Villagers fight 'the building of a new town' on Sussex countryside

A planning application for 1,450 homes alongside a raft of infrastructure such as 90 residential care units, a primary school and a health hub is pending consideration and has received widespread condemnation.

The development has been proposed on land between Ansty, Cuckfield and Haywards Heath near the Cuckfield Bypass.

In response, the Cuckfield Society has now launched a GoFundMe page to raise enough money to take legal action against the application, which they say is effectively a proposed "new town".

The society said: “The Cuckfield Society has appointed a barrister from one of the leading UK Chambers on planning and development together with planning and traffic consultants to argue against this particular site being included.

“Members of the community together with the support of local parish councils have already spent £39,000 on specialist reports to support our case and estimate that the total cost will be nearer £100,000.

Protesters on the land east of Ansty (Image: Brad Williams)

“So, if you care about the future of both Cuckfield and Ansty and don’t want the roads permanently jammed, the water supply threatened and all local services and schools strained to breaking point please help us by giving generously.

READ MORE: Dates confirmed for new Worthing Chatsmore Farm inquiry

“If we act together now, we can preserve this beautiful countryside for generations to come.”

The developers have proposed a 'garden community' on the land (Image: Brad Williams)

Councillor Brad Williams, chairman of Ansty and Staplefield Parish Council, said: “We the community and the parish council have been campaigning and raising money to have our own lawyer. The society is trying to get us over the line.

“Next door to me there are 3,000 houses being built near Burgess Hill. This is not NIMBYism.

"We have had enough housing."

The application was submitted in November 2023 and currently has 488 supporting documents, many of which are responses from the public.

Some comments of opposition said the proposed site would mean the destruction of “precious heritage landscape” and villagers' access to nature, as well as making current infrastructure “unsustainable” and amplifying traffic.

Many also called the site an “archaeological asset” which retains the remains of iron forges near streams.

Mid Sussex District Council’s conservation officer found that the development would “result in a fundamental impact on the current rural character” of the land and would lead to a “degree of harm” .