Redhill Planning Enquiry into the ‘Croydonisation’ of Redhill Ends

Published on: 1 Dec, 2025
Updated on: 2 Dec, 2025

Redhill Train Station development with its 15-storey tower block CGI from Solum planning documents

By Emily Dalton

local democracy reporter

A major face-off over plans for two landmark towers next to Redhill railway station has concluded, with neither side backing down.

The proposed development, which would see towers of 14 and 15 storeys built beside the station, has been a heated source of debate for years. Developer Solum says the scheme would deliver 255 new homes, a revamped station, and increased footfall for Redhill town centre. But campaign groups and local residents have criticised it as the “Croydonisation” of Redhill.

Redhill residents outside Reigate and Banstead Borough Council opposing plans to build in the town centre in October 2024 Jan Sharman

Reigate & Banstead Borough Council rejected the application last October, citing concerns over height, scale, and design. Solum subsequently launched an appeal.

At the council chambers in Reigate, lawyers representing Solum, the local authority, and the Redhill Residents Action Group (RRAG) delivered their final submissions on the last day of the inquiry on November 28.

Solum insisted the development is exactly what the town needs, while the council warned it would be a glaring mistake.

A more distant CGI view of the same development CGI from Solum planning documents

Council lawyers countered that the project represented a “tremendous missed opportunity,” arguing: “Redhill deserves better.” RRAG added that Solum should “think again and propose a development that those living here could look upon with pride rather than regret.”

The developer’s lawyer, a KC, said: “Any suggestion that the proposal is ‘not well designed’ is a travesty. It is exceptionally well designed.”

Solum’s legal team described the site as a “quintessential example of a sustainable, urban, underutilised brownfield.” They argued that, as the borough’s most accessible location, it would be a missed opportunity not to build homes there.

Council lawyers argued the towers would not serve as a “landmark” for the station but instead appear as a bulky block of flats. Experts added that the buildings would block key views of historic architecture and distract from the town’s heritage.

The Rule 6 party, led by RRAG, said the towers would dominate Redhill’s skyline and erode the charm of its historic streets.

RRAG argued the development was out of character for a small market town, noting: “It is a small verdant market town surrounded by designated countryside with only three high-rise buildings, none comparable to those in central London.”

The developers also contended that the council could not demonstrate sufficient housing supply, meaning national policy should favour the development. They claimed concerns about affordable housing were “not justified” and argued that providing it would render the project financially unviable.

The lawyer added that any heritage impacts would be “less than substantial” and outweighed by the “significant public benefits” of improved station access.

The council presented a different view, stating it has a sufficient housing supply and is not in urgent need of new homes. Even if approved, the scheme’s benefits would not be realised for years.

After almost two weeks of hearings split between September and November, the decision now rests with the planning inspector. A ruling is expected in the coming months.