Updated: Waverley Council Calls on Government to Re-think Housing Targets

Published on: 23 Dec, 2025
Updated on: 1 Jan, 2026

By Chris Caulfield

local democracy reporter

Update: See Conservative comments added below.

Waverley Borough Council has called on the Government to rethink housing targets that will do “unacceptable harm to our towns, villages and countryside” as figures show the majority of Surrey councils lack suitable land for development.

Councils have to demonstrate they have sufficient land for five years’ worth of housing – against their government-set goals.

Authorities that fail to hit their five-year supply have far less control over where, and the types of housing that gets built.

This is because developers have the power to appeal refused planning permissions, and inspectors will “presume in favour of sustainable development” when councils do not have enough land.

Surrey as currently divided into districts and boroughs

Only three Surrey councils, Guildford, Mole Valley and Reigate & Banstead, currently have sufficient space to hit their housing targets.

The worst affected area is Elmbridge which has less than a year’s worth of deliverable housing sites remaining – unless they find new sites, opt to build in the green belt, or intensify town centres.

Waverley, Epsom and Ewell, and Tandridge all have less than two years, while Surrey Heath, Spelthorne, and Runnymede has fewer than four year. Of those that can not demonstrate enough sustainable housing sites, Woking at 4.6 years’ is the closest to the minimum benchmark.

The crisis has prompted Waverley Borough Council to call on the Secretary of State to urgently review national planning rules – and said the Government’s revised housing targets were “undeliverable, environmentally damaging, and out of step with the realities facing constrained rural authorities”.

Cllr Paul Follows

Council leader Paul Follows (Lib Dem, Godalming Central & Ockford) said the current approach places Waverley in an “impossible position”, with the borough’s annual housing target more than doubling from around 710 to over 1,450 homes per year despite extreme land and environmental constraints.

He said: “More than 80 per cent of Waverley is green belt or part of the Surrey Hills National Landscape.

“The remaining land simply cannot absorb the level of development the Government is demanding, not without unacceptable harm to our towns, villages and countryside.”

The council said it was not against the provision of more housing, including affordable homes, and that it was outperforming its previous targets.

But, it said, the new nationally imposed targets were pushing development into a small proportion of unprotected land with building taking place in areas that lacked adequate infrastructure.

The other issue, is that councils are judged on homes built, even though they do not control build-out rates. Waverley Borough Council has 5,500 homes with planning permission that remain unbuilt.

Cllr Liz Townsend

Cllr Liz Townsend (Lib Dem, Cranleigh West), portfolio holder for Planning and Economic Development added: “If these targets continue to be imposed without flexibility, the consequences for Waverley will be severe.

“We risk overdeveloping our towns and rural villages, placing huge pressure on already-strained roads, public transport, schools, healthcare and water and power utilities.

“We would also see the loss of valued green spaces and wildlife habitats, running directly against the Government’s own environmental goals, and an inevitable rise in public opposition and legal challenges. Far from accelerating delivery, this approach could actually slow it down.”

Surrey councils housing land supply (in years)

Elmbridge 0.9
Waverley 1.3
Epsom and Ewell 1.5
Tandridge 1.9
Surrey Heath 3.
Spelthorne 3.8
Runnymede 3.9
Woking 4.6
Mole Valley 5
Guildford 6.6
Reigate and Banstead 6.7

Cllr Jane Austin

Jane Austin (Con, Bramley & Wonersh), leader of the opposition at Waverley Council agreed that there was a real problem. She said: “Waverley is facing a planning emergency. With only 1.28 years of forward housing supply, developers are now far more likely to win appeals, leading to homes being built in unsuitable locations without sufficient infrastructure or affordable housing.

But she believes some of the fault lies with the Lib Dems. “This situation stems not only from housing target pressure; it’s also due to six years of delays and poor strategic decisions taken by the Lib Dem-led administration.

“Conservative-led Waverley in 2019 left a 5.3-year housing supply that provided full planning protection, now sadly eroded. Compounding these issues in 2023, the Lib Dem-led administration voted for a full Local Plan review which won’t be adopted until at least 2028 – meaning three more years of planning vulnerability.”

And Sir Jeremy Hunt the Conservative MP for Godalming and ash added: “We all agree houses must be built – but this development should be in line with strong defendable Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans.

“When I met the Housing Minister he expressed concern that Waverley’s housing supply was just 1.28 years and made it clear that councils should not wait until their plans are effectively out of date before making moves to replace them – yet that is exactly what has happened in Waverley. I hear every day from residents who are gravely concerned their local protected landscape will now pay the price.”