Additional Comments on
Planning appeal
Ref APP/U1430/A/13/2207577
Wattle Hill Oast
Beacon Lane
Staplecross.
From
Mr and Mrs Lewis
Mr and Mrs Walker
Wattlehill
Beacon Lane
Staplecross
TN32 5QP
The comments are in same sequences as the appeal as much as possible.
1.0 Introduction
We submit that the Planning Inspector is simply not being given the full picture on which to base a fair and reasonable judgement.
For example there is nothing about the refused 2006 Planning appeal re the conversion of the pool house into a dwelling.
2.0 The appeal site and its surroundings.
Beacon Lane, was a very quite and is a very local, picturesque, narrow lane, with few passing places and “Not suitable for wide vehicles” signs. It is well used for dog walking, horse riding etc.
All the Wattle Hill Oast neighbours and Beacon Lane Residents enjoyed quiet amenities. Mr and Mrs Harley arrived in 2007.
No one living in the lane has supported this development. All the neighbours and the majority of the local residents are firmly opposed this commercial development.
None of those who have written the 3 letters of support are really local or will have had to suffer the effects of this current and planned commercial activity.
The Term Paper on Spatial Planning
Planning, that is process of ‘making a plan’, has been an important part of development of our areas. Planning is the application of conscious thought to the solution of problem or issue. Planning is said to be found at the very centre of the complex mess of technology, politics, culture and economics that create our whole society and its physical presence (Rydin, 2011). As RTPI (2011) defines it, ...
In 2013 Mr and Mrs Harley operated 8 bell tents for up to 6 people for 154 days with no planning permission and full use of the pool house facilities again with no planning permission. We, and other local residents have had our worst fears of the effect of this commercial activity on our Environment, our Amenities and Road Safety confirmed.
3.0 Planning History Wattle Hill Oast
Frankly the information given in the CLM appeal document is, in our opinion, often misleading and incomplete.
RR/77/1847 Erection of triple garage with housekeepers
accommodation over – Approved conditional in January 1978
Mr and Mrs Harley have advertised it in 2013 for hire as a 4 person holiday
let. This is, we understand, a breach of the above planning conditions.
RR/2004/289/P Proposed change of use of enclosed swimming pool and
garage building to dwelling – Refused in April 2004.
RR/2004/1977/P Change of use of enclosed swimming pool/garage
building with living accommodation to single dwelling house – Refused in October 2004. It went to Appeal.
Appeal 2006 ref APP/U1430/A/04/1169685 dismissed in January 2006.
We submit it is very relevant to note some of the Planning Inspector’s reasons as to why it was refused.
This refusal was for one house on the pool house site.
We feel strongly that this needs to be compared with all the unapproved commercial activity that has been and is taking place since the arrival of Mr and Mrs Harley.
Our amenities are now affected by: –
* Parking spaces for approx. 30 vehicles,
* Unauthorised full season bell tent camping with all its traffic and noise etc.
* Commercial use of the pool, gym, sauna and for ablutions etc. from Campers.
* personal training in the gym
* Light pollution etc.
RR/2008/270/P Erection of extension to pool house and internal alterations and conversion of garage – Approved conditional in May 2008.
The Business plan on Strategic Planning Paper Plan Process Business
The history of strategic planning begins in the military. According to Webster's New World Dictionary, strategy is 'the science of planning and directing large-scale military operations, of maneuvering forces into the most advantageous position prior to actual engagement with the enemy' (Guralnic, 1986). Although our understanding of strategy and applying strategic planning in management has been ...
The full picture has not been given here in that the application was, from memory, part retrospective in that the garage had been converted to a gym prior to the application.
The approval was conditional as follows: –
1 | The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
(CD1A) |
2 | The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match in materials, colour and texture those used in the existing building. Reason: To maintain the characteristics of the existing building in accordance with Policies GD1(iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan and Policies S1(f) & (j) and EN2 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011. (CD9G) |
3 | The extension and converted garage shall be used only for purposes incidental to the occupation and enjoyment of the dwelling as such, and not for any trade or business. Reason: In the interests of protecting the character of the area and the residential amenities of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy GD1 and HG8 of the Rother District Local Plan and Policy S1 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011. (CD8H) |
4 | REASONS FOR THE GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION The proposed extension is of an appropriate size, design and materials and will not adversely affect the character of the area or the amenities of adjoining properties and therefore complies with Policy S1(f) & (j) and EN2 of the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011 and Policy GD1(iv) & (v) and HG8 of the Rother District Local Plan. |
| |
We would highlight clause 3 as follows. This is not mentioned in the CLM appeal.
