in Waverley without green belt protection AND any environmental designation.  Farnham at least has the protection of Thames Basin Special Protection Area.  So going forward, Cranleigh will be the dumping ground for any, and all, unmet housing in Waverley.  However, Waverley Borough Council seem to be the winners, they have a convenient area, in the corner of the borough, which will be a cash cow for council tax, and with only 5 councillors (Farnham has 18) representing this area, and two of those with a declared pecuniary interest in development, this really does seem like a marvellous arrangement.

There is the rather inconvenient truth of Cranleigh Waters, which is polluted and failing in terms of the Water Framework Directive, but that can be smoothed over, by applying pressure to an overworked and under resourced Environment Agency (EA) with the promise of funds for river restoration  and flood plain replacement projects.

There’s the problem of the rural roads and A281, but as Matthew Evans, Ex-Waverley Head Planner, said it really doesn’t matter if people are stuck in traffic.  Obviously air quality issues and quality of life, for residents in this part of the borough,  was not something that disturbed his sleep.

And then there’s the ageing asbestos cement drinking water pipes, which have an extremely inconvenient habit of bursting whenever water pressure increases, still, studies of health risks are inconclusive, so it appears Waverley don’t need to worry about that either.  Despite the fact that we can find no reports that include the age of pipes we have here, or our particularly agressive type of water.

It would be difficult to imagine what would ever be considered as a material constraint by Waverley planners against development in Cranleigh, perhaps the discovery of uranium in the high street?

And to add insult to injury, the EA are now actively looking for replacement flood plain for this area, as let’s face it, they don’t want to create too much flooding downstream for Bramley and Guildford, residents there might start to wonder why the hell all this building was allowed, or should we say encouraged, on the natural flood plain we DID have.

However, we still have something up our sleeve and that’s you!

Joined together, you are the most powerful force.  Stronger than Waverley and stronger than developers.

Working together in big enough numbers, people can, and will, make a difference.  We can fight for fairness, we can fight for our community, and we can fight for our environment.


“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Margaret Mead


Share Button

Crest Nicholson Breach Planning Consent

Share Button

UPDATE: 3 November 2016

Reply received today from Waverley Borough Council re planning enforcement visit, advising that there was no breach of planning after all.  However, concerns have been raised about the presence of “two large mechanical excavators which were identified as belonging to a demolition and construction company. Both machines were fitted with grab claws which, in our opinion, would serve the purpose of demolition.” Apparently the  construction workers were also no longer present at the time of the visit.

Full email :

“Further to our previous correspondence this week in respect of the above, I am writing to provide you with an update following William Gibb’s (Planning Enforcement Officer) site visit to Horsham Road on 1st November 2016.

A site visit was undertaken for the purpose of confirming whether or not works have commenced to demolish the properties at 106 and 108 Horsham Road, Cranleigh.  On arrival to the site, it was noted that security fencing had been erected to the front and side of the property at 106 Horsham Road; however, at the time of his visit, there were no construction workers on site.

It was also noted that works had commenced to strip out internal fixtures and fittings at both properties and especially the property at 106 Horsham Road.  These works would not be considered to be development, and as such, there has been no breach of planning controls. It is also confirmed that no works have taken place to demolish the two properties, and as such, there has been no breach of the planning permissions.

Concerns were raised, however, about the presence on the site of two large mechanical excavators which were identified as belonging to a demolition and construction company. Both machines were fitted with grab claws which, in our opinion, would serve the purpose of demolition.  William Gibb has been in communication with the agent for the developer to raise concerns about the presence of such machinery on the land at 106/108 Horsham Road.

I trust this interim response is of assistance, however, should you require any additional clarification of our investigations, then please do not hesitate to contact me.”

End of email

Original post 2 November 2016:

Yesterday morning residents living near to the Crest Nicholson site, Horsham Road, woke to the sound of heavy demolition machinery working on the removal of number 106 and The Chantrys bungalow, these properties stand in the way of the access road to the Crest housing estate.

This was in clear breach of the planning consents of both the outline and detailed planning permission, which required that various conditions be executed prior to any work being commenced.

Cranleigh Civic Society, together with other residents, emailed Planning Enforcement at Waverley Borough Council requesting that they urgently investigate the matter.

Waverley acted quickly and sent an enforcement officer to the Crest Nicholson site yesterday afternoon and have confirmed that:

The planning permissions do indicate that a demolition should not occur prior to the relevant pre-commencement conditions being discharged. This has been highlighted to Crest Nicholson on previous occasions.”

