A full extraordinary council meeting has been called for October 24th, in which a motion to unpause the local plan is due to be debated. Please see the meeting agenda here :https://democracy.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=146&MId=1600

 We call for all councillors support for the amendment proposed by Cllr Christine Howells, which includes:

– reducing the local housing target based on local constraints (as permitted by NPPF para 11)
– identifying more brownfield land, including properly considering council-owned sites and mixed use areas
– excluding all greenfield Greenbelt land and permitting development only on brownfield land and previously developed land within the Greenbelt.
– not redrawing Greenbelt boundaries
– providing significant levels of housing that would be affordable to local workers and those with assessed need

We believe this would provide an excellent foundation for a growth plan that local residents really want.

We would be grateful for your support:

1) Meet at 7pm at the car park side of the Town Hall, The Parade, KT18 5BY for a peaceful protest and greet the councillors.
2) Either join the public garllary in person or watch online from 7:30pm via https://www.youtube.com/@epsomandewellBC/playlists
3) Share this message or our facebook page https://www.facebook.com/p/Epsom-Green-Belt-100087921227030/
4) Write to your councillors asking for their support. Please see Contact Councillors Tab

Some key reasons for the motion:

First of all, Epsom and Ewell residents valued the Green Belt greatly, which is the character of EEBC and why many people chose to live here. A petition to save Green Belt has been signed by over 11,000 residents (https://www.change.org/EpsomGreenBelt) so far. In addition, Council published data shown that 87% residents objecting building on the Green Belt. The true percentage should be much higher as residents discovered many of their objections were excluded( https://epsomandewelltimes.com/green-belt-development-objections-excluded). 

Secondly, the “affordable housing” proposed in the draft plan by building on the Green Belt land is neither affordable nor sustainable. UK house prices are plummeting at the most rapid pace in over a decade. If you look at Righmove or Zoopla, there are an abundance of housing supplies currently at EEBC of all price ranges, many selling at a discount but still could not find buyers. Epsom needs truly affordable council houses to solve the housing crisis and homelessness issues. For this, EEBC should invest in building high-quality council housing at brownfields.

Research published by Sheffield Hallam University found the eight largest UK housebuilders have paid £16billion in dividends over the last 18 years, with investors handed the equivalent of £22,000 per new home built in 2022 alone. The researchers say dividends paid between 2016 and 2021 alone exceed the £8.8billion the Government spent on its major affordable housing programme over the same period. In fact, the recent property crisis in China shows the world that developers led massive house building will skyrocket the house prices, and when bubble bursts, it’s the people that will suffer.

Thirdly, any future plan for housing development in Epsom & Ewell must take account of one fundamental fact: that EEBC has by far the smallest land area (13.3 Sq. miles) and the lowest green belt percentage of the eleven boroughs in Surrey. Yet over time has been forced to accept, by various factors, to “accommodate” the disproportionately highest population density ( c. 6,200) and highest housing density (c. 2,500) compared to the other ten boroughs. For example Waverley with a 25% larger population has an area of 133 Sq. miles with population density of c. 930 and housing density of c.387. Mole Valley with a similar population size to EEBC has an area of 99 Sq. Miles with population and housing density of c.865 and c. 375 respectively. Put another way Epsom accounts for 2 % of the land area of Surrey yet has the highest by far population and housing density figures.

Lastly, the draft Local Plan did not provide any viable solutions to improve the already oversubscribed educational establishments, health service provision and transport infrastructure.