“The extension and converted garage shall be used only for purposes incidental to the occupation and enjoyment of the dwelling as such, and not for any trade or business.”
This has been totally ignored in that there has been the following activity: –
The Essay on Planning Function within the Different Levels of Management in Organizations
Management of a business involves the four general functions of making plans, organizing, exercising leadership, and fostering coordination. Planning constitutes the process of determining goals and objectives, identifying strategies and techniques, and accessing or allocating the necessary resources to support implementation. Plans integrate the competencies and resources of the organization ...
* Substantial commercially swimming lessons run for several years by Baby and Toddler Junior Swim which only ceased in Mar 2013. At its peak 26 sessions per week were being offered for between 6 to 8 children per session.
* Advertised on their own website and other commercial camping website http://www.wattlehilloast.co.uk/
Use of the pool house for the pool, gym, sauna, toilets/showers etc. for camping in 2012,2013 and now advertised for 2014
* Personalised Training, this was personally advertised by Mrs Harley and Lifestyle PT who still run a website featuring photos of the actual gym.
————————————————-
————————————————-
————————————————-
5 STAR TRAINING FACILITIES
Lifestyle PT personal trainer, Nathan, works from a state of the art, 5 star, private facility based in Staplecross. The training facility includes gym, sauna and 20 metre indoor swimming pool as well as male and female changing rooms with private showers.
There appeared to be recent activity, which was witnessed on 13/11/2013.
RR/2011/382/P Change of use of part of smallholding to seasonal campsite together with change of use of pool building and ancillary parts to use with campsite for general washing and ablutions – Refused in August 2011.
This was the Yurts application. The reference to a “smallholding” is, in our opinion, unrecognisable.
Perhaps Mr Polito failed to make the full facts available to those considering this application. Those making the decisions and recommendations e.g. Rother Planning, ESCC Highways, The Parish Council etc. were not informed about the massive swimming lesson activity plus the personal training also taking place.
RR/2011/1789/P Log and fodder store and shelter – Approved conditional
in October 2011.
This was a retrospective application.
RR/2012/558/P Revisions to extension permitted by RR/2008/270/P,
weatherboarding and external staircase to pool building –
The Term Paper on Bloomberg Essentials Online Training Program
Hello, and welcome to the equity session of the Bloomberg Essentials Online Training Program. My name is Rosie Genao, and the goal of this training session is to get you acclimated with our equity functionality so you can quickly and easily navigate through the tools that will be vital for your daily investment analysis. I will start with key news functions that will keep you up-to-speed with ...
Approved conditional in August 2012.
This again was retrospective and following a breach of a planning approval condition as follows: –
1) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match in materials, colour and texture those used in the existing building.
The extension was built of blocks and the whole building including the original part was clad in timber as opposed to matching brick.
RR/2012/390/P Use of pool house for swimming classes and personal gym training. Widen access. Improve Beacon Lane junction Submitted 17/02/2012– Withdrawn in January 2013.
This was another retrospective application with an admission by Mr Polito that approval clause 3 had been ignored. He states in his planning statement.
“The outbuilding has been used for private swimming lessons and gym training for the last four years and the applicant wishes to regularise the use.”
The swimming lessons were not private they were run and advertised by Baby Toddler and Junior Swim.
Mr Polito makes no mention of the fact that this application was withdrawn the day before it was due to be discussed at the Planning Committee and after the Officers, ESCC Highways and the Parish Council had recommended it for refusal.
In his withdrawal e-mail of 16/01/2013 there is no reference whatsoever to the withdrawal of the Personal Training which was an integral part of this application. This has carried on.
No mention was made either of the 2012 camping activities, which, we believe, exceeded the 28 days rule. Full use of the pool gym and pool house facilities were also advertised on their website and on camping websites.
Once again those being asked to make planning decisions on the Swimming Lessons/ Personal Training application were not given the full information. They were not told about the camping activity.
