Developers appeal against planning refusal
Would-be developers of a housing estate in the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (HWAONB) outside Groombridge have lodged an appeal against Wealden Council’s refusal of planning permission.
Objectors to the proposed 8.9-acre development by Earlswood Homes were surprised and delighted when Wealden’s Planning Committee North turned down the application in July, against the recommendation of their planning officers.
Earlswood’s appeal to the Planning Inspectorate is based on their claim that the decision is not in line with Wealden planning policy. If they are successful and show that the Council acted unreasonably, Wealden could be faced with “very substantial costs,” said a Wealden planning officer.
The vote to turn down planning permission was carried by nine Committee members with two abstentions. and none against it.
The 21-house estate, which would be outside the Groombridge settlement boundary (the agreed limit of built-up area), they reported, was ‘unsustainable within the HWAONB, failed to conserve or enhance the landscape and scenic beauty’, out of keeping with area’s intrinsic rural character and scenic beauty, and the potential harm ‘significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits of the proposal.’
Chairman Johanna Howell, who in the last year was quoted in the press as saying “houses will be built more and more on AONB land. We need the houses,” seconded the motion.
AONBs are not Green Belt but have a higher level of protection equating with that of national parks. The development would change the land usage from rural to urban, despite its being outside the agreed village development boundary. The new houses would be on rising land and stand higher than any other houses in the village.
Wealden councillor Keith Obbard, who represents the Withyham ward in which the development lies, believes that the appeal will refer to the Government’s Five-year Plan to open up more land for housing. The developers’ case was presented by Jonathan Buckley, planning consultant: “rural communities need to grow, houses need to be built,” he said, and maintained that the estate “would do no unacceptable harm to the AONB, but be an organic, limited and logical extension to the village.”
Earlswood Planning Director Billy Clements said that the appeal would address not only the AONB reasons for refusal but “any other matters that we feel necessary.” The grounds for the appeal will be published on the Planning Inspectorate and Wealden Council’s websites. ‘Other matters’ might include those raised by Planning Committee councillors and in the 168 objection letters from Groombridge residents, such as highway safety issues arising from increased traffic, site access at the “pinch point” of a main road into the village and cutting across an extremely important and well-used byway for pedestrians, cyclists, mobility vehicles and horse-riders.
For Groombridge residents and the ‘Stop Ardenvale Green’ (now known as ‘Little Wold’ which is the name of the four-bedroomed family home that would be demolished to provide access to the site) campaigners, it is not yet time to take down the protest signs from around the village.
“It could be months” from when the appeal was lodged on 23 September before the Planning Inspectorate, an executive agency within the Department of Levelling Up, Housing & Communities, publish details and announces the ‘start’ of the appeal. After that, there is only a 5-week window for anyone to make their case against the appeal.
Normally, only one in three appeals is successful, but an independent planning consultant has suggested that when a Council stand against its officers’ recommendations, there’s a significant risk that the Planning Inspectorate will back the officers.
A retired Groombridge solicitor warned “if the developers won their case, the Council would have to foot the legal bills, and may cave in rather than risk that.”, the Inspectorate must take the level of public interest and views into consideration, assess all historic and new representations for and against the development, and look at other factors for refusal than the AONB issue before making a final decision.
“The best course of action might be for an objection letter or petition signed by as many Groombridge residents as possible,” said the solicitor.
At this point in time we have to wait until notification of the appeal is made and a response can be formulated but pre-emptive actions are being formulated by the steering group behind the scenes.
Please consider donating to help fund our activities We are appealing to you, please, to help us fight for our village by donating what you can to our fighting fund at https://www.gofundme.com/f/Stop-Ardenvale-Development.