top of page
Search

Planning application live - now is the time to object

  • Writer: Residents Against Clouds Hill Farm Development
    Residents Against Clouds Hill Farm Development
  • Sep 24
  • 2 min read

Updated: Nov 12

The application for up to 250 new homes is now live on the Elmbridge Planning Portal. We need as many objections as possible to show the council the residents of Oxshott believe this development is not suitable, sustainable or necessary, and would damage Oxshott's character, erode vital Green Belt, and make life worse for both existing and future residents.


Please click on the following link and object by submitting a comment:



If the 'Make a Comment' button is not available on the Elmbridge Portal - you can still submit an objection by emailing - tplan@elmbridge.gov.uk.

Include your full name and address at the end of your email, and quote '2025/2147 - Clouds Hill Farm Leatherhead Road Oxshott Leatherhead Surrey KT22 0ET' at the start of your email.


Quantity is important so can every individual from each household object to increase numbers and help our voice be heard.


Feel free to use the template below to copy and paste in. Add in at least a sentence to make each objection unique. And feel free to write your own bits and views as you see fit!


Please see rest of website on more info on how to help! (Including contributing to a professional led coordinated response funding reports and legal representation)


Template:


Reference: 2025/2147 - Clouds Hill Farm Leatherhead Road Oxshott Leatherhead Surrey KT22 0ET


Dear Planning Officer,

 

I strongly object to the proposed development of up to 250 homes at Clouds Hill Farm, Oxshott. This site lies within the Green Belt, whose purpose is to prevent urban sprawl and protect open land. National policy makes clear that brownfield sites must be prioritised before Green Belt land can even be considered, meaning there are no “very special circumstances” to justify this application. Once Green Belt is lost, it is lost forever.

 

The development would also place unsustainable pressure on our community and is not sustainable. Leatherhead Road is already heavily congested, with more cars bringing greater delays, air pollution, and risks to road safety. Local schools are oversubscribed, GP services overstretched, and public transport links are extremely limited. At 1.6 miles from the station, most residents would rely on cars, creating even more traffic at peak hours. Furthermore, there is no contiguous pavement from the proposed site to the Village for pedestrians or safe routes for cyclists to use. This proposal is unsustainable and unnecessary. It would damage Oxshott’s character, erode vital Green Belt land, and make life worse for both existing and future residents. I urge you to reject this application.

 

Yours sincerely,

[Your Name]

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All

2 Comments


richard
Sep 27

Dear Planning Officer,


I also object to the outline application for up to 250 dwellings at Clouds Hill Farm.


1) Green Belt harm with no very special circumstances


The site is within the Metropolitan Green Belt. New housing on open Green Belt is inappropriate by definition and should not be approved unless very special circumstances clearly outweigh the harm. None are demonstrated. Openness would be permanently reduced by housing, estate roads, lighting and boundary treatments. Once lost, this countryside setting cannot be restored.


2) Brownfield first and plan-led growth


National policy expects councils and developers to prioritise previously developed land and well located urban sites before considering Green Belt release. This proposal is a large, speculative estate in open countryside…


Edited
Like

richard
Sep 27

Subject: Objection


Dear Planning Officer,


I write to object in the strongest terms to application 2025/2147 for up to 250 dwellings at Clouds Hill Farm, Oxshott. The proposal is inappropriate, unsustainable and unnecessary, causing significant harm to the Green Belt, highway safety/capacity, landscape character, and the setting of sensitive habitats. It conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, December 2024) and with Elmbridge’s own evidence base.


1) Green Belt: inappropriate development and harm to openness


The site lies in the Metropolitan Green Belt. Under the NPPF (Dec 2024), the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt is inappropriate unless it falls within narrow exceptions. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances (VSC).…


Like
bottom of page