It is interesting to note there is a reference in Mr Polito’s withdrawal letter re
“having regard to local residents concerns over the extent of commercial use of the pool house”
Despite these fine words, we have all had to continue to suffer the commercial camping activity, 7 days a week, in the season and use of the pool house for camping clients in direct contravention of the planning approval clause 3 for the approval of the pool house extension.
The Essay on Manpower Planning And Forecasting Needs
1. Decide what positions you’ll have to fill through Manpower planning and forecasting. 2. Build a pool of candidates for these jobs by recruiting internal or external candidates. 3. Have candidates complete application forms and perhaps undergo an initial screening interview. 4. Use selection techniques like tests, background investigations and physical exams to identify viable candidates. 5. ...
Personal Training, which was in the withdrawn application, was not commented on and in fact still carries on and is currently being advertised on a website as mentioned earlier.
There is also a direct admission, once again of, what is by this time, is 5 years unauthorised commercial trading in Mr Polito’s letter
“losing a valuable local amenity which over the past 5 years has served the local community well”.
This confirms that there have been unapproved commercial activities carried on since 2008 when Mr and Mrs Harley clearly knew about the pool house extension approval conditions!
Traffic reviews.
The application was dated 17/2/2012 and only withdrawn on 17/1/2013.
A Traffic Advisor, Mr Rollings, was engaged.
His activities resulted in: –
* Traffic surveys/speed monitoring which had to be repeated because of equipment failures and presumably unsatisfactory and flawed results.
* An attempt to re route the entrance to Wattle Hill Oast.
* An attempt to justify a revised junction for Beacon Lane and the B2165.
* Demands that our Wattlehill/B2165 hedge be cut back.
All this activity paved the way for an East Sussex Highways traffic survey, which confirmed the ESCC position that the line of sight looking south on the B2165 from the junction with Beacon Lane is substandard.
In our opinion ESCC Highways quite rightly confirmed their recommendation for refusal.
It was evident from the focus put on the swimming lessons etc. that the vehicle movements in and out of Wattle Hill Oast were probably in excess of 400 per week. There were 26 sessions a week being offered as follows.
Baby and Toddler Swim Sessions
Wednesday 9.30 to 1.30 – 8 sessions with a maximum of 8 in each class
Friday 9.30 to 1.30 – 8 sessions with a maximum of 8 in each class
Junior swim
Monday 3.30 to 6.30 – 5 sessions with a maximum of 6 in each class
Wednesday 3.30 to 6.30 – 5 sessions with a maximum of 6 in each class
In any one week there were a maximum of 376 additional vehicular movements arising from the swimming lessons alone. In addition there is also be traffic generated by the personal training and spectators and staff.
The Essay on Drowning Pool House Babysitter
Drowning is the second leading cause of injury deaths of infants and children younger than 15 years old in the United States. I know many of you may have small children and relatives so this may be of some interest to you. A personal experience happened to me when I was around seven years old. I still can remember it like yesterday. This incident almost cost me my life, I was disobedient and it ...
We would hope that the Planning Inspector will reference this back to the 2006 appeal re the conversion of the pool house to a dwelling. The Inspector at that time was concerned about the effects of one family’s cars on the location.
Submissions in 2012 of revised plans for Camping prior to submission of the Safari Tent application in 2013.
It is now clear that after the refusal of the Yurts application RR/2011/382/P there were further e-mail communications from Mr Polito with Mr Corke of Rother Planning on 27/3/2012 about a possible future revised camping applications.
At this time there was already the application for Swimming Lessons and Personal Training ref RR/2012/390/P which was submitted on 17/2/2012.
Before Mr Corke’s reply on 21st May, Bell Tent camping was started on 4/5/2012 and ran for approx. 50 days, despite a claim that they were operating under the 28 day rule, with full use of the pool house facilities.
Found on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/WattleHillOast
Wattle Hill Oast
May 4, 2012
Exciting, tiring and wonderful day. 4 tents, 40 man hours and some happy to be here guests. Now excuse me while I have a dry sherry and little snooze x x
Found on Twitter on 16/8/2012 at 15.42.38 (since removed)
Dated on May 5th 2012
Safari Tent plan submitted by Mr Polito in his e-mail to Mr Corke on 27/3/2012.
A plan and Mr Corke’s response are shown in Appendix B of Mr Polito’s submission to the Planning Inspector.
Mr Corke’s response on the 21/5/2012 stated that he was giving “an informal Officers view only”.