It transpires that in July Crest applied to Waverley to demolish the properties and were refused permission. However, it appears that, despite being reminded of their obligations “on previous occasions“, Crest Nicholson have carried on regardless.

This is not the first time that residents have felt completely let down by the behaviour of Crest Nicholson.

Contractors working on the Horsham Road site said that they planned to demolish both properties on Monday and only stopped because they found live electricity on the site.

If it is proved that a planning breach has occurred Waverley can issue an enforcement notice on Crest, requiring compliance with planning consent. It is extremely disappointing that a huge developer like Crest, who will be more than aware of the rules relating to the planning consent, appears to be sidestepping them.

Failure to comply with an enforcement notice is a criminal offence and can result in a fine of up to £20,000 on summary conviction in Magistrates Court, or an unlimited fine on indictment in a Crown Court.  However, it appears that this is not a sufficient deterrent for developers wanting to act in their own best interest.

The enforcement process itself is discretionary and arbitrary and developers have the right to appeal.  Please continue to be vigilant and let us know of any activity on development sites.  It is extremely important that pre-commencement conditions are adhered to, without these, we can assume, that planning consent would not have been acceptable or granted by Waverley in the first place.

Share Button

Horsham Road Application Gets the Go-ahead

Share Button

UPDATE 17 October 2016: Set response from Waverley Leader to multiple residents’ complaints.

Dear xx
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me.
I have now had the opportunity to speak with our Monitoring Officer about this matter and he is satisfied that the meeting was properly managed. He has advised me that there is nothing unusual or improper about the chairman conveying the views of councillors who are not present at the meeting. Whilst I understand that some will be dissatisfied by the decision made by the committee and fully respect the different views held in respect of this planning application, the Council’s Monitoring Officer has confirmed that that the process by which the application was considered and the manner in which a vote was taken and recorded were both done correctly in the usual way.
Yours sincerely,

Julia Potts
Cllr.Julia Potts
Farnham Upper Hale Ward
Leader Waverley Borough Council
01483 523484
07977 443394

Original Article:

After a deferral on the 24 August, the Crest Nicholson application for 149 dwellings came before Waverley Borough Council’s Joint Planning Committee (JPC) again on 3 October 2016 at 7pm.

There was a disappointing turnout for this significant application, with only 15 councillors out of a possible 23 in attendance.

Despite numerous comments and concerns from members of the committee at the previous August meeting, Crest Nicholson had responded with very few changes to the original layout.  However, despite this Planning Officers recommendation was for approval.

Layout submitted in August:

Horsham Road site housing layout Crest Nicholson


New layout (spot the difference):


This was hugely disappointing for residents, who after the August deferral and councillors strong criticisms, particularly regarding the rear parking courts (car parks), were expecting some changes on the northern boundary.

Unfortunately the minimal layout changes and the ongoing legal dispute over ownership of the drainage ditch, into which Crest Nicholson propose to discharge surface water from the site, proved to be no constraint and the application was granted by councillors in a vote of 8 to 7.

Cranleigh’s Borough Councillors Mary Foryszewski and Patricia Ellis fought Cranleigh’s corner, highlighting the high quality of this site, which was now subject to a “poor and uncaring design” not reflective of the area, together with narrow roads that would be unable to accommodate the estimated number of cars, and most importantly the great disservice being done to existing residents. Cranleigh Parish Council also objected to the relatively unchanged plans, the prevalence of parking courts on the northern boundary, issues about sewage capacity and stressed that this was an opportunity to achieve the best possible outcome for existing residents as well as new ones.  Similarly vocal in her support was Farnham Councillor Carole Cockburn who was extremely disappointed and stressed that there had been an opportunity to “do something that works well for everybody” .

In a surprising twist, prior to the vote, the Chairman of the committee, Bramley Councillor Maurice Byham, deviated from normal protocol,  to advise council members that Cranleigh Councillors Jeanette and Stewart Stennett were “happy” with the new scheme and had informed the developers’ agents [Savills]. The couple, he went on to expand, were on holiday in Australia and therefore unable to attend the meeting, however apparently they were watching it closely. Obviously not much going on in Oz at 5am in the morning!

