View Response

Response Details

Response Details
From Cheryl Seward
Date Started: 19 Aug 2019 13:01. Last modified: 19 Aug 2019 13:19
Status Complete
Response ID #739808


Have you read the Options Consultation document?

You must provide an answer to this question.

  • Yes
  • No


Which area do you live in?

You must provide an answer to this question.

  • Claygate
  • Cobham
  • Esher
  • Hersham
  • Hinchley Wood
  • Molesey
  • Oxshott
  • Stoke D'Abernon
  • Thames Ditton and Long Ditton
  • Walton
  • Weybridge
  • Other

If other, please specify (200 maximum characters)
«No response»


Place-making and the continued success of well designed, well-functioning places is fundamental to developing a growth strategy for the borough. What are the key characteristics that make your area a great place to live? (Maximum 500 characters)

I live on the Fieldcommon Estate and the diversity of housing, residents and the surrounding green belt make this a unique and desirable environment. We have just lived through the nightmare that was the consultation and later (rejected) appeal processes for the proposed Drake Park development. We hope that following the Home Secretary's rejection of this abomination that our green belt will be left alone now.


What changes would you like to see in the borough over the next 15 years? (Maximum 500 characters)

Obviously, there needs to be more housing built in line with the government objectives, but Walton has already taken more than its fair share of building projects with many large scale projects currently underway, e.g. the Birdseye building at the Halfway in Walton


This options consultation document sets out 5 options for housing growth for the borough.  These are:

Option 1-intensify urban area
Option 2-optimise urban area and 3 area of Green Belt release
Option 3-optimise urban area and large Green Belt release
Option 4-optimise urban area
Option 5-optimise urban area and small areas of Green Belt release


Which option will best suit your area?

  • Option 1
  • Option 2
  • Option 3
  • Option 4
  • Option 5
  • Other

Please tell us why you have chosen this option (Maximum 600 characters)
Although this would amount to 3% of the current green belt in Elmbridge, there are 3 small areas earmarked for release that have been designated as 'weakly performing' - one in Long Ditton and 2 in Cobham. Cobham is long overdue for its share in new home development and this option would make it more equitable for Walton. Walton invariably picks up more than its fair share of development.


Please give details of any alternative ways you think we could meet the government’s ambitious housing target for Elmbridge of 623 new homes each year for the next 15 years. (Maximum 600 characters)


Re-development of derelict sites


How do you think we should plan for the new homes we need in your area?

  • Higher densities
  • Green Belt release
  • A mixture of higher densities and Green Belt release
  • Other

Please provide any comments here (Maximum 500 characters)
A minimum of green belt to be released, otherwise Elmbridge will run the risk of becoming another London borough and towns will run into each other


Are you aware of any planning issues that need to be addressed in our detailed day-to-day planning policies?

  • Yes
  • No


If yes, please specify which planning issues

  • Density
  • Design / Character
  • Building heights
  • Parking
  • Conservation Areas
  • Historic features (e.g. listed buildings)
  • Sustainability / renewable energy
  • Flooding
  • Open spaces
  • Other

Please provide an explanation of the issue(s) (Maximum 400 characters)
«No response»


Do you have any comments to make in relation to this Options Consultation? (Maximum 600 characters)

I have opted for Option 2 as the least "worst" option as it stands. However I feel that the council should be joining forces with other local authorities to challenge the excessive housing targets set by the government. The target set of 9,345 homes over the next 15 years is alarming and Elmbridge is always expected to take more than its fair share of the new housing quota.


Did you respond to the previous Local Plan Strategic Options Consultation in 2016?

You must provide an answer to this question.

  • Yes
  • No