A controversial application for 86 houses on a greenfield site in Plumpton is set to be decided at Lewes District Council's planning committee on December 8th. Council officers are recommending the committee refuse the application.
Plumpton's Lib Dem District Councillor, Rob Banks, who has objected to the application, said: "The development would mean unacceptable impact and pressure on the open countryside and the intrinsic rural character of Plumpton Green and nearby area.
"A previous application for 45 houses was rightly rejected. The only reason the developers are trying to get away with 86 houses is a change in government rules which encourage these speculative bids"
"The pressure on the existing infrastructure - which cannot cope with the existing housing - includes sewers which frequently fail, a poor power supply and narrow rural roads. Indeed the rural road which serves the village would be urbanised.
"And you would see hundreds of extra car movements a day on local roads as the village has no essential services like a GP surgery - that's not good for the environment.
"This development is outside of the 2018 Neighbourhood Plan which was voted on by local people - and allowed some new housing in the village but this site was rejected. Democracy should be respected."
County Councillor Sarah Osborne, who also wrote to object, added: "The site was rejected for 45 houses in 2019, for very good reasons including impact on the countryside and landscape. So 86 would be really devastating. I also fear the damage to people’s well-being and mental health resulting from the loss of yet more green space."
In the officer recommendation to the planning committee, the report states: "It is considered that this extensive development to the east of the village, extending the built form of the village onto an area of undeveloped countryside would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the wider landscape setting of this part of the village and wider countryside. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on areas or assets of significant importance, in this case the character of and visual amenity associated with the wider countryside and result in significant harm".