Two new sports pitches have been approved as part of a 216 home development in a Surrey village, but neighbours claim it will make the “ancient country lane” more dangerous and damage its “rural character”.

The new addition forms part of plans for more than 200 homes and a new farm shop at Secretts in Chapel Lane, Milford, which were given the green light in August 2023. The development site lies to the north-east of Milford, currently part of Hurst Farm.

The majority of the development falls within Waverley Borough Council but the northern portion, approximately 1.5 hectares of where the proposed playing fields will be, crosses the boundary into Guildford Borough Council. Officers formally approved the scheme on Friday, December 20, 2024 after councillors agreed the plans at a planning meeting in September 2023.

The plans include two mini football pitches with real grass, a small spectator area, 30 car parking spaces, and a toilet, at the northern site of the development. There is a lack of 7 x 7 grass football pitch provision in the Godalming area, for both current and future needs, according to planning documents.

The proposed sports pitches are said to be allocated to Milford Pumas Youth Football Club, according to council documents. They detail how the club would use the pitches just for the weekends on the condition the Milford Pumas will agree restricted hours to address residents’ concerns.

Access to the playing pitches will be solely off Eashing Lane, a two-lane single carriage way with a current speed limit of 30mph. Parts of the road are narrow, with no footpath or curb and no street lighting.

Surrey Highways raised no objection to the plans and was satisfied the development would not cause extra strain on the transport network. Planning documents stated that the applicant was working with the Highways Authority to reduce the speed limit from 60mph to 40mph with the aspiration to reduce it by a further 20mph. Surrey Highways also recommended potentially introducing a virtual footway, i.e. a designated area on a road marked by paint for pedestrians to walk on.

But neighbours to the site are not too pleased with the proposed pitches, fearing it will increase traffic and make the surrounding roads more dangerous. The objectors argued the “admirable” desire for more sports and open space facilities seemed to be “blinding logic” of how it would be accessed.

Neil Smith said driving along the lane was already “challenging” enough, especially when “confronted” by delivery vans and lorries. He said it is “not appropriate to generate even more traffic on the lane”. Another resident, Liam Pearce, said it is “impossible to pass oncoming traffic without needing to stop and pull on the verge”.

Part of the road safety measures would include cutting back 120m of existing treed hedgerow along the western boundary of the site and replacing it with new native hedgerow. But residents argued cutting the long-established hedgerow would put it “in danger of completely losing its character” and the “traditional rural environment will disappear forever”.

John Mills opposed the scheme as it would “irreversibly change the character of Eashing Lane and compromise the safety of all who use it”. Anthony Isaacs argued Eashing Lane is an “ancient county lane” which has been “virtually unaltered” for years.

Cameron Leslie, who used to live near London’s South Circular, said she is “shocked” to see the road safety issues on a daily basis on Eashing Lane. Agreeing with her, Ms Isabel Webster also wrote to the council saying pedestrian footpaths are “non-existent on the narrow, almost single track lane- and to make it safe would substantially harm the historic hedgerows”.