In the heart of England, a fierce debate is unfolding over how—and where—to house the nation’s growing population, including those most in need. Over the past week, three high-profile cases have underscored the complexity of balancing community concerns, planning laws, and the urgent demand for homes, especially for homeless families and asylum seekers.
On October 16, 2025, the Mid Sussex District Council’s planning committee delivered a decisive blow to one of the region’s most ambitious housing proposals. By a vote of eight to four, the committee rejected plans to build up to 1,450 homes on farmland east of Ansty Way, between the villages of Ansty and Cuckfield. The scheme, first submitted in November 2023 by developer Fairfax, was billed as a “garden community” and would have included 90 residential care units, a primary school, a special needs school, a health hub, allotments, retail and community spaces, employment land, and sports facilities such as all-weather hockey pitches and a tennis center. Of the proposed homes, 435 were designated as affordable housing.
The council’s decision came after an outpouring of local opposition—490 letters objected to the development, citing its impact on the countryside and the site’s location. Simon Stokes, chair of Ansty & Staplefield Parish Council, welcomed the outcome, saying, “This is absolutely the right outcome. The council has properly applied the basic planning principle that new development must be sustainably located and plan based. The council has already identified other, more sustainable, locations to meet its need for new homes.”
Interestingly, council officers had actually recommended the application for approval, but the committee ultimately sided with residents’ concerns. Paul Steedman, director of the countryside charity CPRE Sussex, was blunt in his assessment: “Dropping thousands of new residents into the middle of the countryside, away from infrastructure and public transport links, is not good planning. It just creates development sprawl, while harming the natural landscape and failing to deliver enough affordable housing.”
Fairfax, the developer behind the proposal, expressed disappointment with the decision. “We are disappointed that the committee chose not to follow their officer’s professional recommendation, and we are now considering our options,” a spokesperson said. The outcome highlights the tension between the need for more homes and the desire to protect rural landscapes—a debate that seems unlikely to abate anytime soon.
Meanwhile, as traditional housing projects face hurdles, alternative solutions are gaining traction. Modular building specialist Portakabin is finalizing major deals to deliver bespoke temporary homes for people facing homelessness across England. The company, best known for its portable classrooms and site offices, is now in advanced talks with 11 councils, eight housing associations, and several charities. The timing couldn’t be more urgent: England is grappling with record levels of homelessness, with more than 326,000 people—including 169,000 children—now living in temporary accommodation. That figure represents a staggering 12% increase in just one year, and in London, one in every fifty residents is affected.
Councils are struggling to cope, spending billions on emergency accommodation in hotels, hostels, and B&Bs—often far from families’ original homes. Dan Ibbetson, Portakabin’s chief executive, told The Times, “The numbers just keep climbing and it’s alarming. Our solution is a stepping stone—significantly cheaper and a much better social outcome than current hostels.” Portakabin estimates its modular homes could halve the £2.8 billion currently spent on emergency accommodation in England between April 2024 and March 2025.
Each prefabricated home can be built in as little as three days at Portakabin’s York factory. The homes will include private bathrooms and kitchens, with layouts ranging from one to three bedrooms. Councils plan to place these units on disused brownfield land, renting them at around £14 per person per night—a stark contrast to the £90 often paid for hotel rooms. Talks are ongoing with several authorities, including Croydon, where over 3,500 households are in temporary accommodation. A Croydon council spokesperson confirmed, “We are exploring modular options,” though no decisions have yet been made.
Portakabin is also open to supplying units for asylum accommodation, although both the company and the Home Office have downplayed any formal discussions on this front. The modular approach, if widely adopted, could mark a significant shift in how England tackles homelessness—potentially freeing up funds for long-term solutions and helping families stay closer to their communities.
But the conversation around emergency housing is not limited to innovative construction methods. In Epping, Essex, a legal battle is raging over the use of the Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers. Earlier this year, a High Court judge granted Epping Forest District Council a temporary injunction that would have stopped 138 asylum seekers from being housed at the hotel beyond September 12. However, in August, the Court of Appeal overturned the injunction, calling the original decision “seriously flawed in principle.”
The council is now seeking a permanent injunction, opposed by both Somani Hotels (the hotel’s owner) and the Home Office. The Bell Hotel has become a flashpoint for community tensions, attracting protests and counter-protests—especially after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl in July. Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, an Ethiopian national who had arrived in the UK only days before the incident, was jailed for 12 months in September. Another resident, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, was jailed for 16 weeks after admitting to assaulting two fellow residents and two staff members. Several others have faced charges related to demonstrations outside the hotel.
In written submissions to the court, Philip Coppel KC, representing the council, said, “A person wanting to stay in Epping cannot book a room there. A person cannot even visit there. The Bell became the focal point of several protests and counter-protests in the summer.” He argued that the hotel’s use for asylum accommodation constituted a “material change” with a “significant adverse impact” on the local community, including the need for security fencing and strain on local services.
Somani Hotels, for its part, insists there has been “no breach” of planning laws. Barrister Jenny Wigley KC contended that the hotel was repurposed during the pandemic, and that security fencing was “a response to hostile protests” that began in July 2025 following an arrest. She added, “Other than an assertion by council officers, there has not been any determination that the use of the hotel for the accommodation of asylum seekers constitutes a material change of use in breach of planning control. The council’s assertion is a matter that is firmly disputed by Somani and the Secretary of State for the Home Department.” The hearing before Mr Justice Mould is set to conclude on October 17, 2025.
These three cases—rural resistance to major housing development, the rise of modular solutions for homelessness, and the legal wrangling over asylum accommodation—capture the dilemmas facing England as it seeks to house its people fairly and sustainably. The answers, it seems, remain as contested as ever.