In all of the planning applications that we have attended we have never heard comments read out from councillors not in attendance, or comments that were not officially lodged against the application, or those, as was implied by the Chairman, were personal statements from councillors direct to a developers agent.

You can hear it for yourselves:

To say we were taken aback by this announcement prior to the vote, which might be viewed by some as an attempt to gather support for the development, would be an understatement.

If you share our concerns please ask Julia Potts the Leader of Waverley Borough Council to explain the decision to use absent councillors comments, and whether the monitoring officer’s approval was sought and given prior to the meeting. Please copy in the Cranleigh Society to your email and your MP Anne Milton.

Email addresses:

Julia Potts

Anne Milton

Cranleigh Society

Share Button

Important News Update from Cranleigh Society

Share Button

Cranleigh Parish Council Drop-in Session

Have organised a drop-in session on Thursday 15 September 6pm – 9pm at the Village Hall.  All residents are invited to discuss Waverley’s Local Plan with your Parish Councillors.

This is a very important opportunity.  The Local Plan will have a significant impact on where you live.  You have until 3 October 2016 at 17:00 to get any you have comments to Waverley, after that the plan will be sent to a Government Planning Inspector for examination.

Don’t miss out on this opportunity to find out how this will affect you.

Representatives of Waverley Borough Council were invited to the meeting but unfortunately are unable to attend.

Read more about what a Local Plan contains on the CPRE website

This should not be confused with Cranleigh’s Neighbourhood Plan which is a completely separate process and must comply with policies outlined in the Local Plan.

Crest Nicholson Site, Horsham Road

We are currently looking over a new site layout submitted by Crest Nicholson after their application for detailed planning was deferred.

Residents are very disappointed that their major concerns about the layout of the site have still not been taken on board by Crest Nicholson.

This is due to come back before the Joint Planning Committee very soon.

Cala Homes, Amlets Lane

The application for detailed planning comes before the Joint Planning Committee this Wednesday 14 September 2016, 7pm at the Council Offices in Godalming.  Public are welcome.

We have been busy looking at new information lodged against this application.

Access has not yet been agreed for this site. We carried out a traffic survey of Amlets Lane on 12 Sept to compare our figures to those of the developer’s original transport assessment.

The Gate House

We have submitted new flood evidence to the Planning Inspectorate for the Appeal to demolish the Gate House in Knowle Lane and replace it with a substantial block of flats.


Windy Way, The Common

We have submitted an objection to Waverley Borough Council against the demolition of Windy Way, a bungalow in the Conservation Area on Cranleigh Common and the building of a block of 6 flats (over 13m high) and two semi detached dwellings on the site.

This development will have a harmful impact on the new Cranleigh Conservation Area.

Existing Bungalow


Replacement Block flats and Houses

Flats Side elevation (over 13m in height):


Houses (x2) Side Elevation (over 13m in height):


Position on plot:


Please get in touch with your views and comments.

Share Button

Crest Nicholson Horsham Road Deferred

Share Button

We were delighted that members of Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee deferred a decision on the Horsham Road site on Wednesday evening 24 August 2016. Crest Nicholson already have outline planning permission for 149 houses (stage one) on this site.  This meeting was to decide detailed planning permission for this site, which includes the type, design and layout of the housing.

We think that existing residents who live adjacent to the site have been extremely reasonable in their response to the building of 149 dwellings on this beautiful open green field next to their homes.

Chantreys Horsham Road Crest Nicholson site

The original site layout which accompanied the outline planning application, establishing the principle of building on the site was very different to the final layout in the detailed planning application.

The original layout was (note the northern boundary of the site that abuts existing housing):

Crest Nicholson Chantreys Cranleigh site plan

We are constantly warning residents that the artists impressions that developers provide when they first consult with residents may well bear no resemblance to what is finally built on that site.

The design that was before the council last night was this:

Horsham Road site housing layout Crest Nicholson


We think that Cranleigh residents deserve better than looking out onto drainage ditches as well as a sewage pumping station (which could be noisy) and car parks!  We are very glad that Councillors agreed with this, however the application has only been deferred and Crest Nicholson may decide that they don’t want to change their plans.