We submit that Mr Corke may not have been aware that there were issues with the plan submitted to him as follows: –
Safari tent footprint.
The sizes indicated on the plan appears to be incorrect and misleading. The Safari tents are show as being 11.8m x 6m. This is not correct. They are according to the manufacturer 13.83m x 5 m with a full footprint of 20.83m x 9.5m including the roof canopy and guy ropes.
The tents shown do not appear to be to scale!
Safari Tent height.
There is no mention of the substantial height on each unit. The subsequent planning application quoted the height incorrectly as 2m. The manufacturer confirms the height as 3.3m, plus a base of 0.2m plus the height of the support pillars off the ground. So the true height is probably close to 4m as opposed to the 2m originally quoted in the current appeal application.
Screening
The screening eventually proposed in the 2013 application was to be 2 to 3 metres high after 7 years. The tents, being close to 4m, would still be seen for a massively longer period.
The Hops screening was quoted as a fire risk by Environmental Health in their comments on the application.
The camping sites
The Yurts application quoted
* Solar panels for hot water and power.
* Parking for up to 20 cars.
* Toilets, cooking and washing facilities in the vicinity of the Yurts.
* Mains water.
* Showering facilities in an independent block.
The plan submitted for the Safari tents in March 2012, does not seem to cover any of the above.
The scale of the tents is also far larger.
The application finally submitted in March 2013 does not embrace most of these points and all major ablution are centred on the pool house instead within the curtilage of the house. This causes an increased effect of the amenities of the Neighbours.
Full Leisure use of the Pool House.
We suspect this may not have been raised.
For the previous Yurts application the use applied for was ablutions but with the possibility of a shower block, running water etc. on the actual campsite.
On the safari tent plan there is no shower block, running water or drainage. Almost all the ablution activity is up at the pool house along with use of the pool, gym, sauna etc. and from their website Massage, Personal Training and Beauty treatment.
As mentioned, Mr and Mrs Harley started bell tent camping and were actually advertising full leisure use of the pool house etc. on their website and in their online advertising from 4/5/2012 before Mr Corke had to replied to the proposal.
Increased effect on the Neighbours Amenities.
As can be seen the proposed Safari Tent campsite is far closer to the Neighbours than the Yurts site and therefore it would have a much bigger effect on their amenities by way of general camping noise, shouting, screaming, children, crying, dogs barking, playing games, smoke from BBQs and smells from cooking etc. etc.
In addition there is, as a result of a lot more activity centred on the Pool House, a constant flow of campers backwards and forwards to and from the campsite. This is what we believe other Neighbours have now experienced from the 2013 unauthorised bell tent activity.
It also means increased light pollution particularly for Hobby Hobbs in that safety lighting is often left on at night.
The campsite shown is right alongside the footpath and very much closer to Hobby Hobbs. The route from the campsite to the pool house is again far closer to Hobby Hobbs.
As the pool, gym, sauna and almost all the ablutions were already being used by campers from 4th May 2012, there was a lot more noise and activity within the curtilage of Wattle Hill Oast itself and this has had a substantial effect on the amenities of both Wattlehill, across the lane, and Hobby Hobbs.
Inaccurate Plan
The plan exhibited does not even show the extended pool house which was completed in 2011, nor does it show the mobile home in the woods by the pond or the substantially enlarged black storage shed, both of which do not appear to have any planning permission.
Given the above points and other developments, we can quite understand how the Officers’ view probably evolved to a position whereby they concluded that the planning application submitted for Safari Tents in 2013 did indeed affect the amenities of the Neighbours.
East Sussex Highways have clearly changed their view to one of recommending refusal probably as a result of their traffic monitoring and review of junction safety.
4.0 The current Safari Tent application appeal re RR/2013/526/P submitted 14/03/2013 – refused 16/05/2013.
Firstly Mr and Mrs Harley have omitted to tell the Planning Inspector that they started camping with up to 8 bell tents on 3/4/2013, before the Safari tent application had been heard on 16/5/2013, and continued until at least 4/9/2013 which is a total of 154 days, 126 days in excess of the 28 day rule!
Their website tells us
“The Bell Tents are all unique and can sleep between 2-6 people.”
Therefore they have been running an unauthorised camping operation, in defiance of planning regulations, of 8 bell tents for up to 6 people which equates in numbers to the refused Safari tents application which was also for 8 safari tents with up to 6 people.
