Local residents are not the only ones opposing the Taylor Wimpey proposal to impose up to 950 new builds in the wildlife and heritage heart of Normandy. None of the organisations asked by Guildford Borough Council (GBC) for their views on planning applications 25/P/01725 and 25/P/01726 have expressed enthusiasm for them.

As the AI-generated summaries* of the various submissions on the GBC website show (see below), some have actively opposed them, and many have argued that they should at least be deferred to allow further information to be produced and assessed. 

For example, regarding the main application, the Environment Agency points to an inadequate flood risk assessment on the main site, technical discrepancies in the application, and missing data.

The Surrey County Council SuDS team objects on the basis of an inadequate strategy, missing data, and concerns about groundwater management.

Active Travel England also has concerns about the data and point to infrastructure gaps, saying the applicant must revise the Transport Assessment, commit to financial contributions for local cycling improvements, and improve bus stop facilities.

Network Rail points to the need for Wanborough Station improvements, specifically step-free access between platforms.

The Forestry Commission recommends a minimum 30m high-quality buffer zone to protect the Ancient Woodland on site, rather than the 20m proposed by the applicant.

Thames Water is unambiguous that the current sewerage network cannot accommodate the needs of 950 additional dwellings.

Surrey County Council Education Dept makes clear that the proposed new primary school is only necessitated by the development itself, not by the needs of the wider population.

Surrey County Council Highways Dept has called for a deferral due to the "nature and complexity" of the proposal and to give it time to carry out a full technical assessment.

The Surrey County Council Archaeologist has recommended a programme of archaeological work before any development begins, given the high potential for undiscovered archaeological remains.

In addition, the Parish Councils of Ash, Normandy, Wanborough, Pirbright, Worplesdon, and Puttenham have all objected to the proposals.

Regarding the proposal for the associated SANG, the Surrey County Council Archaeologist has called for further investigation due to the site's historical potential, including a full geophysical survey.

Natural England has called for further information before it can assess the impact on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA). It has also called for a full SANG Management Plan and a Habitats Regulations Assessment. It has asked to be re-consulted once its requested amendments have been addressed, and before the development is approved. 

NatureSpace has stated that the development falls within the red impact risk zone for great crested newts and that it is not satisfied that the applicant has adequately demonstrated that there will no impact on this protected species and/or its habitat.

Normandy Parish Council has objected on grounds of highway safety, parking shortage, poor connectivity, and inaccessible infrastructure.

All in all, these comments are a damning indictment of the Taylor Wimpey proposals and show the absurdity of seeking to bring forward such a large-scale and invasive development, with huge issues around environmental sensitivity and infrastructural sustainability, on an opportunistic basis and outside of the Local Plan process. Only in this latter context could it be properly considered against the planning needs of the area as a whole. 

We hope that good sense will prevail when the application comes before the GBC Planning Committee later this year.

* As these are AI-generated, they may contain small errors of detail, but we believe that they nevertheless represent a fair summary of the submissions that have been made.

Attachments:

Main Application Feedback	[ ]	455 kB
SANG Application Feedback	[ ]	213 kB