Littlehampton development of 77 homes approved

The former campsite before it closed
The former campsite before it closed

A development of 77 homes in Littlehampton will generate hundreds of thousands of pounds for school improvements.

Plans to build 59 houses and 18 flats on a caravan site south of Cornfield Close were approved by Arun District Council’s development control committee on Wednesday (April 10).

Proposed layout of the new development

Proposed layout of the new development

As part of the application, the developers will pay almost £900,000 of infrastructure contributions.

The plan is to use the education portion of the money – more than £600,000 – for expansion work at River Beach Primary School and The Littlehampton Academy, as well as fixtures, fittings and equipment for phase 2 of the new secondary school for Arun.

In addition, there will be more than £80,000 for a minor injuries unit at Park Surgery, almost £26,000 for expansion work at Littlehampton Library, and £2,500 for technical equipment for West Sussex Fire & Rescue.

The final £142,000 will pay for improvements to the football pitches at Southfields Road, and improvements and play equipment at Rosemead Park.

The development on the former Daisy Fields campsite, which was sold by the council in 2017, will include 23 affordable homes.

There were objections from Littlehampton Town Council, which said that changing the use of the site ran contrary to the Arun Local Plan, and pointed out that the site was not allocated for residential use in either the Local Plan or the Neighbourhood Plan.

There were also concerns about the lack of campsites in the area.

Planning officers argued that the site was within Littlehampton’s built-up area boundary, where the principle of residential redevelopment is considered acceptable.

They also said there were other caravan sites within 1.5km ‘which provide enhanced facilities’.

In a report to the committee, officers said: “The delivery of housing, including much-needed affordable housing, therefore weighs heavily in favour of the proposal and it cannot reasonably be resisted on the basis of a loss of tourism facilities.” 

The application received unanimous approval from the committee.