Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options

As a Committee, we have a responsibility to all those with a frontage (frontagers) onto Maple Walk (South). Similar committees represent the interests of the residents of other unadopted roads in the vicinity of the proposed development of BX116.

Under the terms of the original development of the De La Warr Estate, frontagers are required to pay an annual sum towards the upkeep of the road. They are also required to keep the frontages properly maintained and litter-free. The proposed development of BX116 seems to have been put forward without any regard to the special and historically significant nature of Maple Walk and the other private roads on the De La Warr Estate, nor of the impact upon the current and future residents.

We write in more detail in respect of question 35. However, we should state - in the strongest terms - our wholehearted objection to the inclusion of BX116 amongst the possible sites for new housing development. Previous development in this area has of course been the subject of allegations by the former MP for the area, Mr Charles Wardle, of improper influence on the planning process (https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmhansrd/vo010509/debtext/10509-40.htm). It is arguable that those developments should not have gone ahead. To add to them with BX116 would be wholly unacceptable to the residents whose interests we represent.

As a Committee, we have a responsibility to all those with a frontage (frontagers) onto Maple Walk (South). Similar committees represent the interests of the residents of other unadopted roads in the vicinity of the proposed development of BX116.

Under the terms of the original development of the De La Warr Estate, frontagers are required to pay an annual sum towards the upkeep of the road. They are also required to keep the frontages properly maintained and litter-free. The proposed development of BX116 seems to have been put forward without any regard to the special and historically significant nature of Maple Walk and the other private roads on the De La Warr Estate, nor of the impact upon the current and future residents. The additional traffic (and the damage to the road it will cause) represents a totally unacceptable burden upon the frontagers. They would face a considerable and enduring additional annual expense, plus a loss of amenity. There is no pavement on Maple Walk, and additional traffic (both during construction and thereafter) also represents a risk to pedestrian safety.

We are thus fundamentally opposed to the development of BX116. It is our view that no development of the site should go ahead.

Were some development to proceed notwithstanding our opposition, then given our responsibilities we should comment simply upon paragraph (ii) of policy BEX9.

Given the impact upon the unadopted roads (and upon Meads Road - which is narrow and not well maintained), in our considered judgement both the vehicle and pedestrian entrances should be onto Barnhorn Road, and there should be no entry into or out of Spindlewood Drive. Barnhorn Road is a trunk road and, although badly congested at peak times - a strong reason for opposing all the suggested ribbon development adjacent or close to the A259 - it is maintained at public expense to take a much higher traffic flow. (Closing the link between BX116 and Spindlewood Drive would be necessary to prevent its use as a rat-run to and from the A259 to avoid the Little Common roundabout.)