When the 82 acre site at Headley Court was put up for sale towards the end of 2017, many local residents looked forward to engaging in constructive consultation with a developer in respect of redevelopment plans across this historic site of national repute.  However, residents have been disappointed.  Mole Valley District Council’s (“MVDC”) clearly documented expectations, prior to Headley Court coming on the market for sale, were for development to come forward on the basis of one single Masterplan that considers the impact on the surroundings in the round.  This has not happened to date.

 

Headley Court was acquired by Angle Property in May 2019.  Angle Property has the backing of investment funds who invest for profit.  Angle Property states, on its website, that it “creates and enhances value from under-performing assets and unlocks development potential”. This resulted in the site being broken up and sold on in separate elements in a way which residents feared would present the Planning Authorities with some challenges when considering the holistic effect on the environment, local community and infrastructure of development over the site as a whole.   It is understood that the business model is to obtain planning permission on sites that are sold on “oven ready” to housebuilders.  Angle Property is therefore not the housebuilder and residents fear they have no long-term interest in their village. Residents are concerned that Angle’s piecemeal development plans present a serious risk of overdevelopment at Headley Court and increased road safety risks as a result. 

 

It is not too late.  HRAG asks that developers place the Headley community at the heart of what is being done at Headley Court. We urge meaningful engagement on the substance of the proposals so that Headley Court can be repurposed in a way which can deliver housing in accordance with its Local Plan allocation whilst properly respecting the community expectations, the sensitive location, heritage and the Green Belt.  We ask for one holistic master plan.  We object to Angle continuing to push ahead with unwanted planning applications, and appeals to planning applications, for development of a scale and character considered highly objectionable to the local community.

​

IMPORTANT UPDATE

The Development Management Committee held an extraordinary meeting at MVDC’s offices on 23rd November 2021 to consider the two development proposals below.  (1) was deferred, (2) refused and (3) has since been withdrawn. HRAG has always asserted that these developments should come forward and be considered holistically, as a master plan, but this has unfortunately not been done to date.

​You can watch the hearing here: https://molevalley.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/619419

There are 3 main areas of development (1) Western Site, (2) Mansion Site and (3) Jubilee Site:

The Western site is subject to (A) an appeal for the 70 houses and, at the same time , (B) a new application for 59  houses 

​

(1) WESTERN SITE

​

(A) Housing development for reserved matters for a maximum of 70 houses - DEFERRED 23rd November 2021 and now UNDER APPEAL

​

Read appeal documents here.  Deadline for comments 24th May

​

https://www.molevalley.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=MO/2021/0871&theTabNo=3

Comments to email East1@planninginspectorate.gov.uk

​

Despite overwhelming letters of objection from the community (all of which have now been removed from the MVDC website) Angle Property obtained outline planning permission back in December 2020 for access only (all other matters reserved) for up to 70 dwellings on just 11 acres on part of the Headley Court site. 

Critically that outline permission did not decide the exact number of dwellings that were allowed to be built - only the maximum.  The outline consent included a hypothetical layout for a high density housing estate.  The actual number of buildings, their layout, size, volume, appearance as well as routes and open spaces, landscaping and areas of protection of the amenities of the site were all left to be decided in a subsequent reserved matters application.

 

Nick Gray, MVDC Director of Finance and Deputy Chief Executive, gave HRAG the following assurances as to what was and was not covered by the outline consent and the community has placed reliance upon his words, as follows:

​

“One of your concerns was the nature of the decision that was made, and I can confirm that the Outline Permission granted, covered only: the ‘red line’ within which any development must be located; the means of access to the site; and the maximum number of dwellings. Reserved matters, which will be subject to a subsequent planning application, include:

• layout, including buildings, routes and open spaces within the development, and the way they are laid out in relation to buildings and spaces outside the development;

• scale, including size of the development, which refers to the height, width and length of each building;

• appearance, including the look of the exterior of the development;

• and landscaping, including the protection of the amenities of the site and the surrounding area.

This list is not intended to be exhaustive. Rather, I list these specific factors to demonstrate that the ‘layout’ provided by the applicant and included in the report is a purely hypothetical example at this stage with no formal significance. Although any subsequent layout, at the reserved matter stage, must be entirely within the ‘red line’, the Council will be able to consider the appropriate location of dwellings within the red line, starting from no presumption of where they will be sited, other than ‘within the red line’. It is possible that this consideration could constrain the final number of dwellings to something less than 70.

I hope this provides you with some reassurance of the decision that has been made, and the decisions yet to be considered.”

 

The reserved matters planning application was submitted by Angle, in partnership with Millgate Homes, in May 2021. Angle Property is not a housebuilder.  Its business model means it partners with a housebuilder who may build the development.  Angle has selected housebuilder Millgate Homes (part of Countryside Properties PLC).

