New homes approved on Surrey green belt amid appeal fears

Park Lane next to Warlingham, Surrey, will be developed by Chartwell Land and New Homes Ltd following approval by Tandridge District Council planning committee on July 24.

The scheme will see open paddock land on the edge of Warlingham developed into a housing estate.

The land sits within the designated protected green belt, as an area of great landscape value (AGLV).

Sarah Johnson, part of the campaign group Save Warlingham’s Green Belt (SWGB), said at the meeting the paddock provides a “longstanding buffer between Warlingham and the countryside”.

She added if the development was to go ahead it would create an “urban view” for the bungalows opposite.

Councillors were concerned about substantial harm to the green belt, highway safety and flooding.

“I’m speechless that this part development has been proposed,” Cllr. Perry Chotai said. “We cannot compromise on green belt.”

Neighbours had previously said they felt the character of Warlingham was being threatened by ‘big’ developments.

One neighbour wrote: “We will lose the rural feel of our village and become another dreary suburb of Croydon.”

Yet at a planning committee, a majority of councillors agreed the scheme should get the green light after considering the affordable housing provision and that the reasons for refusal would be unlikely to succeed at appeal.

Heckles of ‘you should be ashamed of yourself’ and ‘cowards’ were heard from the public gallery after the committee voted.

Despite the heated debate, members expressed their anxiety that if they rejected the application they would have to go through a lengthy and expensive appeal process.

Cllr Deborah Sherry: “How will the appeal officer deal with it? They would reject our arguments on flooding, they would reject our arguments on highways, that effectively leaves us with the very special circumstances [of housing on the green belt…]

“Unfortunately many of the recent planning decisions have held that additional housing is a very special circumstance [for building on the green belt].”

She added: “My worry is if we refuse this, it goes to appeal. We are held to have wasted time and we not only lose but we’re charged a £250k which we might be fined for making a wrong decision.”

Chair of the planning meeting, Cllr Claire Blackwell said: “At the end of the day it’s going to be taxpayers money that we’re going to be spending if we do get costs.”

Flooding was raised as a key concern by councillors and objectors alike, with both citing anecdotal evidence of neighbours struggling with flooded gardens on occasion.

But the Flood Authority, after receiving further detail of mitigation and water management plans, raised no objection to the scheme.

Members flagged access to and from the site are “narrow” and “winding” roads, with Cllr Jeremy Pursehouse describing it as a bottle neck.

But Surrey Highways Authority did not object to the proposal, making it difficult for the council to rely on highway issues to argue their reasons for objection at appeal.

Cllr Pursehouse added: “The highways department is as much use as a chocolate teapot as far as planning is concerned.”