Letter: Council Has Quietly Relieved Developer of £Million Obligation

Published on: 19 Jun, 2025
Updated on: 19 Jun, 2025

Allotments were expected to be located by Minleys Close in Ash

From John Ferns

I wish to express my dismay — and likely that of many local residents — at the quiet and extraordinary collapse of the commitment to deliver a fully serviced allotment site on land south of Ash Lodge Drive, promised as part of the Section 106 agreements attached to planning consents (12/P/01973 and 17/P/02592) for 481 dwellings.

This was no incidental or ambiguous clause. The allotments were a headline community benefit — cited by Guildford Borough Council officers in 2013 as part of the justification for a deeply contentious scheme. Bewley Homes costed the site at over £1 million, including fencing, drainage, sheds, and utility connections, and Ash Parish Council was identified as the intended site manager.

Late last week, GBC quietly posted a decision notice on its planning portal confirming that it had struck off the developer’s 2024 application (24/P/00339) to change the use of the allotment site. But crucially, this was not because the application had been refused — rather, Bewley had simply stopped engaging with the planning process. In effect, the application expired due to developer inaction.

Even so, the consequences are significant — because Ash Parish Council had already signalled, in a unanimous vote on October 14, 2024, that it no longer wished to pursue adoption of the allotment site, citing access and cost concerns. This was despite the fact that Bewley was legally required to fund full site servicing under the original agreement. That decision by the Parish gave the developer precisely the excuse it needed to walk away.

Ironically, just six months earlier, in April 2024, the Parish Council had submitted a strong objection to Bewley’s change-of-use application, citing lack of consultation and a local waiting list of 28 people. What followed was a remarkable volte-face — and, effectively, an own goal.

Many residents will be wondering how such a key piece of promised infrastructure could vanish with so little scrutiny or resistance. The overlapping leadership roles held by two senior GBC councillors who chaired planning committees at Borough level and key roles at Parish level during this period, make the outcome all the more disappointing. There has been ample opportunity to uphold enforcement and protect the public interest in the 11 years that have passed since the first s106 was signed.

No one is suggesting impropriety. But the result is clear: a developer walks away from a million-pound obligation, and a community is left empty-handed.

Residents deserved better. And they still do.

Share This Post