Guide to Objection to Owlsbury Development

Start your comment with a personal note about you – where you live and how this development will affect you personally. Then include some or all of the 10 points below as reasons for your objection. Do make them your own and adapt for your own personal use. Your own words do carry more weight. Then you can edit/copy and paste parts or all of the reasoning below into the Comment box.

1. Unsuitable Location for Housing

The proposal reflects land ownership rather than properly assessed District wide town planning. The proposed development on a greenfield site outside Uckfield’s defined settlement boundary conflicts with Policies GD2 and DC17 and national planning policies. While the District lacks a 5-year housing supply, meaning policy weight is reduced, the site’s location still fails key sustainability criteria, including accessibility and infrastructure capacity.

2. Unsustainable Population Growth

The estimated population of the proposal (4,000) combined with the existing commitments at Ridgewood and potential draft Local Plan allocations would increase the population of Uckfield between 2021 and 2040 from 15,200 to some 27,000 people (78% increase). This represents an unsustainable increase in population. Such rapid growth poses severe challenges to local infrastructure, services, and the rural environment.

3. Permanent Harm to Countryside and Landscape

The scheme would convert rural land west of the A22 into suburban housing, substantially harming Uckfield’s established pattern and rural hinterland and intruding visually on the landscape. Ancient woodlands, hedgerows, historic landscape, watercourses and the Low Weald Character Area would suffer substantial harm.

4. Irrevocable Harm to Ancient Woodland

The scheme would harm sensitive and irreplaceable ancient woodlands through light, noise, predation and pollution. National policy only permits such harm under exceptional circumstances, which this development does not represent.

5. Irreversable Harm to Biodiversity and Ecology

Sensitive habitats, including the River Uck and designated biodiversity opportunity areas, would be harmed. The site’s location within the Uck Valley Green Corridor and in close proximity to Ashdown Forest (SAC and SPA) would exacerbate environmental harm.

6. Permanent Loss of Agricultural and Carbon-Rich Land

The development would permanently destroy versatile Grade 3 farmland, undermining food security and national sustainability goals. This land also provides essential ecosystem services like carbon storage, wildlife habitat, and flood control.

7. Increased Traffic and Highway Impacts

Existing congestion on the A22 and A272 would worsen, especially at peak times. There are substantial highway capacity and access constraints to which no solution has been explored or found.

8. Inadequate Drainage and Sewerage System

Local sewage infrastructure is already under pressure, with frequent overflows. The proposed drainage plan risks contaminating nearby watercourses and sensitive woodland, while infrastructure upgrades remain uncertain.

9. Harm to Rural Context and Character

Wealden is a rural district lacking major infrastructure, unlike surrounding urban centres like Eastbourne, Tunbridge Wells and Brighton, which are well-connected. Uckfield has limited transport links and no Strategic Road Network access, making it unsuitable for large-scale development. Uckfield is distinct and separated from the satellite villages including Isfield.

10. Planning Balance Weighs Against Approval

While the development offers housing and modest economic benefits, these are far outweighed by substantial locational, environmental, heritage, and infrastructure harms. The proposal fails national and local planning policies and should be refused.