 

Against the wishes and unambiguous opposition from the community, the application was for the maximum 70 dwellings.   That application was deferred by MVDC at a planning hearing on 23rd November 2021.  A reason for the deferral was that Councillors gave critical evidence (during the hearing of application (2) below) as to their understanding of certain historic planning permissions granted for the personal use of the MOD only.  Buildings used by the MOD personally were never intended to exist for any purpose other than for MOD military rehabilitation and could therefore never be allowed to be used for redevelopment purposes by Angle.  This decision reduced the amount of land that could be redeveloped.  The “goalposts” have been moved and we expect MVDC officers will now recommend that this application be refused.

 

Objectors say that squeezing so many dwellings into an urban density housing development, in an unsustainable location where people will be reliant upon cars, will irreversibly ruin the countryside feeling that characterises Headley.  In reliance upon Mr Gray’s assurances, we think it is impossible to fit 70 dwellings on the site in a way which respects the Green Belt and the character of Headley and nearby properties on The Drive, Clay Lane and Cunliffe Close. The urbanised development proposed will be completely at odds with the local character. Click here and scroll down to read the 117 letters of objection to the reserved matters application: https://www.molevalley.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=MO/2021/0871&theTabNo=3

Objectors have never opposed the principle of some residential development and think the location supports a smaller development of around half the size, that would respect the local character. 

 

(B) reserved matters application for 59 houses  OBJECT BY 6TH JUNE 2022

You can read the documents here:

https://www.molevalley.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=MO/2022/0692&theTabNo=3

This is essentially the same cramped, urban style development with just 11 houses removed - most of which were located in a part of the site that never ought to have been developed in the first place and too close to Ancient Woodland.  The community still objects on the same grounds as before, to putting the wrong development in the wrong location that fails to respect its heritage, rural location and cannot be described as a sustainable development. 

​

You can email your objections by 6th June to planning@molevalley.gov.uk and quote MO/2022/0692, giving your name and address.

For further guidance email us at savingheadley@btinternet.com

​

(2) MANSION SITE

Senior Living Proposal - REFUSED 23rd November 2021

​

In addition to the above MVDC refused an outline application by Angle Property for 114 new, senior living, two-bedroom flats at the site of the mansion house across the road from the proposed housing development.  This application also met with unambiguous public objection.  If, which we think is likely, the retirement model (C2) proves not to be viable in current times, or at this particular site, we anticipate an application will be made to convert this into yet more residential (C3) development.

 

At the Development Management Committee meeting on 23rd November, to the delight of local residents, the above controversial application was refused. Read MVDC’s decision notice here: https://www.molevalley.gov.uk/CausewayDocList/DocServlet?ref=MO/2020/2263&docid=1176128

Councillors were persuaded that the scale of development was harmful to the openness and character of the area without any “very special circumstances” to override the harm.  Also, without a Listed Buildings Application for the Mansion and other heritage assets, Councillors did not feel they had sufficient information to make a decision.  They decided that strictly personal consents given to the MOD were not available for a developer to use.

 

HRAG is grateful to Councillor Margaret Cooksey, Cabinet Member for Planning, who made a plea for sufficient involvement of local people and local organisations in the development of the plans.

​

(3) JUBILEE SITE

Re-use of temporary buildings built solely for the MOD as a medium security (NHS) psychiatric facility - WITHDRAWN 6th January 2022

​

Development in this location is particularly contentious since the wards and hardstanding concerned were temporary structures and the community expectation has always been that the land would be restored to open green space once their emergency use in the Covid pandemic had ended.  MVDC has now served a Breach of Condition Notice (after requests from HRAG) and the public expects that to be followed through.  Headley is not considered a suitable location and the planning harm is not outweighed by the claimed special circumstances of the NHS's operations – which amounts to nothing more than “normal business” for an NHS Trust.

 

We are delighted to report that ​Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Trust agreed with us that this site is not a viable location for a psychiatric unit and withdrew its planning applications on 6th January 2022.   See their update https://www.sabp.nhs.uk/news-and-events/jubilee-complex

 

Planning applications MO/2020/1911 and MO/2020/1912 for the body storage contingency have also been WITHDRAWN May 2022

Surrey County Council responded to pressure from HRAG to use Covid Regulations to operate this site without the need for a planning consent.  It is now closed.

​

HRAG remains concerned that developers will still seek to use this site, in virgin Green Belt outside of the Development Plan, for yet more development.  This will likely cause uproar in the community since local residents, and the Parish Council, expect this site to be restored to its former status as the North Lawn to the historic Elizabethan Mansion at Headley Court. The community expects MVDC to procure that this happens and are pleased to report that a Breach of Condition Notice has now been served in respect of hardstanding in that location. 

​