Other areas that Councillors expressed concerns about were:

  • the provision for sewage and the lack of capacity in Cranleigh’s sewerage infrastructure.
  • the fact that zero one bedroom market homes were being proposed and the one bedroom affordable housing numbers had been reduced
  • a lack of public open space
  • the drainage system being adequate on the site and the risk that this could exacerbate the flood risk for adjoining properties.
  • about the ownership of the existing drainage ditch, which residents claim they own half of, if proved to be correct this will mean that the drainage system proposed for the site could be invalid.
  • ongoing management  and maintenance of the drainage system by a private management company.
  • clustering of affordable housing, rather than including with other market housing (pepper-potting).
  • Roof heights and further expansion of homes into roof space.
  • Visual impact on existing residents who currently look over an open green field.
  • some of the properties were smaller than national standards, particularly the 1 bed ground floor apartments.

Until a decision has been made you can continue to submit your comments against this application WA/2016/0417

Share Button

Horsham Road Planning Application Date

Share Button

We have been advised that the Full Planning Application (Detailed Planning Permission) by Crest Nicholson for 149 dwellings off Horsham Road will be heard by Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee on 24 August 2016 at the Council Offices in Godalming.

We will add more details when the time and the agenda are published on Waverley’s website.

At present there remain outstanding details regarding the drainage system which need to be addressed. We also have major concerns about the raising of the land by 1m on the northern edge of the site and the added risk of flooding for existing residents of Nightingales, as well as sewerage infrastructure.

If you still want to comment against this application you can do so via Waverley’s Planning Portal WA/2016/0417full instructions on how to comment are here.

Or by emailing the Planning Officer Mrs Jo Dawes on you must include your name and address and quote reference WA/2016/0417

Share Button

Waverley’s Shocking Plan for Cranleigh

Share Button

With the recent publication of the Agenda and accompanying Local Plan documents for the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Monday, 27th June, 2016 7.00 pm came the shocking news that Waverley are  dumping 45% of their total housing allocation in and around Cranleigh, with a new settlement on Dunsfold Park.

Waverley’s published Local Plan documents include Strategic Sites selected across the borough. This includes two strategic sites in Cranleigh, including phase 2 of the Crest Nicholson site with an additional 101 houses off the Horsham Road, this increases the total housing number on this site to 250 houses.

Horsham Road Cranleigh Strategic Site


The other site is an amalgamation of the Berkeley Homes, Little Meadow and Knowle Park Initiative sites, creating a huge mega-site off the Alfold Road of 765 houses.  The West Cranleigh Nurseries site (Knowle Park Initiative) which was going to be refused by planning officers, then got called in by Cllr Brian Ellis, thereby by-passing officers’ decision and finally was refused by Waverley’s Joint Planning Committee.

Berkeleys KPI Little Meadow Cranleigh Strategic Site

You can look at the full meeting details and documents using the link below:

Dunsfold New Town

It is clear that Waverley are now favouring 2,600 new houses at Dunsfold Park and this has also been identified as a strategic site.


At the moment there is a planning application for 1,800 houses on this site, however, Waverley have delayed making a decision on this. You can still add your comments and objections against this application.

Any housing on Dunsfold is in addition to 1,520 houses in Cranleigh, as well as 335 in the surrounding villages.   This brings the total amount of new housing in this area to 4,455, which is equivalent in total to a new settlement the size of Cranleigh.

Dunsfold in the 2011 census had a population of 989 with 467 dwellings. Should an additional 2, 600, plus 80 dwellings be added to Dunsfold village, this will be almost a six-fold increase in the number of houses and with the proposed business expansion create a new town adjacent to Alfold and Cranleigh.

A previous attempt to develop a new town at Dunsfold Aerodrome was put forward in 2007 and sought to develop a town of exactly the same size with 2,600 houses.  This was rejected by Waverley and dismissed at Appeal as unsustainable.

The planning inspector stated at the 2009 Appeal; “The site is not in a sustainable location and little can be done to improve the existing infrastructure.” Under Overall Conclusions, he stated “The Secretary of State has concluded that the development would generate a considerable amount of additional road traffic and he concludes that this would have a severe and unacceptable impact on an overstretched local road network, and that the scheme would be unsustainable in transport terms.”

What has changed in the surrounding area since 2009 to make the road network around Cranleigh now sustainable to Waverley Planning Officers?

What are the implications for Cranleigh?

With the proposal for 1,520 more houses for Cranleigh and almost 3,000 in total in neighbouring villages the effect on Cranleigh and the high risk of coalescence between Cranleigh, Dunsfold and Alfold is huge.

