Dear Sirs

Suggested development within the
High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
NO5 - Land to the North West of Winchelsea Lane, Hastings, East Sussex

I am writing to urge the Hastings Borough Council and its councillors to reject the proposal that the above plot of land be added to the Borough's housing stock.

It is within the High Weald AONB and one of the top five issues for settlement in this area is the erosion of the AONB by extension of boundaries (High Weald development plan 2004 (updated 2008). With 15 councils within and surrounding the AONB, especial care must be taken to not encroach into this area unnecessarily.

There are several concerns about this proposal and the practicalities of building on this site.

1. The site itself is higher in the north and east and there would be a significant visual impact into and across the AONB for some distance in all directions.

2. The proposal means a change of use for the land from agricultural land to a housing estate and very careful thought must be given as to whether this change of use is in line with current guidance and is in fact sustainable use for the land.

3. Building on this site would definitely have a negative impact on the wildlife in the area, as well as the humans. The land is regularly ploughed and maintained but it is still full of wildlife. We do have bats in the area, foxes, badgers, a large magpie population as well as amphibians, and smaller mammals.

4. There are concerns that the already low water pressure in Winchelsea Lane would be further eroded by development on the said site.

5. Winchelsea Lane is proposed as the ingress and egress to and from the site. This narrow lane is constantly under pressure with traffic (including through traffic) and parking. Three new houses in the Lane - close to the proposed site entrance - have already added to the problem, with narrow frontages and more than three vehicles for the three houses.

If you look at the site as holding 36 homes, each of those homes (given the type of property likely to be built and the fact that it is on the edge of town) it doesn't stretch the imagination to propose that each home is likely to own 2 cars. At just 6 journeys per household each day (school run twice a day and to and from work) the number of journeys along Winchelsea Lane increases by around 15,500 per year or around 400 journeys per day. This is a very conservative estimate of the increased traffic involved as it doesn't take into account shopping trips or leisure activities.


In conclusion, there is little to be gained in increasing the housing stock using this area and a lot to be lost in terms of the nature of the area and erosion of the AONB. My fear is also that this would encourage more speculation on similar sites even throughout this beautiful valley. Please reject this proposal without a moments hesitation.

Yours faithfully



Linda Twort (Mrs)