Nine family homes at Land Adjacent To Westfield Rise, Saltdean, Brighton

The proposed homes

The application sought outline permission for nine family homes, with the layout indicative and some matters reserved.

“BH2025/00293 - Land Adjacent to Westfield Rise, Saltdean - Outline Application Some Matter Reserved…”

“Zac Denton addressed the committee as the agent acting on behalf of the applicant and stated that they wanted support for the nine much needed family homes, on this site allocated for development in the local plan. Access from Coombe Meadow is the only issue. The highway officers have not objected to the scheme. The layout is indicative and allows for consideration under reserved matters. There will be a S106 agreement.”

Minutes

The site and access

The proposed access would use the existing road, while access from Coombe Farm was considered too steep.

“Councillor Pickett was informed that the committee should consider the access and the new homes in relation to the application before them. The access from Coombe Farm is considered too steep. It is not known what standards were used in the past to measure the gradient. There are no yellow lines on the private road (Coombe Meadow).”

“Councillor Thomson was informed that the access would be from the existing road. The Principal Transport Development Officer stated that the gradient from Westfield Rise and Coombe Meadow was achievable for emergency services. Pavement parking is an issue; however, it has not prevented the refuse truck from getting access to the homes. It was noted that a fire truck was 2.6m wide.”

Minutes

Earlier development nearby

Most of the 72 homes permitted at Coombe Farm had been built, with one home removed to allow access to the proposed homes.

“Councillor Fishleigh considered that 71 of the 72 homes granted permission on Coombe Farm have been built. One home was removed to allow access to the nine new homes applied for here.”

Minutes

Highway and access advice

Highway officers had no objection and considered that safe, accessible access and street design could be achieved through conditions.

“Councillor Robinson was informed that as a minor application there had been no general scoping provided. It was noted that in the report at 7.3, Transport raised no objection and considered in terms of access, a safe and accessible design was achievable.”

Minutes

Residents’ concerns

A resident described restricted emergency and refuse access, vehicle congestion, pavement parking and a preference for access from Coombe Farm.

“Callie Lister addressed the committee as a resident and stated that they lived on Coombe Meadow. There has been a noticeable uplift in vehicles in Westfield Rise leading to Coombe Meadow, which limits access for emergency and refuse vehicles. Coombe Meadow is 4.8m wide, however, with parking this is reduced to 2.75m and 3.5m lower down the road. The road is full of vehicles at night, with pavement parking being usual.”

Minutes

People who spoke

A resident opposed the access arrangements, while the agent supported nine family homes and said a legal agreement would be provided.

Committee debate

Members disagreed about access, road impacts, information, openness and effects on the nearby national park, while others found no reason to refuse.

“Councillor Theobald considered the meadow to nice and open, and there would be an impact on the South Downs National Park from light pollution etc. The information on access was not good enough and no fire engines would be able to get up there. The councillor was against the application. The planning manager noted the application was not in the South Downs National Park and there was a 5m buffer zone to the rear of the proposals.”

“Councillor Sheard expressed concerns that the committee were considering the access road but not the route to it. The councillor supported the application as they saw no reason to refuse it. It was noted that a sweep analysis was not required as the access road was straight.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

The committee voted 5 to 4, with one abstention, and was minded to grant permission subject to a legal agreement, conditions and informatives.

“A vote was held and by 5 to 4, with 1 abstention, the committee agreed to grant planning permission.”

“RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to be MINDED TO GRANT planning permission subject to a S106 agreement on the Heads of Terms set out in the report and the Conditions and Informatives as set out in the report, SAVE THAT should the S106 Planning Obligation not be completed or significantly advanced, on or before the 25 November 2026 the Head of Planning is hereby…”

Minutes