Councillors reconfirm proposals for long-awaited housing development in East Sussex village
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
On Thursday (December 5), Wealden District Council’s Planning Committee North reconsidered outline proposals to build up to 40 homes at the Coopers Row site in Five Ash Down.
A previous committee had resolved to approve the scheme in 2022, but planning permission had not been formally granted due to an unresolved section 106 legal agreement.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIn a report to the committee, officers said the processing of this legal agreement had become “intractable”, with long periods between comment and action by the developer. In light of this, officers had asked councillors to redetermine the scheme and in doing so add a new time limit intended to bring the process to its conclusion.


As the meeting began, however, councillors were informed that the developer, Linkwise Properties Limited, had now signed a version of the legal agreement.
The developer’s agent, Chris Wojtulewski of Parker Dann. Mr Wojtulewski said: “The delays to the completion of the legal agreement for this application have been very unfortunate and included matters that have been outside of the applicant’s control.
“These matters are all now resolved and the engrossment version of the legal agreement was issued on the 14th October and as you have heard today this has been completed by the applicant and is now with the council’s solicitors.”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdMr Wojtulewski also said the applicant intended to submit a reserved matters application early next year.
Despite being signed, the committee heard how this version of the legal agreement was unlikely to be the document’s final form, as the council intended to add new conditions to the scheme. These included a Grampian-style condition — which restricts occupation prior to its resolution — on drainage.
This uncertainty sat uneasily with Cllr Gavin Blake-Coggins (Lib Dem), who said: “It has taken so long to get to this apparent signing of a document which we don’t have access to. It is only a telephone call saying we’ve got it.
“I’m suggesting that we defer this until such a time when the application is complete. A new application would be favourable, whereby you can then add conditions … to make this a bonafide application.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“This, in my view, is not a bonafide application, you are trimming things off, adding little bits to make it look pretty. That is not the reason why we are here.
“We have to make firm decisions based on evidence and we do not have evidence, therefore we can’t make a decision on this. It needs kicking away and then a new application coming forward.”
This view was not shared by other committee members, however, who pointed to the time limit as a way to ensure certainty.
Cllr Andrew Wilson (Ind), who went on to second a motion to approve the scheme, said: “The fact is that if we grant planning permission today with the various changes that [head of planning Stacey] Robins has outlined, it will then be in the applicant’s court and he will have a time limit.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“If he does not meet that limit, the application falls away and you get your fresh application, if they want to do it.
“There is no more time. If the s106 is not signed by the 19th of December that is in effect a refusal of planning permission.”
Ultimately, the committee resolved to approve the scheme for a second time, with the additional time limit requested by officers.
For further information see application reference WD/2021/1895/MAO on the Wealden District Council website.
Comment Guidelines
National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.