Farleigh Meadows: this site, an ‘Area of Great Landscape Value’ according to Surrey County Council, with the path through to a primary school, could soon seen 45 houses being built
Residents in Warlingham are fighting a rearguard action to save the Green Belt, with a succession of applications to build housing, often on sites which were formerly sports grounds or used for recreational purposes.
Farleigh Meadows, previously a stables and paddock, is subject of a planning application for 45 houses on Green Belt, despite the site having been determined to be an “Area of Great Landscape Value”.
Just the other side of Croydon’s borough and London county boundaries, in Tandridge, Surrey, the local district council reckons more than 90% of its area has rural planning designation, giving it little option but to build on Green Belt to meet housing targets set by central government. But a botched Local Plan has managed to leave the door open for overdevelopment on Green Belt.
The previous Tory government established the targets, though the current “Build, build, build” Labour government is unlikely to be sympathetic.
A residents’ campaign group, Save Warlingham’s Green Belt, reckons there are proposals for as many as 600 new homes across five sites in the area. Developers who have snaffled up two former sports grounds off the Limpsfield Road have already been granted planning permission for 250 houses.
The plans for Farleigh Meadows by developers Chartwell provides for a mix of two- and three-storey houses, 18 of which would be affordable homes, on a site off Farleigh Road, close to Warlingham Village Primary School.
The locals’ suspicions over the foregone conclusion for the fate of Farleigh Meadows were heightened at the end of January when trees and vegetation were grubbed up. The mature trees lined the entrance to a footpath that runs through the middle of the site through to All Saints School, and is well-used by children on their way to school.
Until very recently, the site had been used as a paddock for horses and stables, with a single bungalow, No1 Park Lane, tucked in line with Boxwood Way.
Under attack: Save Warlingham’s Green Belt have detailed the five sites which could see more than 600 homes built
“Farleigh Meadows can be seen from many private and public viewpoints,” the campaigning locals say.
They highlight that the site is significant for flooding prevention measures, noting that in 2007 “the local sewer network could not cope and many residential properties… were flooded with water and sewage”. Storm tanks were installed underground as a consequence.
South to North on the site there is an open watercourse which takes “high risk” surface water away from existing dwellings across the fields during heavy rainfall. The planning application describes this as “a dry ditch”.
Farleigh Meadows is among the Green Belt schemes being brought forward under Tandridge District Council’s Local Plan 2033, despite that plan being found to be “unsound” by the Planning Inspectorate.
The Tandridge Local Plan was published in 2019 by a previous Conservative council adminstration at a cost of £3.5million.
In August 2023, Planning Inspector Philip Lewis wrote to Tandridge District Council that he did not consider it is possible to make the plan sound and could not recommend its adoption.
A central part of the Conservatives’ Local Plan was a “Garden Community” of 4,000 homes on Green Belt land at South Godstone.
Delivery of the Garden Community hinged on improvements to Junction 6 of the M25 and to the A22 and A264 Felbridge junction. Those improvements were reliant on £57million of funding from the government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund which was never forthcoming.
The government stated that Tandridge’s bid would not receive any funding because it “does not demonstrate sufficient value for money for the taxpayer… due to the delivery risks stemming from the complex land assembly needed for the scheme”.
Despite the rejection of the Godstone scheme and Tandridge’s unsound Local Plan, residents’ groups across the area remained concerned that all the district’s Green Belt would be at risk from unsuitable planning applications and that some might get through at appeal.
Warlingham had the second-highest allocation of new homes under the unsound Local Plan, and residents’ fears are fast becoming a reality. “Our district council is still determined to welcome planning applications across large Green Belt sites in Warlingham,” the Save Warlingham’s Green Belt campaigners say.
FREE ADS: Paid-up subscribers to Inside Croydon qualify for a free ad for their business, residents’ association or community group, just one of the benefits of being part of our online community. For more information about being an iC subscriber, click here for our Patreon page
PAID ADS: To advertise your services or products to our 10,000 weekday visitors to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
Croydon is one of four Tory London councils that are not taking part in the Mayor of London’s review of the green belt.
The review is to see whether rural land and other green spaces in Outer London boroughs can be designated ‘grey belt’, enabling homes to be built on them. That’s what Starmer wants.
While Bromley’s council leader says they are already doing their own review, hence their non-participation, there’s no word on whether part-time Perry has deliberately ignored Sadiq’s invitation (the short-sleeved shirker took umbrage over ULEZ), or if it’s just got stuck in his inbox