Reigate and Banstead Council have rejected 300 new homes at Sandcross Lane. Why? Not because the site is old greenbelt land; simply they have a five year supply, so it is oversupply. Local residents views are passionate. ‘There is no need for this development. The green spaces in the area are being lost in the name of greed’ one says. Another one ’It is such a beautiful green space that makes the area peaceful and tranquil. We don’t need more……houses but to preserve natural habitat which makes Reigate and Surrey special’.
Sincerely held fears, the anger pressure gauge is building in Dudley and Reigate. 300 new homes in Surrey; 76,000 new homes in the Black Country. Reactions on the ground are the same.
Did anyone ask Reigate’s upset residents, if Sandcross Lane is wrong for spatial reasons in perpetuity then where can their communities future houses go? As most undeveloped land in Surrey is protected can the demand be exported? Where to? Sounds like another NTDC will be needed.
Snag is this: residents next door in Berkshire and Hampshire, with far more unprotected white land might see their areas as special too. Room for incentives here. Reigate’s residents pay the host communities in Berkshire or Hampshire the market rate to decant their share. Is this a solution? Or is it radical?
Ian Campbell
9 October 2022
