The Loseley Path Closure
The Hedge Campaign flyer
Electric Vehicle Charging Point
Consultation
North Street Development Community Update Briefing June 2025
University Research Project
Bin Collection Calendar 2025
Look out for hornet nests
Yellow Legged Asian Hornets Alert
Winner of Treasure Trail 2024
Wood Burning – Report on APRIL meeting
Loseley Path Closure
Below are all the documents which have either been posted on the homepage of this website or have been sent out in emails from OVRA relating to the closure of the path across the top of the fields on the South side of The Mount. The most recent are at the top.
If you want to contact Loseley you can email them at info@loseleypark.co.uk
7. Press Release from Loseley posted on 27th March – after no further meetings with the community representatives but clearly responding to the emails they have received.
PRESS RELEASE
Loseley Park Proposes New Path to Enhance Public Access and Protect Farmland
Following the last press release regarding the closure of the path at Loseley Park, the Estate Manager has received further correspondence from members of the public. Many expressed that they miss the views previously accessible from the path and highlighted the importance of the route for their “mental health and wellbeing”
.Concerns were also raised that the originally proposed viewing areas could become fixed “destinations” rather than part of a natural walking experience, and that such areas may attract antisocial or potentially illegal activity.
On Friday 20 March, the Estate Manager and the owner of Loseley Park met to review all available options, including proposals to fence the former path. After careful consideration, the Estate believes it has identified a solution that balances public access with the needs of the land and tenant farmer.
Loseley Park is committed to ensuring that the magnificent southerly views remain accessible to local residents and visitors, while also protecting agricultural land and livelihoods.
The proposed solution is the creation of a path running from the existing bridleway to the edge of the tenant farmer’s field. This approach will:
• Prevent damage to crops
• Avoid reducing the farmer’s working land
• Remove the need for intrusive fencing
• Allow walkers to continue enjoying the landscape along the field boundary
The Estate also plans to enhance the area by opening up the views and improving the surrounding environment for both current and future generations. The area marked red on the plan donates the wide path.
Adjacent to the recently installed dead hedge, a traditional living hedge will be planted and carefully managed at a height that preserves the views. This will support local wildlife while showcasing traditional countryside craftsmanship.
In addition, an avenue of 70 beech trees will be planted, running east to west. In honour of Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, the new route could be called Elizabeth Avenue, with one tree representing each year of her reign. The path will be closed annually on 21 April to mark her birthday.
6. The Evidence Form and map (both need to be filled in, see 5. below for more details).
Click this link to get the form to print out and fill in.
Click this link to get the map to go with the evidence form.
5. A Message from the The South Field Steering Group about filling in the Evidence form and map.
HOW YOU CAN HELP: Many of us have been walking the path in an area known locally as South Field “as of right” .
We believe that this path is an unrecorded public right of way, which has been established by historic usage and are preparing an application for it to be added as a recorded public right of way.
Crucial* to the application will be gathering evidence showing that the public used the path as of right for more than 20 years. “As of right” means without force, without secrecy and without permission.
If you would like to support our application please fill out the form and map and drop it off at 37 Hedgeway (double swings in garden).
You will need to mark on the map your entry and exit point and photos if you have any. The form also asks detail on regularity of use.
Even if you have walked the path less than 20 years contributing a form will be very helpful as it shows how widely the path was used.
If you know of anyone (neighbour/ friend who moved away from the area) not in the WhatsApp group that has used the path please share this with them.
You can send electronic submissions to southfieldwalkers@gmail.com
If anyone would like help filling out the form please get in touch via the email address or the South Fields WhatsApp group.
We will leave forms in the book telephone box on the Square in Onslow Village for those who are unable to print off a form.
The path we are referring to runs along the inside of the south field, parallel to Bridleway 14 in the North and Footpath 604 on the East side, which connects in the South to the North Downs way.
4. Information about the South Field WhatsApp Group
Lorimer Burn, chair of St. Catherine’s Village Association who is co-ordinating this work, has created a WhatsApp group for anyone with a particular interest. You can request to join the group by scanning the QR code below. You will be asked to provide your name and address on joining.
