New affordable Rudgwick homes approved

Plans to demolish six bungalows in Rudgwick and replace them with six houses will be approved once issues with their design have been resolved.

Friday, 10th January 2020, 9:34 am
Updated Friday, 10th January 2020, 9:41 am

Members of Horsham District Council’s planning committee north had problems with the colour scheme submitted by housing association Saxon Weald for the new homes in Pathfield Close, when the scheme was discussed on Tuesday (January 7).

Toni Bradnum (Con, Nuthurst & Lower Beeding) said the red brick ground floor with grey weatherboard on the top floor was ‘very top-heavy, very dark and gloomy’.

Richard Landeryou (Con, Rudgwick) added: “This grey and red is totally not Rudgwick and I don’t see how they can possibly feel this fits in with the rest of Rudgwick.”

Plans to demolish six bungalows and replace them with six affordable houses in Pathfield Close, Rudgwick, have been approved

The new homes would all be classed as affordable housing – as were the bungalows.

Christian Mitchell (Con, Holbrook West) told the meeting this was not the first time Saxon Weald had submitted a design for affordable homes that had caused concern.

He said it was time the council ‘put our foot down’, adding: “The private sector wouldn’t build these houses because people mortgaging a property would not buy these properties.

“So why should those who can’t afford to buy a home live in a home like that? ”

It was a view shared by Rudgwick Parish Council.

Chairman David Buckley said: “We fail to understand why more traditional materials – hanging tile for instance – are overlooked in favour of something that will be unnecessarily incongruous on the Rudgwick street scene.”

There were suggestions that the application be deferred until the design could be looked at again.

Instead, it was agreed that Saxon Weald would consult with Mr Landeryou and the chair and vice-chair of the planning committee to come up with a suitable solution.

Members were assured that if this condition was not met it would not be discharged – meaning work could not begin on the new homes.