In the gaps between these three areas there will be continued pressure by developers to acquire land for residential and commercial use. The Cranleigh Neighbourhood Plan provides no policies for any buffer zones or strategic gaps between these settlements, and it does not suit Waverley to limit development in countryside beyond the green belt.  The pressure to develop and fill these gaps could be constant and overwhelming.

Cranleigh is deemed the nearest main service centre for Dunsfold and Alfold and there will be massive impacts on the village from all the development:

  1. Urbanisation of our village and loss of countryside. At the recent consultation regarding the relocation of the Cranleigh Primary School when the developer’s agent was asked about the urban feel to the proposed housing they replied that Waverley wanted an urban look.
  2. 4,500 houses will double the number of local cars on our road infrastructure (this is approximately the same number of houses that Cranleigh has in total NOW). That’s a potential 9,000 extra vehicles.
  3. Increased traffic will lead to increased congestion, especially on the roads in and out of Cranleigh, Bramley and Shamley Green as well as all locations along the A281.
  4. There will be a significant impact on local services including our doctors and schools.
  5. The negative impact on Air Quality from traffic emissions from petrol and diesel-engined motor vehicles include a wide variety of pollutants, principally carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter (PM10), which have an increasing negative impact on air quality, on public health and on the environment. In addition, pollutants from these sources may not only prove a problem in the immediate vicinity of these sources, but can be transported long distances.
  6. The current sewerage system has no capacity and there is no provision being made for a 100% increase in liquid effluent being discharged into Cranleigh Waters and no mitigation being proposed. Waverley have not even done a Water Cycle Study, which is usually carried out at the beginning of the Local Plan process.
  7. Cranleigh is in an area of known severe “Water Stress” as acknowledged by Surrey County Council Water Management Report Sept 2013. This combination of increased housing and limited supply could lead to serious water shortages.
  8. Requirement for large increase in electrical supply. EDF indicated to Waverley in January 2011 that Cranleigh would require an increase in capacity if there was a significant increase in population.  This also appears to have NOT been factored in so far.

Have your say

Waverley say in the Local Plan documents that:

The vitality and viability of the main centres of Farnham, Godalming, Haslemere and Cranleigh will have been safeguarded in a way that takes account of their distinctive roles.  This will have been achieved through carefully planned development, which meets the need of these centres, whilst recognising the importance of preserving and enhancing their historic character” [our emphasis]

We have never read such utter and blatant ‘spin’ regarding development in and around Cranleigh.  We know that the only reason they are dumping housing here is simply because there is NO GREEN BELT.

It’s time to let the Leader of Waverley Borough Council, Julia Potts and the planning portfolio holder, Brian Adams what you think about their decision to dump 45% of their housing allocation in and around Cranleigh

Tell them by email, always include your name and address and copy in both the Cranleigh Civic Society – and your MP Anne Milton – :

Julia Potts –

Brian Adams –

Share Button

Cranleigh Society Objects to Horsham Road

Share Button

The Cranleigh Society has written to object to the Horsham Road FULL planning application by Crest Nicholson.

You can still add your own objections here too:

Application by Crest Nicholson for full planning ref WA/2016/0417 for phase one 149 dwellings on Land At 106 And The Chantrys Bungalow And Land To SW Of Horsham Road,  Cranleigh available on the Waverley Borough Council Planning Portal.

We would like to place The Cranleigh Civic Society’s objection against WA/2016/0417 (Land at 106 and The Chantreys Bungalow and Land to the SW of Horsham Road, Cranleigh).

Firstly, we object to the raising of the ground level on the Northern Boundary of the site. This will have a detrimental effect on existing properties and lead to a further loss of privacy, as well as increase the risk of flooding on the Hitherwood Estate which is at a lower point. The attenuation ponds are all positioned on the northern edge of the site, should these SuDS fail there will be a catastrophic effect on neighbouring properties. This proposal appears to channel all surface water flow towards these existing properties.

It is also ridiculous to state that as in point “4.6. As it is proposed to limit all rainfall events to the Qbar greenfield runoff rate, it is not necessary to provide long term storage within the surface water drainage network.” of the Ardent report, as it has been proven time and time again that current greenfield rates already lead to surface water flooding of adjacent properties and the flow cannot currently be accommodated.

Flooding occurred in adjacent properties in in Dec 2013, Jan 2014 and Jan 2016. Although we see no mention of the latest flooding in this document. Savills letter dated 19 April 2016 states that they are “not aware of any flood data being available for the 2013, as it was a local event”. This is simply untrue this flooding covered almost the entire Wey Catchment and Thames River Basin.