3. ‘Why We Care’ presentation sent to Loseley Estate in preparation for a meeting with Loseley representatives explaining what we would like. The presentation was produced by the South Field Steering Group and is available here
2. Press Release from Loseley Estate posted on 18th February on The Guildford Dragon online newspaper and sent to Lorimer Burn, Jo Rew and Angela Goodwin for circulation to the community.
PRESS RELEASE 1
Statement Regarding Closure of Permissive Footpath
The Loseley Estate confirms that the permissive footpath on land at The Mount/Hoggs Back has now been closed.
The route was always provided on a permissive basis, meaning public access was granted at the landowner’s discretion rather than as a permanent public right of way. Following careful consideration, the closure has been implemented to support land management requirements, safety, privacy, and the long-term stewardship of the estate.
In particular, the tenant farmer needs to farm the land fully up to the field boundaries. This is essential to maintain the viability of the holding and to ensure the land can be managed efficiently and safely.
We recognise that the path has been valued by many local residents, particularly during the COVID-19 lockdown period, and we appreciate the strength of feeling expressed by the community. This decision has not been taken lightly. Our priority is to ensure the land can be managed responsibly while balancing environmental, operational, and privacy considerations. Walkers are encouraged to continue enjoying the extensive network of existing public footpaths and bridleways in the surrounding area, many of which offer views across countryside within the local Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
We remain committed to being a considerate neighbour and to constructive engagement with local stakeholders. In response to feedback, with local residents wishing to enjoy the views, the Estate will be creating three new viewing points from a slightly elevated position adjacent to the existing public right of way (see attached plan) that has a much more suitable surface. Seating will be installed at the central viewpoint to allow visitors to rest and enjoy the surrounding landscape. We will continue to work with the local community to support access to the beautiful Surrey Hills.
These works are expected to be completed within the next one to two months, subject to ground conditions.
Estate Manager
The Estate Offices
Loseley Park
Guildford
GU3 1HS
- Letter from Lorimer Burn, Chair of St. Catherine’s Village Association. First posted on 12th February 2026.
“I have written a post for The Guildford Dragon explaining the current situation regarding the recent denial of access to the South-facing field on the Hog’s Back. I’m in discussion with Jo Rew, the Chairwoman of OVRA (Onslow Village Residents’ Association) as well as Councillor Angela Goodwin to work together to represent local concerns to the Estate. See below…
“I live in Guildown, on the Western edge of Guildford. It’s a 15-minute walk into town and a 5-minute walk up onto the Hog’s Back behind me. I write as a local resident of 30 years and also as Chairman of the St Catherine’s Village Association (SCVA). I’m now on my 4th collie and I walk on the Hog’s Back morning and evening every day, as I’ve done for the last 30 years.
It has caused me concern to see the “coppicing” of the hedge at the top of the field on the South side of the Green Lane. But I have to agree that the hedge has not been managed for many years. A “Dead Hedge” has been constructed out of the foliage, which I understand will provide a haven for birds, mammals, insects and reptiles. It looks awful at the moment, but once the remains of the hedge have sprouted, it should look more normal once more.
What has particularly concerned me is the blocking of all access points to the field so dog walkers can no longer access one of their favourite walks along the top of the field which provides such beautiful views to the South. This has caused consternation amongst the adjacent communities of Guildown, Wodeland Avenue and Onslow. This path is valued by literally 100s of those who own dogs, or simply seek a walk providing views over our beautiful Surrey countryside.
About 15 years ago, the Chairman of our SCVA committee (Ron Johnson) and I (Secretary), arranged a meeting with Michael More-Molyneaux in the Green Lane by the N.E. corner of this South-facing field. The purpose of this meeting was to explain to Michael More-Molyneaux why this particular walk along the top of the field was so important to us because of its beautiful views and the opportunity to see the sunset. He saw our point and agreed that we could continue to use this path as a Permissive Path. The Estate subsequently put up notices explaining that this is a Permissive Path and current permission for use could not lead to a future Right of Way.
So it has been for the last 15 years or so.
