Normanhurst Plans for Holiday Lodges Dismissed
At a meeting on 7 September, the Planning Committee of Rother District Council refused outline permission for the development of a major holiday complex on the Normanhurst estate, north of Catsfield.
Sheep on the Normanhurst estate
Applicants Greystoke Land Limited were putting forward proposals to build up to 211 holiday lodges and 350 car parking spaces on this site. Their barrister, Anthony Crean KC, acknowledged unashamedly at the hearing that they had chosen it because of the beauty of the local landscape, which is encompassed within the Weald AONB [Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty], arguing that their designs would moderate any potential harm to it from the prospective development.
But while the Committee accepted that the proposals represented investment in the local economy and tourism sector, “which has policy support”, it concluded unanimously that their scale – akin to building a new village the size of Catsfield itself, which has an existing population of around 800 residents – “would create a prominent and incongruous intrusion into the rural setting, appearing as an intensive overdevelopment of the site and out of keeping with the surroundings”.
The Committee also expressed concern at the prospective intensification of traffic seeking access from the existing village.
The result is vindication of the efforts of a team of local residents who have campaigned against the proposals, led by naturalist and local tree warden Dr John Feltwell. But it is plain that they had the vast majority of locals on their side as well as a plethora of statutory bodies. Over 1,000 on-line comments were lodged on Rother’s planning website, almost all opposing the development – the largest application response which Rother has ever received.
“The environmental impact would have been substantial,” says Dr Feltwell, “especially the eight-metre high lodges on stilts, out of character in the AONB. Dark Skies policy would have been compromised.
“As tree warden, I emphasised the impact on the protected woodlands on site, the loss of bluebell woods, greenfield loss with the widening of the woodland tracks to 3.7m. I also emphasised to Rother that UK law is all about ‘conserve and enhance’, not ‘destroy, then enhance’.”
During the hearing, the Committee were told by Mr Crean that his clients would not appeal if the application was rejected. Campaigners are hoping that the result means that the company will have given up their development plans altogether – but they remain alert to what may happen next.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply