Free-For-All for Developers in Mid Sussex

11 Mar 2011
serena tierney studio photo

In this week's Mid Sussex Times Lib Dem Parliamentary Campaigner Serena Tierney's letter about the Tory run District Council's failure to plan housing development has been published. The letter is reproduced here along with some quotes from the Planning Inspector's judgement.




"The decision by the planning inspector to allow Rydon to build 42 houses in the AONB [Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty] signals the start of a free-for-all for developers in Mid Sussex.


Many local people will be astonished to learn that the Tories running MSDC never objected to the very high number of houses allocated to Mid Sussex in the South East Plan. Although they now complain that the numbers are not deliverable, they did not propose an alternative development strategy when the plan was being drawn up. Neighbouring councils did - and so were allocated reduced housing targets.


Now we have the worst of all worlds. We do not have a planning policy for development to take place where it will benefit local people. We do not have enough affordable housing for our children to stay and live in the area as they grow up and start their own families. And developers will get permission to build wherever it suits them, regardless of the impact on neighbours or the environment.


The Rydon appeal succeeded because the inspector decided that there is an exceptional need for affordable homes in the area within the next 5 years and the council has not allocated land to build them. But the planning conditions that he ordered mean that building may not even start in the next 5 years - let alone be completed. It seems to me quite wrong that if the justification for giving planning permission is an unfilled urgent need, the permission is not even given in a manner that ensures that the urgent need be provided.


The Tories failure to do the job for which they were elected has let down everyone in the district - now and for many, many years to come."


"The Council subsequently accepted that it could not demonstrate a five year housing land supply, in the context of paragraph 54 of Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3)."

Appeal Decision - 24th February 2011


This website uses cookies

Like most websites, this site uses cookies. Some are required to make it work, while others are used for statistical or marketing purposes. If you choose not to allow cookies some features may not be available, such as content from other websites. Please read our Cookie Policy for more information.

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
Marketing cookies are used by third parties or publishers to display personalized advertisements. They do this by tracking visitors across websites.