Fairlight housing development refused

Outline proposals for a housing development in Fairlight have been refused by Rother planners. 
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

On Thursday (March 11), Rother District Council planning committee turned down an outline application to build up to 43 dwellings on at the edge of Fairlight Cove, to the south of Pett Level Road.

The development was refused despite being recommend for approval and being named within the council’s Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Committee members, however, felt it departed too far from what had initially been proposed in the DaSA, due to the increase in the number of houses proposed and the loss of a serviced plot for a GP surgery. 

The surgery had been one of the site objectives listed within the DaSA, as had a pedestrian footway between the site and the rest of the village, which was also not present in the application. 

During the meeting developers said this plot for a doctors’ surgery had been dropped as the East Sussex Clinical Commissioning Group said it would not be needed during consultation.

The committee also heard the pedestrian link would require use of third party land.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Moving refusal, Cllr Andrew Mier said: “The scheme appears to me defective. It departs from the DASA, it exceeds the number provided for without providing good reason. 

“Yes, we need to make good use of land but we also have to acknowledge the transition into the open county. The amenity land as provided in that plan has not been provided and the developers have eaten into that with their road.

“It prematurely rejects the land for the doctors’ surgery. It fails to meet the inspector’s wish that the site could be linked to the rest of the village, we know that would involve third party land.

“I know  that in itself would not be a reason for rejection. But if you weigh that in the balance – and planning is always a balance – then it tips the balance towards refusal.”

Following further discussion the application was unanimously refused. For further details see application reference RR/2020/151/P on the Rother District Council website.