On Wednesday evening I had a long phone call with Jim, the Loseley Estate Manager, to discuss the current turmoil. My main point was the importance of the Estate maintaining good relations with the local community. Jim agreed with this. I told him that I’m the first to recognise that this particular field is private land and it is only due to Michael More-Molyneaux’ good will that we have had permission to have access to the field at all. But should that goodwill be withdrawn, it will cause great unhappiness in the local communities. Jim spoke of “damage” to the field. But I really feel that a 6’wide path at the edge of the field is insignificant damage in relation to the size of the field.
Together with Councillor Angela Goodwin, and Jo Rew I’m having a meeting with Jim, to further discuss this early next week.
On Wednesday afternoon I met a group of five elderly women who described having walked into the field and had walked much farther than intended because they couldn’t get out due to all access points having been blocked with tree trunks and foliage. One of them muttered that she would no longer be visiting Loseley or buying any of their products again. I fear that this is just a hint of ill-feeling which will become prevalent if the local community is excluded from accessing one beautiful walk which means so much to so many people.”
The Hedge Campaign
Electric Vehicle Charging Point Consultation
Finishes 23rd July 2025
North Street Development Community Update Briefing
The slides from the event can be seen here.
Building/Scheme Notes
- Building works have commenced and will continue until December 2030
- Demolition of the two buildings on North Street has commenced
- Piling works have commenced
- The first new building is planned to be completed by May 2026 and will initially be a sales suite for the new apartments. It will contain 8 apartments.
- No info on apartment prices has been released as yet. Apartment sales are expected to commence in November 2027
- Some building heights have changed, some down by a metre, while some have increased by 1.5 metres – Subject to planning being approved in December this year.
- Other changes include – An additional lift being added to each building, due to changes in building regulations, more trees and soft landscaping has been added, a small amount of public realm space has been added.
- 477 new homes will be built. Approximately 850 residents will live in the area, injecting “life” into the town centre. They are expected to spend around £8,000 per head per year, adding £6.5m of additional spending into local shops and businesses.
- The new pedestrianised area will stretch from Black Sheep Coffee to Poundland on North Street
- Only two new buildings will be created on North Street. Poundland and Barclays will remain, as St Edward does not own these buildings. The facades of both buildings are expected to be refreshed by their owners, so they blend in. expected to
- St Edward is now working with the NHS in specifying the requirements for the medical centre. What this centre will offer is not yet known. It will be a 350 metre square building.
- Two acres of new public realm space will be created
- £4m is being spent on the bus station rebuild. The new station will have fewer bays; however, buses will be able to access from the North and the South, speeding up access for buses, so they will be able to move through the station more quickly. Therefore less need for parking bays. The station will feature waiting rooms and toilets.
- The roads leading into the station are being realigned to make it easier for buses to turn/turn around
- Two new temporary bus stops are being added to North Street to ease congestion and bus offloading during the bus station rebuild
- The bus operators have all been engaged in the design process.
- The current bus station canopy demolition will be completed in December this year.
- The new bus station is due to be completed by the end of 2026
General Notes
- There is little of archaeological interest on the site, as this was mostly destroyed when the Friary Centre was built. All the ground west of Woodbridge Road has been surveyed, with nothing of note found. St Edward has worked in tandem with local historians and archaeologists in these efforts.
- Any interesting building features in the demolished buildings will be passed to local museums. Demolition will be completed in June.
- St Edward is offering summer placements for local school students interested in working in construction
- The North Street market will be temporarily relocated to outside the library while being built. It will return to the bottom of North Street after the building work is completed
- There are plans for monthly community events in the area once it’s completed, as a way to create a thriving and engaged community in the area.
Outstanding Issues
- How the Section 106 funds (given to local council as part of the planning arrangements to fund local projects) will be spent is not clear as yet. A large chunk will be spent on the medical centre, but OVRA members might want to ask our local councillors what the plans for the rest of these funds are?
- I was disappointed that no Guildford Borough councillors attended this briefing. However, St Edward said that they are working very closely with the Council and the planning officers through weekly meetings.
Opportunity for Local Change: St Edward’s £10,000 Community Fund Now Open
Take part in a University of Surrey paid Research Project!
