SPC logo


MEMBERS PRESENT: Councillor Vine-Hall (Chairman), Cllrs Glew, Mitchell, Reynolds, Cllr Wright (Chairman of the Council)

Clerk/Responsible Financial Officer: Mrs P Raymond


Also in attendance: two members of the public.


P11/12.68 Apologies and reasons for absence. Cllr Rand (working)

Disclosures of personal and prejudicial interests from Councillors on matters to be considered at the meeting in accordance with the adopted Code of Conduct 2007. None.

P11/12.70 Public participation session. None.
P11/12.71 Minutes. RESOLVED: That the Chairman of the Committee is authorised to sign the Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 30/08/11.

Sedlescombe Parish Council Planning Policy. Members were reminded of the Parish Council's Planning Code of Good Practice which includes members arranging inspection of planning application sites through the Agents. Some of the planning application forms now include an opportunity for the applicant to specify who inspections should be arranged through.

Members agreed that no changes need to be made to the "Planning in Sedlescombe" forms that accompany applications and that the questions were helpful in guiding them to a decision.

P11/12.73 Planning Applications

RR/2011/1784/P and RR/2011/1785/L Beech Farm, Hawkhurst Road, Sedlescombe TN33 0QS. Replace extant planning permission RR/2008/2531/P for alterations and additions including replacement conservatory, replacement windows/dormers and extension to ground and first floors, erection of new access gates and wall/fence.

Cllr Mitchell reported on these applications. RESOLVED: That the Parish Council supports approval.

73.2 RR/2011/1715/P Eastlands, Sandrock Hill, Sedlescombe TN33 0QR. Variation of condition imposed on RR/2009/2908/P re alteration to windows. Cllr Reynolds reported on his inspection. RESOLVED: That the Parish Council supports approval.
73.3 RR/2011/1827/P The Haven, Sandrock Hill, Sedlescombe TN33 0QR. Removal of existing garage and erection of traditional replacement pitch roof building incorporating single garage and storage and garden room. Cllr Wright reported on her inspection. RESOLVED: That the Parish Council supports approval.
73.4 RR/2011/1845/P Marley Lane Business Park, Marley Lane, Sedlescombe. Specialist coachwork workshop in association with vintage cars. Cllr Vine-Hall reported on his inspection. RESOLVED: That the Parish Council supports approval.
73.5 RR/2011/1823/P Barnes Farm - The Dairy, Poppinghole Lane, Sedlescombe. Proposed conversion of redundant dairy building to 4 bedroom dwelling with associated parking. Cllr Vine-Hall reported on his inspection. RESOLVED: That the Parish Council supports approval.
P11/12.74 Bulmer Lodge, The Green, Sedlescombe. Installation of three solar panels in roof. Awaiting Enforcement Officer's reply.
P11/12.75 LWA Bodyshop. The Clerk reported that, despite a stop notice being issued, it had been noted that the paint spray building was running on 08/09/11. According to District Cllr Ganly, the Environmental Health Officer, Steve Mills, has been asked to attend and take further noise levels after alterations have been made.
P11/12.76 Pestalozzi International Village Temporary Events. The Clerk reported that following the report to the last Planning Committee meeting, a report on a recent meeting about temporary events had been made to the full Council on 06/09/11. In addition, the Clerk reported on the open meeting held on 19/09/11 for local people to meet Sue Walton (Chief Executive, Pestalozzi). The meeting had welcomed the restriction of temporary events under permitted development rights next year to four. Noise from various sources remained a concern for neighbours. A telephone contact number at Pestalozzi will be available. A list of temporary events for 2012, which will include all events including those that do not count towards the 28-days permitted development allowance, will be provided for the Parish Council and Rother DC.
P11/12.77 Budget Car Company. The Clerk reported that, despite ongoing unauthorised parking of cars for sale both on the highway and on land next to the car lot, Rother District Council had not yet prepared the relevant cases for prosecution. Enforcement action is proposed by Rother DC following erection of the small shed on the car lot.
P11/12.78 Rother District Core Strategy
78.1 Draft Rural Settlements Study. Rother DC had not been able to update the Rural Settlements Study but information provided by parishes will be used when the Site Allocations Policy is considered.

