7th March 2021 - 2018 Planning Permission (30 houses with 40% Affordables) expires. 

24th February 2021 - Park Lane lodge a second Reserved Matters Application, which is identical to the one refused by the council the day before. Simultaneously, they say they will appeal the Council's decision, along with the threat of reclaiming their appeal costs from the council should they be successful.

RR/2021/409/P

23rd February 2021 - Rother District Council refuse the Reserved Matters Application by a vote of 13-1. Rother's planning officers supported it vigorously.  

6th October 2020 - Detailed Reserved Matters Application lodged, relating to the 2018 planning permission, which allows for 30 houses with 40% affordables. 

RR/2020/1822/P

14th February 2020 - We ask for access to the field in order to carry out an independent survey of the ecology, soil and piling. The response says more about Park Lane's attitude to the local community than perhaps the author of their email intended.

Our Email

Park Lane's Reply

8th January 2020 - Architect shows drawings to the public at the Burwash Internet Café

The Architects Presentation

Our Response

25th July 2019 - Appeal dismissed by planning inspector. His report said: “The three-storey buildings present a rather abrupt edge to the village and an architectural style, form and scale unsympathetic to the rural landscape character. The proposed dwellings would include large areas of glazing and details unrelated to the locality or the building traditions of the wider landscape. This would result in a hard, semi-urban appearance. Accordingly, the proposal would not enhance the architectural quality of the village or the High Weald."

The inspector also considered ‘the design had not been tested through any form of design review or any concerted effort to work up a design with the local community’.

Our Submission to the Inspector

The Full Inspector's Decision

1st March 2019 - Appeal lodged by Park Lane

March 2019 Appeal - Where all the documents can be found

APP/U1430/W/19/322824

22nd January 2019 - Application for 30 units WITHOUT affordable housing was refused unanimously by Rother District Council

26th November 2018 - The County Ecologist made a report on the Watercress Field site.

County Ecologist Report

28th June 2018 - Application was made for 30 units WITHOUT affordable housing

June 2018 Application - Where all the documents can be found

RR/2018/1787/P

High Weald AONB Objection Letter

Second High Weald Letter affirming same position to the amended plans

7th March 2018 - Section 106 was signed, including a condition of a footpath to join with the recreation ground/Ham Lane.

Section 106 Agreement

27th July 2017 - Consent was given subject to conditions and the satisfactory prior completion of Section 106 (Section 106 is a legal commitment to build and fulfil the requirements of the footpath).

15th March 2017 - Planning application made for 17 units with affordable housing

March 2017 Application - Where all the documents can be found

RR/2017/582/P

15th December 2011 - Outline planning permission granted with 40% affordable housing.

October 2011 - Application for outline planning permission for 17 houses with 40% affordable housing.

1st December 1986 - The Inspector gave his reasons for refusing the development. He noted that the East Sussex Structure Plan had superseded the County Development Plan relied on by Rother District Council. He also noted the failure of the local authority to provide adequate housing. The reasons for refusal were:
 

i)    The visual impact on part of the AONB, see Documents page 11 para 11.

ii)   The widening of the carriageway in Strand Meadow would be insufficient to overcome the problems of the [17] extra houses, see para 12, see Documents page 11.

iii)  The quality of the landscape, see para 15, see Documents page 12.

iv)  The setting of the village, see para 15, see Documents page 12.

v)   The AONB, see para 15, see Documents page 12.

vi)  The detrimental visual impact on the surrounding landscape, see para 15, see Documents page 12.

vii) The significant increase in traffic [generated would create] danger and inconvenience for the residents in the existing houses.

Inspector's Report - 1986

2nd and 3rd October 1986 - A public inquiry was held to determine the appeal

July 1986 - The decision was appealed

5th September 1985 - The Council refused the application on the following grounds:

i) The development was not in accordance with the County Structure Plan.

ii) There was an intention by the District Planning Authority that the land should remain the same.

iii) The development would be contrary to the approved policy in the 1981 Village policy.

iv) The site lay within a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the proposal would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area and contrary to the provisions of the County Structure plan.

v) Strand Meadow is of inadequate width to serve the proposed development.

2nd July 1985 - Mr R C Kirkham made an application to Rother District Council for planning permission for ‘residential development of 2 acres of land at Strand Meadow in Burwash’.