Psychology researchers at the University of Surrey are seeking 7-10-year-old children and their parent/guardian to participate in paid research (£50 voucher). The study involves a presurvey and a lab session at the University of Surrey (travel costs reimbursed). For more information and click here.
Bin Collection Calendar
Look out for hornet nests!
Yellow Legged Asian Hornet Alert
A destructive, and potentially dangerous, invasive insect has made its way to the UK and may soon be in Guildford.
Read on to find out how to spot it, how you can help stop it…and how to keep yourself safe.
Yellow-Legged Asian Hornets have the capacity to wreak havoc on our wildlife in the UK. One nest of hornets can consume up to around 11kg of insects in a year; honey bees generally make up 60% of their diet. We all know just how important pollinators are to our own health and wellbeing, and the security of our food chain. This could have huge consequences on our wider ecology and a devastating impact on song birds that rely on insects for food.
Yellow-Legged Asian Hornets could pose a risk to public health too. While one hornet alone is unlikely to cause a problem, they can be aggressively defensive of their nests, which can be built high in trees but also low to the ground and in hedgerows and brambles. Do not approach a suspected nest closer than 10m.
Please take time to familiarise yourself with what they look like, download the free government Asian Hornet Watch App, then report any suspected sightings. Or call our local member of the Asian Hornet Alert Team on 07966 182171 or email gillie.muir@gmail.com. Gillie can help verify photos. If it’s a positive, a team of government bee inspectors will come to locate and destroy the nest.
Other useful websites:
National Bee Unit website: https://www.nationalbeeunit.com/diseases-and-pests/asian-hornet/
Non-Native Species Secretariat (nest identification): https://www.nonnativespecies.org/non-native-species/id-sheets/asian-hornet-nest-identification/
British Beekeepers’ Association website: https://www.bbka.org.uk/Listing/Category/asian-hornet-vespa-velutina
Winner of the OVRA Treasure Trail 2024 Prize Draw
Congratulations to Zoe Lowres (aged 10) who was the lucky winner of the Treasure Trail Prize Draw. She receives a £25 Odeon Cinema Voucher. Well done to everyone else who completed the trail and sent in their entries.
The Treasure Trail will continue to be available to download from the Events page of this website. All the clues relate to permanent features in the village so it can be done at any time. Many thanks to all the people who have let us know how much they have enjoyed doing it.
Look out for a new trail next summer!
Wood Burning – report on APRIL meeting, 29/7/24
By Alan Robins
APRIL
APRIL (‘Air Pollution Research in London’, https://aprilresearchlondon.wordpress.com) is a network that brings together scientists, policy-makers and the wider community to share the latest science and knowledge about air pollution and to discuss priority areas for future research, mitigations and actions to improve air quality, as well as exploring opportunities for collaboration. Regular meetings are held in central London and co-ordinated by the Greater London Authority, alongside members of the Committee.
Background to the meeting
Regulating authorities have considerable difficulty in assessing pollution from wood burning – the essential issue is that emissions from each source may be small but the combined emission large, further that there are no common emission systems, in the sense that chimney stack and flue designs are very variable. For example, the fact that odours from near-by wood burning appliances are frequently detected at street level testifies to the inadequacy of stack design.
The main pollutant of concern that is emitted by burning solid fuels such as wood is ultra-fine particles, also known as PM2.5 (Particle Matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter). It is widely acknowledged as being the air pollutant which has the greatest impact on human health, as it penetrates deeply into the lungs. Both short and long-term exposure to PM2.5 increases the risk of early deaths from respiratory and cardiovascular diseases as well as hospital admissions. Children growing up exposed to PM2.5 are more likely to have reduced lung function and can develop asthma. Current evidence suggests there is no safe level.
Government statistics show that domestic wood burning accounted for 25 per cent of PM2.5 emissions in 2020 [1]. Emissions from domestic wood burning have increased by 35 per cent between 2010 and 2020 and become the single largest source of fine particle air pollution in the UK, exceeding that of road traffic [2].
The best way to reduce exposure is to stop burning or reduce the amount burnt. Fuel and burner selection make a big difference to the pollution created. Open fireplaces are the most polluting and pose the greatest risk to health. Since January 2022, all new wood burning stoves must meet new EcoDesign standards. Even so, Ecodesign wood burning stoves produce up to 450 times more toxic air pollution [3] than gas central heating, according to data published in the Chief Medical Officer’s Annual Report 2022.
