What is Village Concerns
Village Concerns is an Action Group campaigning to protect the character and ambience of the Parish of East Hoathly with Halland in East Sussex. It endeavours to ensure that development in the Parish is sustainable. It aims to monitor housing proposals and galvanise the community to either endorse beneficial developments or challenge those that are unsustainable.
Village Concerns was established in 2016 when a developer submitted a proposal to build 205 homes in the parish on greenfield land which would increase the number of homes in the village of East Hoathly by 63 %. This was followed by other developers putting forward proposals for an additional 200 homes in East Hoathly and 90 elsewhere in the Parish.
This follows on from a development in 2009 where 75 homes were built in East Hoathly increasing the size of the community by 25 %.
What Can I Do ?
If you would like to do something about this then become a supporter of Village Concerns. Join our mailing list by contacting us with your email address. We will then send you Updates on current planning applications and give advice on how to object. Go to the Contact page or email: email@example.com
Our latest Update email is always shown at the bottom of this home page and a library of all previous Updates is located in the Reference Library.
Who Runs Village Concerns
Village Concerns is run by a Steering Group elected at an Annual General Meeting. The Steering Group maintains an email list of supporters. The meetings take place at The Kings Head pub (virtually during Covid Restrictions) and the current members of the Steering Group are:
Tania Freezer Joint Chair
Katherine Gutkind Joint Chair
Gill Kennedy Treasurer
Village Concerns Update 108
Good news, for once. Halland’s Bramblebank’s development has been refused by
Wealden. Below, their two main reasons for this refusal.
“REFUSES TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION for the said proposals, for the reasons stated below:-
1. The site lies within open countryside situated on the periphery of Halland, located to the rear of the exisPng linear development fronPng the B2192. Loss of this greenfield site for development of up to 30 dwellings constitutes overdevelopment of the site. Development in this location would not respect the landscape character, the grain of the existing settlement and character of the existing built form. The development would amount to an unacceptable backland or 'tandem' form of development within open countryside. The principle of residential development would therefore not be acceptable having regard to local planning policy as it would be contrary to policies GD2, DC17, EN2 and EN27 of the Wealden Local Plan 1998 and Policy WCS6 of the Wealden District Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) (CS). These, taken together and amongst other objectives, preclude development within open countryside, set a classification of settlements suitable for additional housing and seek development that respects the character of the area and maintains existing settlement pattern. The development would also be contrary to the guidance set out in Paragraphs 8 and 127 of the NaPonal Planning Policy Framework 2019 which seek to ensure that development protects and enhances the natural and built environment.
2. The proposal is unsustainable development delivering up to 30 dwellings in an unclassified settlement with no significant rural services that the occupants could rely on or contribute to and with no desirable alternatives to the private car leading to the need for private vehicle trips to access services and employment likely to be in the urban centres of Hailsham and Uckfield. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies EN1 and EN2 of the adopted Wealden Local Plan 1998; and SPO7 and Policy WCS14 of the adopted Wealden District Council (incorporating part of the South Downs NaPonal Park) Joint Core Strategy Local Plan 2013 and paragraphs 8, 11 and 103 of the NaPonal Planning Policy Framework 2019).”
Circle of Oaks, South Street Planning Application. New documents submitted.
We are able to object / comment, again, and that deadline is: January 26th Planning Application No: WD/2018/2741/MAO
Attached the new / amended documents.
Suggested points to make:
My previous objections still stand.
Both the green and wildlife corridors will sPll be affected by this new development.
The application proposes to build in the Green Gap on South Street damaging the character of the village and destroying an important wildlife corridor connecting the ancient woodland of Moat Wood with open countryside. If the land is developed it would close this corridor and isolate this wildlife. This is important because the wildlife in Moat Wood and its surrounding areas is enclosed to the East by the significant barrier of the A22. The Green Gap on South Street is the only connection that wildlife has to the open countryside to the East.
3. The trees by the back of Trug Close and the last few homes on South Street before the development, show removal. We disagree with this unnecessary action. Keep them and work around them. Planning Application Map, attached.
4. The Circle of Oaks cannot be seen - well - from the street anymore. This is a disappointment. In the Planning Application’s LVA Report on page 18 it states that “The landscape character of the site and its local landscape is not considered to have a high scenic quality”. Both of these statements are wrong and offensive. The site is highly valued in this community. This is a perfect example of how a developer has no connection to the community. The LVA report doesn’t even manage to make mention of the TPO on the Circle of Oaks.
5. Drainage. There are serious issues regarding surface water drainage. Before any development takes place this should be fully investigated including over winter drainage reports. We aXach photos of water not draining well at the corner of Juziers, Trug Close and the potenPal new development. Feel free to add them to your own submission. Attached the most recent WDC letter re drainage.
6. Sewage. We know the issues re the main drain in the Village. The SWMP Report correctly identifies that a mains service pipe crosses the site. This is the sewer pipe for the entire village. Relocating this pipe would have serious implications for the village and the disruption and proposed new route should be the matter of a detailed report.
7. This application is contrary to Wealden’s policies past and emerging. The housing it proposes is neither wanted nor needed in this community. The site is outside the Development Boundary and is unsustainable. There are no school places, no local job vacancies and new residents would be totally car dependent creating unbearable traffic within the Village and add more to the already stressed A22.
As with previous planning applications, there are a few ways to submit. Here they are:
1. Commenting by email to: firstname.lastname@example.org by January 26th, 2021, citing the Planning Application Number, WD/2018/2741/MAO
Include your name and address.
2. Or go to the link: hXps://planning.wealden.gov.uk/plandisp.aspx?recno=144712
and follow the “Comment on this Application” link.
Include your name and address.
3. Or via post, quoting the application number WD/2018/2741/MAO, and include your name and address to:
Mr M Taylor, Planning Wealden District Council Council Offices,
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham,
Anyone in your household over 18 can send in a separate objection. The more the better.
And finally, you may be aware of the following: WD/2020/2660/PO Statements-Reports_2030 Discharge of Obligation v1.0 with Appendices.
This is to do with Hesmond's Stud. We are studying the documents and will get back to you as soon as possible.
You are in receipt of this email because you have previously requested to be part of Village Concerns email list. If you no longer wish to receive these emails please let us know.