The Wattle Hill Oast website now states : –
“We are now taking bookings for 2014”
Mr and Mrs Harley are already offering full seasonal bell tent camping once again with full use of the pool house and with no planning permission without even waiting for the outcome of this appeal.
They also omitted to inform the Planning Inspector that they do currently advertise the full use of the pool house and its facilities openly on their own website and on commercial camping websites.
This is direct contravention of the pool house extension approval condition 3.
From Wattle Hill Oast website
————————————————-
FACILITIES
Each tent is provided with a fire pit, BBQ, and gas stove. All of your pots, pans, plates, cups, glasses and cutlery are included. You also have a large cool box to store your fridge items. A camping loo is available for emergencies but our beautiful new amenity block has changing rooms with toilets and showers. Yummy Beds and bedding are provided too, so all we ask you to bring is yourselves, clothes and towels.
Gym
Open daily it has a range of cardio and resistance equipment and free weights. Towels and Water provided. Medical questionnaire required. Over 16’s only.
Pool
Open daily, our 13 m salt water pool is ideal for family swim time and also suits lane swimming. Check timetable for session times. Please note that children under 16 must be supervised by an adult.
Sauna
Open daily. Over 16’s only.
Foot Path Walks
Wattle Hill Oast has a footpath adjacent to its land which leads you into the village without going onto the main road. Please see reception for maps of walks.
By Arrangement In Advance
Personal Training£40 per session level 3 REPS Personal Trainers.
Beauty treatments – mobile beauty therapy in your tent or in the pool house.
Massage – mobile massage in your tent or in the pool house.
We have an indoor swimming pool, sauna and gym fitted with commercial training equipment.
The Camping location
The following Google earth photos show the unauthorised bell tent campsite layout on 9th July 2013.
It is in much the same position as the refused application for the safari tents.
It is clear that to use the main ablutions and pool house facilities campers have to make approx. a 170m trek and to enter the main ablutions they have to enter by way of the courtyard.
This activity with its associated noise is much closer the Neighbours. All this activity is within the curtilage of the main house.
Campers have to walk almost the same distance to reach their cars.
All this means a constant trek of campers backwards and forwards. If we may, we will refer to this again in comments on the effect of the neighbours amenities.
There is a reference to 8 parking spaces for campers. .
If they need only 8 spaces for campers why have Mr and Mrs Harley created approx. 30 parking spaces and 20 quoted for the Yurts application?
We would also question how 6 people can arrive in 1 car with their luggage?
Development of the site 2006 to 2013
Their car parking development can be seen quite clearly when the 2013 photo is compared with the 2006 one which shows the situation shortly before Mr and Mrs Harley arrived. The time the Planning Inspector refused the conversion of the pool house to a dwelling quoting the additional traffic for one house as a major concern.
Why is there any need to have changed the 2006 parking at all?
It is also worth noticing in the 2013 aerial photo the amount of chippings spilling out onto Beacon Lane at the entrance to Wattle Hill Oast, which, in our opinion, indicates there is substantial traffic using the entrance.
Storage shed
Also by comparing the photos, it can be seen that there has been a massive enlargement of the black shed at the southern end of the garden which we assume is used for camping storage. We are not aware of any planning permission being sought?
Mobile Home
To the east of the garden curtilage there is a large mobile home part hidden in the woods for which, we understand, there is no planning permission.
On comparing the two photos it should perhaps be remembered that the only relevant planning permission Mr and Mrs Harley have had is for the enlargement of the pool house. This was made clear in 2008.
“The extension and converted garage shall be used only for purposes incidental to the occupation and enjoyment of the dwelling as such, and not for any trade or business.”
9/7/2013
1/1/2006
5.0 Planning Policy
5.1 Sustainable tourism
CLM Planning talk about sustainable tourism. We would like to make the point that, within the Staplecross area, we already have the following substantial camping type activities: –
http://www.woodsidebandb.com/ Yurts and Tipis, Just over half a mile away
http://www.lordine-court.co.uk/ Camping, approx. 1.25 miles away
http://www.original-huts.co.uk/ Hut camping, approx. 2 miles away
http://thewhitedogewhurst.co.uk/teepee-camping/ approx. 2 miles away
http://www.parkfarmcamping.co.uk/ Under 2 miles away
http://www.sussextipis.co.uk/ Approx. 2.5miles away
http://www.buckhurstcamping.com/ Under 4 miles away
http://www.dogwoodcamping.co.uk/index.html in Brede less than 4 miles miles
http://www.barefoot-yurts.co.uk/bookings.html in Brede less than 4 miles
There are other sites in Northiam, Beckley, Peasmarsh and Battle.
