Soames supports opposition to Penland Farm threat

In the House of Commons just a few months ago Mr Soames said the government’s localism agenda was facing a ‘credibility question’ and councils faced having their plans ‘overturned by spiv developers trying to take advantage of a very difficult position’.

Now the MP has written to constituent John Clayton, a committee member of the Penland Farm Action Group, in support of the battle to stop 70 acres of farmland being developed on the northern edge of Haywards Heath.

In his letter he says: “I have made my views very strongly known over development in Mid Sussex and I do whatever I can to support my constituents when they are fighting some of these very unsatisfactory applications.

“As you are aware Penland Farm is a highly sensitive site forming a large part of the critically important strategic gap between Haywards Heath and Cuckfield.

“A large scale development on this rural fringe of Haywards Heath, which is immediately adjacent to an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, will have a significant impact on the local environment and infrastructure which is already struggling to cope as a result of other major development in the town in recent years.

“A number of Planning Inspectors have rejected development in this location in the past due to some of these important concerns.

“I understand that this site will not be included as a housing location in the Haywards Heath Neighbourhood Plan, which favours development on the remaining brownfield sites in the town.

“Accordingly, for these reasons and having consulted with my colleagues at Mid Sussex District Council, I do not think what is proposed at Penland Farm is suitable and I have made representations together with my constituents to that affect.”

Mr Soames continues to make representation to government ministers about development pressure in Mid Sussex and frustrations over localism.

Mr Clayton, of The Spinney, Haywards Heath, described the Penland Farm application no. 13/03472/OUT for 235 homes as “cynical”.

The more than 500-member Penland Farm Action Group (www.penlandfarm.co.uk) describes it as “yet another attempt by developers to wreck our countryside” whilst planning guidelines are in transition.

Writing to Mr Soames, Mr Clayton says: “There is no current need to concrete over more green fields. We know it’s good for builder’s profits but it’s bad for our environment and it’s not even economically supportive for our local area – National builders are employed to develop these larger sites.

“Socially there might be a benefit if the ‘affordable housing’ went to truly local people but this is not often true. Properties are advertised in London at London prices.

“This artificially inflates the price of all our houses, including the “affordable” ones. Local people are kept out of the housing market by this merry-go-round.

“Mid-Sussex and all local councils need better support from government and politicians like you.

“Councils have policies that can implement localism if only the Government would deliver on its promises.”

Mr Clayton said unelected developers were being allowed to torpedo district plans.

Mid Sussex District Council’s deadline for comments on Penland Farm is November 15.

The trustees of land owner Borde Hill Estate and developers Catesby Estates say more houses are needed but they have listened to local concerns and reduced numbers from 306 to 235.