40-home development at Church Road, Turners Hill
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Mid Sussex Planning Committee on 12 Feb 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed demolishing existing buildings and building 40 homes, with affordable housing, open space, parking, drainage, landscaping and a community car park.
“Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings and the development of 40 dwellings (including affordable housing) with open space, access, parking, drainage, landscaping and other associated works as well as the creation of a new community car park and replacement parking for Lion Lane residents.”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The site is a field and workshop area beside Church Road, near the primary school, Lion Lane homes, the fire station, woodland and heritage assets.
“Traffic congestion and impact on highway safety at crossroads and particularly during peak hours. • Disappointing that the pedestrian footpath along the eastern boundary to improve access to the school has not been included, albeit safety concerns from the local fire station were noted.”
“The Conservation Area lies across the southern part of the site around The Old Vicarage and 120 and 121 Church Road and to the eastern side of the Allotment Gardens at the rear of the Fire Station. There are listed buildings adjoining the application site boundary in the southern eastern corner (The Bank).”
Officer report
Planning history and allocation
There was no relevant planning history, while the neighbourhood plan allocated the site for housing and a village car park.
“For the purposes of planning policy the site is located within the built up area boundary as defined in the District Plan and is allocated for housing development within the Neighbourhood Plan.”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended permission because housing, affordable homes and economic benefits outweighed heritage harm and other adverse impacts, subject to legal obligations and conditions.
“In terms of affordable housing this is positive in the balance given that the proposal will provide 30% provision to be clustered in an appropriate manner about the site. There will be a 75/25% tenure split in favour of affordable rent and the remainder in favour of intermediate homes. The affordable housing provision can be secured through the completion of a S106 Legal Agreement.”
“Recommendation 3.1 Recommendation A 3.2 It is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Legal Agreement to secure infrastructure contributions, SAMM and SANG contributions and affordable housing, and the conditions set in Appendix A.”
Officer report
Consultation responses
consultees raised no objections on highways, drainage, contamination, noise, biodiversity, minerals, utilities or air quality, subject to conditions and contributions.
“Summary of Consultees MSDC Environmental Health Recommends conditions. The location appears to be low risk with regard to noise and existing air quality. The conclusions of the submitted noise report are accepted. Construction activities could adversely affect the amenity of existing residents or those of completed sections/phases. MSDC Contaminated Land Officer No objection subject to condition(s).”
“WSCC Rights of Way No objection in principle and recommends an informative to remind the applicant of PROW regulations. WSCC FRS Water and Access No objection subject to conditions. WSCC Minerals & Waste Planning Authority No objection subject to the LPA being satisfied that there is an overriding need for the development that outweighs the safeguarding of the mineral resource, and that it has been demonstrated that prior extraction is not practicable or environmentally…”
Officer report
Who spoke
The senior planning officer introduced the application and drew attention to an update sheet and two additional representations.
The committee vote
The recommendation was proposed and seconded, then approved by 10 votes to 1.
“The Chairman took Members to a vote on the recommendation, which was proposed by Councillor Marsh and seconded by Councillor Hitchcock. This was agreed with 10 in favour and 1 against.”
Minutes
The decision
Planning permission was approved subject to the conditions listed in Appendix A.
“Planning permission was approved subject to the conditions outlined at Appendix A.”
Minutes
Sources
- Mid Sussex Planning Committee minutes, 12 February 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Mid Sussex's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Mid Sussex Planning Committee
- Council
- Mid Sussex
- Date
- Thursday 12 February 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Mid Sussex committee decisions →
This committee's year
15 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 2 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.