Given the unsuitable location of Wattle Hill Oast, the effect on the Environment, Neighbours Amenities and the Traffic issues, we submit that camping at this location is not vital to the local economy. We would ask that our natural environment be conserved and our amenities protected.
5.0 Planning Policy
Mr Polito has quoted a lot of policies to the Planning Inspector but, in our opinion, fails to set out any real relevance of the application to them.
We submit, conversely, that the Policies quoted very much support the case for opposing the application on the grounds of :-
* Impacting on the quality and character of our AONB.
* Causing harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties.
* Resulting in unacceptable volumes of traffic.
6.0 The case claimed for the Appellant
Camping visibility
Given that the Safari tents are at least 3.58m high, probably more like 4m high, depending on the height of the wooden base off the ground. It is clear that the current fence, which is less than 2m, and as the proposed screening after 5-7 years is only between 2 and 3 metres the proposed screening is inadequate. The safari tents will be seen for far more than 7 years from along the footpath and from along the Northiam Road.
The recent bell tents, due to the slope of the land, can be clearly seen, in the following photo, over the footpath fence, from along the unfenced footpath border and from along the Northiam road.
6.5 The affect of the proposed development on the Amenities of the neighbouring properties
As the nearest neighbour we totally refute the comments in this section. Having lived here for some 16 years, we are acutely aware of how the unauthorised commercial activity being generated by Mr and Mrs Harley affects our amenities.
Yet again, we feel that the information being given to the Planning Inspector is misleading.
We would comment on CLM Planning’s claims as follows: –
Parking area distances
The distances quoted are misleading.
It is not just the parking area but also the entrance to Wattle Hill Oast and the passage through their large parking area that counts. We have already seen the chippings discharging onto Beacon Lane.
The entrance to Wattle Hill Oast is approx. 5 m across the lane from Wattlehill’s front garden and approx. 26 m from our house. The appellants claim we are 85m away from the noise!!! It is just not true.
The noise of the comings and goings of the traffic on the gravel drive is fairly constant all day and all evening long in the camping season, so much so that we now find it impossible to enjoy our front garden.
With regards to The Grange the claim is that they are 78m away whereas all traffic passing through the parking area is approx. 40m away.
The cars are also just under 40m from Hobby Hobbs not the 52m claimed.
Our traffic experiences, based on having had the opportunity to suffer a full season of unauthorised bell tent camping in 2013 equivalent to the refused Safari tent application.
We feel there is an inference in the appeal that campers arrive, are content to enjoy the site and go in and out infrequently.
We submit this is not the case, in our experience they come and go constantly.
There is no shop or restaurant or bar on site and we submit that the vast majority of campers will want to go out and visit local attractions, out for meals and shopping especially in bad weather and will probably be not too content to sit in a field or share a small swimming pool for long periods of time.
It is also difficult for 6 people or large parties to share 1 car!
The comings and goings are in our opinion very substantial.
We have had to suffer: –
* Noise from vehicles on the gravel and acceleration away.
* Traffic constantly coming and going all day and all evening.
* Noise from slamming doors and shouting.
* Noise from car alarms going off.
* Tooting horns.
* Light pollution from car headlamps and security lights going on and off.
* Increased traffic up and down the previously quiet lane past our house from campers and Wattle Hill Oast traffic to and from the camping field.
* People asking for us for directions etc.
Distance from the camping
It is claimed that the campsite is some 170m from Wattlehill, some 110m from The Grange and 180m from Hobby Hobbs.
This is misleading and partially incorrect in that the campsite is only approx.110m from Hobby Hobbs.
The key point is that the main ablutions and activity centre i.e. the Pool, Gym, Sauna etc. are much nearer to Wattlehill as are the pigs, the chickens, the goats and the vegetable garden. More like 30m not 170m. Most are within the curtilage of the main house.
Camping Noise
Again our experiences are based on having had the opportunity to suffer a full season of unauthorised bell tent camping in 2013 equivalent to the Safari tent application.
