Category Archives: Local Planning
“New haciendas and gin palaces” [update]
Local readers will be disappointed to learn that they are not about to gain access to additional haciendas and gin palaces. The Argus reports that the new rule allowing redundant farm buildings to be converted or demolished so as to create up to three houses without planning permission will not apply in the South Downs National Park.
Minerals Local Plan
New planning guidance
The West Sussex Gazette has a long report. Extracts below:
A highly significant change in the guidance says that councils will no longer have to identify specific sites for development for the last five years of their 15-year plans. The provision was widely seen as unrealistic and was forcing councils to allocate unpopular ‘strategic sites’ for development, like the proposed new Mayfield ‘market town’.
The new guidance also states that infrastructure constraints must be considered in assessing a site’s suitability for development. This addresses a key local concern in West Sussex, where there is a strong feeling that development is allowed without the necessary infrastructure, such as roads and drainage, to support it.
The new planning guidance also addresses another local concern by making clear that emerging local plans should be given weight in decision-making even before they are passed.
The new guidance also encourages brownfield development and clarifies the ‘duty to co-operate’, under which neighbouring councils are required to consult each other on their plans.
Richard Rogers vs Mayfield Market Towns
The architect Richard Rogers has joined the campaign against Mayfield.
Existing settlements already contain ‘live, work and leisure’; public transport, schools, hospitals, churches, meeting halls and existing social and physical infrastructure. Greenfield land has none of these facilities in place and therefore it will mean that more cars, roads, sewers, etc. will be required which is why it is not environmentally sustainable.
Full report here.
Ham Fields Forever
The Mid Sussex Times reports:
Opposition is growing to controversial plans for 97 homes on greenfield land near one of the most polluted crossroads in Mid Sussex. .. The South Downs National Park Authority says the scheme would be seen from Wolstonbury Hill and “have the potential for significant adverse impact on the national park”.
..
Access to the site would be off London Road, which has an average daily weekday traffic flow of 14,000 vehicles. West Sussex Highways officers have expressed concern about road safety and the impact on Stonepound Crossroads, which, in their words is “subject to severe congestion”.
A penny for your thoughts
You have until the end of April to express your views on the Community Infrastructure Levy – Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and to participate in the Local Plan Options Consultation.
Wealden wins
The Sussex Express reports:
A consortium of landowners have failed in a High Court bid to tear up Wealden District Council’s housing plans for the next 16 years and force it to go back to the drawing board.
One of the country’s top judges dismissed the challenge brought by the group, known as Ashdown Forest Economic Development LLP, to the Council’s Core Strategy Local Plan (CSLP.)
The group claimed the Council, the South Downs National Park Authority and a Government planning inspector who had cleared it to be adopted had been too cautious and protective of the environment and nearby Ashdown Forest. However, Mr Justice Sales today rejected all of the group’s grounds of complaint.
More details at the link.
“New haciendas and gin palaces”
The Midhurst and Petworth Observer reports:
A House of Commons debate on national parks .. was called in response to a government proposal to allow the conversion of up to three dwellings, or the replacement of existing farm buildings, without planning permission.
Mr [Nick] Herbert warned the proposals could lead to ‘the creation of a suburbia .. and inappropriate development — new haciendas and gin palaces — instead of maintaining the character of the parks and the landscape, which was precisely why they were created’.
A number of Conservative MPs, many representing constituencies that lie partly or wholly within national parks, spoke against the proposals. Concerns have also been raised by the South Downs Society and the Campaign for National Parks.
Ovwood
The Argus has just posted a long report about a property developer’s plans to merge Ovingdean and Woodingdean.