On the grounds that this will increase flooding elsewhere, we object to the discharge of surface water from the site into Holdhurst Brook and the widening of the brook without consultation with the Environment Agency (EA). We cannot find reference to the EA approving this strategy. The Environment Agency have confirmed that Cranleigh is a flashy catchment and as such our rivers and streams respond very quickly to rainfall, the flow of water rising rapidly to a high peak and liable to flooding similarly, leading to a complete loss of flow at time of minimal rainfall.

The foul water pumping station is not situated in the centre of the site as stated in point “5.1. It is proposed to drain foul sewer from the development to a pumping station located in the centre of the site towards the northern boundary. The foul water would be pumped out to the existing Thames Water sewer beneath Horsham Road.”  But is situated on the northern boundary of the site and adjacent to existing properties, clearly outlined in Appendix D of the Ardent report. This will lead to constant noise pollution from the pump, especially as this appears to be a wet well, and the noise and disruption of tankers when pumping out is required, in addition to unpleasant odours adversely affecting residential amenity. In addition to this we believe there should be a buffer zone between the SuDS attention pond and the pumping station to guard against raw sewage entering the adjacent pond and adjacent watercourse.

We also do not agree that 88m3 is adequate onsite sewage storage capacity calculated for the development and will lead to sewage flooding in times of heavy rainfall when the sewers quickly and regularly become overwhelmed with surface water. Properties on the Horsham Road and Cromwell Place already are known to suffer from foul water flooding in their gardens, which has been reported to Thames Water.

Finally we object to the building of 2.5 storey properties on this site as the height is not at all “sympathetic to its context” and contrary to the Cranleigh Design Statement 2008.


You can read more about the Crest Nicholson application in our previous articles:







Share Button

Knowle Park Initiative & Little Meadow before Planning Committee

Share Button


On 27th April 2016 at 7pm both applications for the Knowle Park Initiative and Little Meadow (Crownhall Estates Ltd) amounting to another 340 houses off Alfold Road go before the Joint Planning Committee (JPC) in Waverley.

Come to the JPC meeting, it is extremely important that councillors make this decision directly in front of Cranleigh residents and we know exactly how they vote, especially our local Cranleigh councillors.

If approved, this would bring the total number of new houses  off Alfold Road to 765.

The nearby Hewitts Industrial Estate application for another 120 houses is also due to be heard at Appeal by the Planning Inspector in October 2016. That would bring the TOTAL JUST in this part of the village to 885.

Where’s the Sewage Going?

We also note that Thames Water have not raised any objection to either of these applications based on sewerage capacity and yet they have placed Grampian style conditions on both Cala Homes and Crest Nicholson, which means that development cannot commence on these sites until foul water drainage strategies for on and/or off-site work, has been approved by Waverley Borough Council and Thames Water.

We have written to Thames Water to point out this discrepancy and the fact that we believe that it is in breach of its statutory obligations as the water and sewage undertaker if it now fails to raise an objection to the Knowle Park Initiative and Little Meadow applications.

Knowle Park Initiative Saga

For those of you who have been following the Knowle Park Initiative (KPI)  application, you might remember that Thames Water originally objected to the application on the grounds that the existing waste water (that’s sewage) infrastructure couldn’t accommodate another 265 houses in addition to 425 on the Berkeley Homes site.  It also confirmed that the water supply infrastructure didn’t have sufficient capacity either.

When the Berkeley’s application for 425 homes was refused on 6 January 2015, KPI’s advisers moved swiftly and contacted Thames Water on 7 January 2015 to point out that in light of the refusal there was now some notional sewage capacity available to them, although we wonder where this was, seeing as Cala and Crest were told there was none?

Thames Water faced with the fact that they had not objected at all to the Berkeley Homes application on sewage grounds had to concede on this point and issued a letter on 15 January 2015 ( view KPI Correspondence to Waverley regarding Thames Water ) withdrawing their objection. However, the letter from Lance Cooper of Thames Water did point out that: “Please note that the views expressed by Thames Water in this letter is in response to this pre-development enquiry only and does not represent our final views on any future planning applications made in relation to this site.”