As we have said a lot of activity and noise takes place much nearer to the neighbouring properties. Hobby Hobs, we understand, suffers from the constant noise of campers trekking to and from the ablutions, on holiday happily chatting, often shouting, children running etc., using the main toilets at all times of the day and night and of course security or constant lights pollution after dark.
Wattlehill house is only approx. 30m away from Wattle Hill Oast garden and our gardens front and back are 5m across the lane from the entire length of the Wattle Hill Oast garden.
We suffer the noise of “Paying Guests” enjoying themselves around the pool house area, in the Wattle Hill Oast garden, around the pigs, feeding the chickens and now the goats and in the vegetable garden.
In addition to this we can clearly hear the campers enjoying themselves, shouting, screaming children, dogs, playing music, kicking balls, having BBQs and when the wide is in the wrong direction smelling their fires and cooking etc. etc. All at the expense of our amenities.
There is the inevitable some noise from pedestrian Campers perhaps returning from the Pub etc.
Noise also carries a long way in the countryside, especially at night.
A quote from Mr and Mrs Walker of Wattlehill
“Just to bring you up to date Mr and Mrs Harley, as you may know, have simply ignored the 28 day rule and have been openly operating a camping business since early April until at least early September.
However, I think it is appropriate to keep you informed and would advise you that our concerns over the effect on our amenities from camping activity, have indeed been fully realised.
We have suffered this summer from:
NOISE.
All summer long in the form of shouting, children, barking dogs etc. It has been virtually impossible to sit in our garden without hearing it. We used to enjoy peace and quiet.
We used to be able to sleep with our windows open; this is no longer the case as our children are woken with all the shrieking and music pumping.
There appear to have been several same sex parties, particularly we suspect ‘Hen Nights.’
We are tired of hearing Mr and Mrs Harley’s ‘guests’ enjoying themselves at the expense of our amenities and the local environment.
TRAFFIC.
The movements of vehicles in and out of Wattle Hill Oast has been substantial and again have contributed a lot of noise as they come and go on the gravel drive, substantially increased traffic in Beacon Lane.
LIGHT POLLUTION
The security lights have been on and off, headlamps of vehicle entering and leaving has had an adverse effect on our amenities.
VANDALISM IN BEACON LANE
My family have lived in Beacon Lane for over 15 years and there has never been any vandalism.
Co-incidentally, this summer we have had paint bombs thrown at the roadside of our listed barn. I was unfortunately away, as were my parents but our house sitters heard some loud females laughing noisily on the evening of the August 25th. The next morning the paint bomb damage was discovered. The incident has been reported to the Police.” Crime incident 1227 25th August
Hobby Hobbs house is only approx. 45 m from the main camping ablutions and no doubt suffers a lot of noise from campers. Mr and Mrs Fergusson’s land borders the entire length of Wattle Hill Oast garden and camping field.
We have been made aware of the following comments re the effect on the Fergusson’s amenities.
“The associated noises of screams and shouts, from children and parents, barking from dogs, the cars movements in and out all day long, tooting of car horns, car alarms going off at all hours, light pollution from the security lights being activated by the movement of a large number of people and bbq’s to say the least are affecting our amenities and have seriously spoilt the first decent summer we have had.”
We note from the Wattle Hill Oast website advises
“We also offer exclusive hire bookings for large parties. Please enquire for more information.”
Wattle Hill Oast advertisement on Pitch Up indicates
Groups welcome
Family friendly
Motorcycle friendly
Rallies welcome
Single-sex groups welcome
http://www.pitchup.com/campsites/England/South_East/East_Sussex/Robertsbridge/wattle-hill-oast/
We feel sure the Planning Inspector can imagine the noise the neighbours may have to endure from many of these types of activity? They are, in our opinion, simply not appropriate for our previously quiet AONB.
Comparisons between the Yurts and the Safari Tent applications
There is an attempt to draw comparisons between the two applications.
We have covered many of these points earlier: –
Yurts
* The Yurts were for up to 40 people and the proposed campsite was further away from the Neighbours.
* There was talk of mains water and an independent block for showering etc. plus a toilet for each tent.
* There was talk of solar power etc.
* Parking for up to 20 cars?
* No mention of the existing Swimming Lessons or Personal Training
Safari Tents
* There would be more people.
