Planning Matters #2 of 2025 

8 April 2025 

In this edition we provide a brief update on the implications of the recent national planning changes for Normandy, and draw your attention to an opportunity to input into proposals for local government reorganisation in Surrey. 

 
National Planning Changes and Implications for Normandy. 

In our previous newsletter we highlighted the increased housing targets for Guildford Borough Council (GBC) – up from 562 to 1102 per year - and the introduction of the concept of ‘Grey Belt’, a more permissive approach to building on Green Belt land. 

The potential threat to Normandy from one or more major new housing developments resulting from these changes was extensively discussed on 28 March at the Normandy Village Assembly, hosted by Normandy Parish Council (NPC) and attended by our local MP, Al Pinkerton, and Surrey County and Guildford Borough Councillor, Keith Witham. The NPC Chair, Councillor Paul Chillman, announced the creation of a working group to support the Parish Council in making informed decisions regarding any large planning matters that affect the community due to these changes. NAG has been invited to join this group. 

We know that as part of the process to update Guildford’s Local Plan, on which we reported in our last newsletter, ‘Grey Belt’ sites in the Green Belt – which could include sites in Normandy - will be allocated to development. The key question, on which we have sought clarification from GBC, is whether development will be authorised on such sites ahead of the revised Local Plan’s being adopted. This could determine whether we face proposals for large-scale development imminently, or on a slower timescale. We shall let you know when GBC responds to our enquiry. 

In the meantime, GBC has turned down an application 24/P/01167 for a care home on Green Belt land opposite St Mark’s Church. It is worth reading the ‘Officer Report’ to get a sense of the factors contributing to this decision. The application failed mainly because, although it passed the ‘Grey Belt’ test, it failed to meet the requirement for “a demonstrable unmet need” for the type of accommodation included in the proposal. The development was also deemed to be “harmful to the openness of the Green Belt”, and therefore constituted “inappropriate development in the Green Belt”. What we do not know is how it would have fared if it had been an application for housing development, rather than a care home, as since 1 April GBC has had to declare that it is longer able to demonstrate a five-year housing supply, and therefore a “presumption of sustainable development” applies to all applications for new housing, as per para 11 of the  National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 

Local Government Reorganisation in Surrey 

In our previous newsletter we reported that in Surrey, the 11 District Councils and Surrey County Council will merge to form two or three Unitary Authorities. Until 20 April Surrey County Council is running a consultation to seek local residents’ views on the preferred option, and this is a good opportunity to emphasise the importance of ensuring that our local voice continues to be heard, even as we move to larger authorities. Looking further ahead, once the new unitary authorities are constituted, there will be further consultation on the establishment of Strategic Mayoral Authorities, such as is already taking place in areas that are further down this route than we are.