Now you might think that in light of the decision for Berkeley Homes Appeal on 31 March 2016 giving permission for 425 houses, and bearing in mind the recent  widely publicised sewage issues in Cranleigh, which are referred to by planning officers in their report for the meeting on 27 April, Waverley officers would go back to Thames Water and get an updated statement before they recommended 340 more houses for approval in Cranleigh?

And especially as the sewers becoming overwhelmed by another 340 houses and foul water flooding would be an environmental and a public health risk.

But you would be wrong, the planning officers have recommended both of these sites for approval, relying on what might be a verbal update from Thames Water prior to the meeting on 27 April. This seems to amount to a serious oversight by Waverley Borough Council Planning Officers.

What about the Water Supply?

And what of the water supply infrastructure you might ask? That’s the stuff that comes out of your taps. Thames Water has maintained that the water supply infrastructure CANNOT SUPPORT either of these developments, however, this appears to have been completely overlooked by officers. There is no mention of a condition regarding this in their recommendation to approve these sites, and there is no mention of the impact study that Thames Water requested.

We think this is yet another serious oversight by Waverley Planning Officers and we would like to know why.

What are we doing?

Yesterday we wrote to Thames Water regarding the Knowle Park Initiative and Litle Meadows applications requesting that they uphold their statutory obligations and we copied in our MP Anne Milton, Waverley Planning Officers and the Environment Agency.

We also met up yesterday with a representative of Waverley’s Environmental Health Department, who seem to be taking this issue seriously.

We will keep you informed of the outcome.

What can you do?

Demand to know what is going on with Cranleigh’s sewerage system:

Send ONE email to the following people quoting references KPI WA/2015/1569 and Little Meadow WA/2015/0478 (please copy us in at

Email your MP Anne Milton

Email Elizabeth Sims, Head of Planning Services (Chief Planning Officer)

Email the Current Leader of Waverley Borough Council Robert Knowles

Email the New Leader (from May) of Waverley Borough Council Julia Potts

Thank you for your continued support.

Share Button

Cranleigh Residents Feel Let Down

Share Button

The application for Full Planning Permission submitted  by Crest Nicholson to Waverley Borough Council  has left Cranleigh residents, especially those directly backing onto the site, feeling let down and upset.

(You can still add your comments and objections against this application for Full Planning Permission.)

Residents have already had months of uncertainty and distress at the loss of the stunning view of rolling green fields and trees they have enjoyed from their homes, now to be replaced by a Crest Nicholson housing estate.

Chantreys Horsham Road Crest Nicholson site

When the original outline permission for 149 was dwellings was applied for by Crest Nicholson, residents took small recompense from the fact that at the Northern boundary of the site by Nightingales there was to be an access road, providing a buffer zone, between existing and new housing, as well as a mixture of housing; detached, semi-detached and terraced homes, set back from each other. This meant that, although residents views were still obliterated, this was not being completely replaced by a continuous line of brick walls of a single house type.

Original plans (view a fuller layout of the Chantreys, Crest Nicholson Site, Horsham Road):

Crest Nicholson Chantreys Cranleigh site plan

The plans now submitted have been met with complete dismay by residents. The housing mix, as well as the access road at the edge of the site, has now been replaced by far more dense terraced housing and car parking bays. Where there were peaceful green fields, with the odd flock of grazing sheep, now existing residents will be faced with the prospect of lines of cars and brick walls.  Perhaps Crest want to ensure that the best views of the countryside are reserved for new residents.  Although new people on the Southern boundary should be aware of a proposed Phase 2,  approximately 115 dwellings, coming soon!

New layout of the top northern boundary:

Final Boundary housing scheme - crest nicholson cranleigh

Outline of affordable housing strategy horsham road cranleigh


We have continued to warn residents about being taken in by the artists’ impressions accompanying outline planning permission applications. They are just a drawing (not to scale) to lull residents into a false sense of security. Outline planning grants permission for the number of houses to be built, it does not include the design and layout of those buildings, this is submitted when full permission is subsequently applied for.

Residents are also facing the prospect of large underground tanks of sewage next to their boundaries, due to the lack of sewage capacity in Cranleigh.  You can read more about this in our Thames Water Sewage Crisis article.

Sewage tanks on Crest Nicholson Site

Crest Nicholson PR company Cratus is attempting to set up a residents’ liaison group, we think that that a member of Crest Nicholson staff must be present at these meetings, so that residents queries and concerns can be answered by the actual people building the development, rather than going through a third party whose obligation is to their client and not to the people of Cranleigh.

Share Button