Comments on the Strategy. RESOLVED: That the following comments are made:

Policy HF1(iii) Hastings fringes. It is not justified to exclude the gap between Hastings fringes and Sedlescombe from this policy. Sedlescombe Village settlement is situated just to the east of the A21 and 3 miles from Rother's boundary with Hastings. Sedlescombe's separate identity and local distinctive character ought to be protected by retaining the countryside gap. The countryside area between Hastings and Sedlescombe includes Beauport Park (in the parish of Westfield) which is an important historic Roman site.


Policy HF1(iv) Hastings fringes. The inclusion of bus improvements into the policy to improve access to the A21 at Baldslow would be neither effective nor justified as bus improvements would not improve access to the A21.


Policy HF1(vi) Hastings fringes. The need to build up to an additional 80 dwellings on the Hastings fringes has not been fully justified because there is a lack of available development land in the Rother District on the Hastings fringes.


Policy RA4(i)(c) Rural Areas. It is not justified to support the conversion of historic farm buildings for affordable housing at the same time as including Policy RA1(vi) which speaks about new development being sited in close proximity to key facilities and in locations accessible via a range of transport options. Farm buildings are usually remote from key facilities and public transport.


Policy CO3(v) Communities. Whilst increasing access to the countryside by promoting improvements to the rights of way network is supported, it is not justified to include the words "especially around urban areas, particularly in reference to Pebsham Countryside Park". To be consistent, all rights of way should be afforded the same protection otherwise some paths receive considerably more attention to the detriment of more rural paths.


Policy CO4(i) Communities. It is not justified to speak about providing various housing options suited to the needs of young people, especially in Bexhill and the rural areas whilst missing out Battle and Rye. Why not just omit the words "especially in Bexhill and the rural areas"?


Policy CO4(v) Communities. It is not justified to omit employment as one of the key services.


Policy LHN1(i) Local Housing Need. The inclusion of this policy cannot be justified because the current and projected housing needs of Sedlescombe parish are unknown as the figures are so outdated having been gathered in 2001, ie 10 years ago.


Policy LHN1(ii) Local Housing Need. The proposal to include at least 30% one and two bedroom dwellings is not justified as The Affordable Housing background papers states that the majority of affordable housing stock in the district already comprises of small dwellings. More larger family homes, its suggests, are needed.


Policy LHN1(vi) Local Housing Need. The term "where practical" is unclear and its use is therefore not justified.


Policy LHN2(iv)(a) Local Housing Need. The inclusion of this policy has not been justified. The Affordable Housing Background Paper mentions that affordable housing should be provided in rural areas where there is "a demonstrable need" and not in accordance with a a blanket percentage figure of houses to be provided. Villages which already have a greater percentage of affordable housing than the average of the District should not required to add further to that stock. With the latest Housing Needs Survey being undertaken in this parish ten years ago, how likely is it that up-to-date information regarding "the local need for affordable housing" will be available when a housing development is being proposed?


The requirement for affordable housing included in a development of houses to be indistinguishable from marketed properties is not justified and, if considered with Policy LHN1(ii) for properties in rural areas to be one or two bedroom dwellings, all properties in the rural areas will, in the future, be small.


Policy LHN2(iv)(b) Local Housing Need. Robust justification for seeking developer contributions in lieu of onsite provision of affordable housing on the scale proposed, as stated in PPS3, has not been provided.


Policy EC7 Economy. Although village shops are mentioned in Chapter 12 (chapter number error in document), the omission of farm shops, garden centres etc which are part of the rural economy, has not been justified.


Policy TR2(iii) Transport. To be effective, the location of the proposed cycle network needs to be specified as the existing bridleway network is insufficient and all roads in the District are narrow and unsuitable for installation of cycleways.

P11/12.79 Draft National Planning Policy. DEFERRED to next meeting to be held on 11/10/11.
P11/12.80 Appeals. None.
P11/12.81 Results. None.

Chairman........................................................ Date.....................................................