The control of wood burning is clearly an important issue in improving urban air quality and was the driving force for the meeting.
APRIL meeting on air pollution from domestic wood-burning.
The meeting was hosted by Camden Borough Council. All the presentations are available on-line at the APRIL website and include links or references to original sources and reports.
This is a summary of my notes from the meeting.
1. Robert Stewart (Ricardo): “Air emissions from solid fuel stoves and fireplaces – the Defra Emission Factors for Domestic Solid Fuel Project.”
Emission factors are used to estimate the rate at which pollutants are emitted from any particular activity.
About a hundred combinations of fuels, appliances and procedures were tested. A typical appliance was selected from each of:
- an open fire
- a pre-2000 closed stove
- a 2000-2009 closed stove
- a modern stove (2022, Ecodesign-compliant),
and for fuels:
- dry wood (commonly available ‘kiln dried’ wood supplied in sealed plastic bags), 6% moisture content
- seasoned wood (seasoned in-house), 15% moisture content targeted
- wet wood (representative of wood stored in outdoor/wet conditions), 25% moisture content targeted.
The emission rates of many regulated pollutants, including PM2.5, were measured in laboratory conditions and expressed in terms of mass emitted per unit of energy supplied.
The modern stove performed better than all others and the use of seasoned wood was clearly best for most pollutants, including PM2.5 but, as already noted, all were much more polluting than gas burning.
2. Tim Williamson (Air Quality Consultants): “Measures to reduce PM2.5 from domestic combustion”
The results of an EU study were summarised by a selection of case studies illustrating procedures in EU countries. The aim was to identify effective measures to foster “burn better, burn less” and dealt with:
Stock – replacement of older appliances,
Restrictions – limitations or prevention of use,
Awareness – burn better, burn less.
There was considerable variation from country to country, reflecting traditional practices as well as practical issues, though appliance replacement schemes were widespread. Germany was a particularly interesting example, where burn better was the focus, with emphasis on regular maintenance by certified engineers and training schemes for users, described as a licencing process.
There was much from these studies that could be adapted as best practice in the UK.
3. Gary Fuller (Imperial College London): “Investigating PM from wood burning in London”
Having been out of favour since the introduction of the Clean Air Act in 1956, wood burning began to return to fashion in the 2010s, but not driven by necessity [4]. Its growth could be viewed as a social issue. In the UK 8% of homes are now responsible for 27% of primary PM2.5 pollution – primary, because fine particles can also be created through chemical reactions in the atmosphere.
The investigation covered a number of areas of impact: indoors, local, neighbourhood and city. The local scale, measured by tens of metres from the source, was the scale of greatest impact outdoors, with pollution peaks associated with start-up and refuelling.
The lack of ‘affordable’ instrumentation for measuring pollution specifically from wood burning was seen as a major barrier to mapping and understanding the distribution of pollutants, particularly at the local scale.
Climate impact was also discussed, noting that wood burning was generally not carbon-neutral over decades, but over centuries.
4. Huw Woodward and Matheus Almeida (Imperial College London and University of Bristol): “High resolution modelling of PM2.5 from domestic wood-burning in urban areas”
This work illustrated very clearly the difficulties that regulating authorities have in assessing pollution from wood burning.
Combinations of ‘open-fire, basic, enhanced and best’ appliances were treated. The combined pollution levels from a number of randomly placed ‘wood burning’ buildings were mapped over the local neighbourhood. The conclusion was simple, as a minimum, standards had to reach 100% Ecodesign levels, with open fire and basic appliances removed from service.
Notes
1. Strictly speaking from solid fuels – but by far the largest component is from wood.
2. The uncertainty attached to the figures for wood burning are quite large – it might be best to think of total traffic and wood burning emissions of PM2.5 as broadly similar. This uncertainty is one of the key problems in developing strategies to meet PM2.5 targets.
3. That is PM2.5 emissions per unit of energy supplied.
4. Some wood burning can also be a result of fuel poverty.