* Much bigger tents located nearer the neighbours.
* Inadequate screening, the tents would be seen for many years to come.
* Parking provision for only 8 vehicles?
* Within the house curtilage and very much closer to the Neighbours,
* Full leisure use of the pool, Gym, Sauna and all showers etc. based in the pool house.
* Use of Garden and close to house area access to Pigs, chickens and now the goats.
* Much more noise from Campers enjoying themselves at the expense of the Neighbours amenities etc.
* No mention made in the appeal of continuing Personal Training, Beauty Treatment or Massage.
We refute the claims made by Mr Polito in section 6.5.
Our amenities and we submit those of the other neighbours and the Residents of Beacon Lane are being very seriously affected.
6.6 Effect of the proposed development on highway safety
The junction with the B2165
There is only one definitive voice on Highway safety and that has to be East Sussex County Council Highways.
If we may we would repeat our earlier comments in that for the earlier application re Swimming Lessons and Personal Training ref RR/2012/558/P a “Traffic Expert” Mr Rollings was employed by Mr and Mrs Harley.
There were
* Traffic surveys/speed monitoring which had to be repeated because of equipment failures and presumably unsatisfactory and flawed results.
* Handheld speed camera monitoring, which was on a seriously wet day when traffic was naturally slower.
* Attempts to re route the entrance in to Wattle Hill Oast which quite rightly on led, in our opinion, to tree preservation orders.
* An attempt to justify a revised junction for Beacon Lane and the B2165.
* Demands that our Wattlehill hedge with the B2165 be cut back.
All this activity paved the way for a definitive East Sussex Highways traffic survey which confirmed the ESCC position that the line of sight looking south on the B2165 from the junction with Beacon Lane is substandard.
We would comment further: –
In our opinion, Mr Rollings “findings” and not correct.
3.2 .1 ESCC Highways recommended refusal for the Swimming Lesson and Personal Training application RR/2012/390/P and again for Safari tent appeal application after conductiong their own traffic survey as a result of Mr Rollings activities. They were still not told about the camping activity.
In the case of the Yurts application RR/2011/382/P, Highways were not given the full picture about the commercial activities at Wattle Hill Oast on which to base their decision. They were not made aware of the traffic from the Swimming lessons and Personal Training traffic. The number of Campers were smaller for the Yurts application.
3.2.2 Mr Rollings claims there has been an improvement in the visibility to the south as a result of cutting back the Wattlehill hedge.
In our opinion, this is not correct. We cut the Wattlehill hedge back as requested by highways but the north end was already at the required distance and in effect therefore there was no improvement as the following photos show. When one pulls out further the view to the south is further obstructed by the electricity pole
Line of sight after the hedge cut on 15/10/2012
Line of sight before the hedge cut on 6/6/2012
It is important to make the point that unlike Mr Rolling’s photos in his traffic report these photos are taken from the driver’s point of view approx. 2m back from the junction line whilst waiting to pull out and turn right.
The real problem with the view south from the junction is the rise in the carriageway.
From our 16 years experience, we can confirm that this is a dangerous junction when turning out and right onto the B2165 which is a 60mph road with very limited vision to your left.
We have witnessed accidents and the evidence of them and also often hear the squeal of tyres and the noise of hard braking.
In our opinion this is not a location to develop commercial traffic. Drivers who are not local may not be readily aware of the dangers of exiting right onto the B2165 or waiting on the B2165 waiting to turn right into Beacon Lane.
There have been unrecorded accidents which have been included in the comments made to Rother Planning. We will add more specific details in our comments on Mr Rollings traffic report which has also been submitted to the Planning Inspector.
Traffic Levels generated by Wattle Hill Oast activities
Mr Rollings has tried to claim by quoting, we feel, very suspect and spurious TRICS data that the traffic generated by the Wattle Hill Oast is as little as a maximum of 16 combined vehicle movements in and out per day i.e. some 112 total maximum of movements per week.
We find this implausible and would suggest, based on our experiences from a full years unauthorised bell tent camping, that the figure is much more towards 500 per week. We will expand further on this and on the misleading TRICS information in our comments on Mr Rollings traffic summary.
Apart from the pool house area at Wattle Hill Oast there is ; –
No shop
No bar
No restaurant
Campers are encouraged to visit local attractions on the Wattle Hill Oast website and in their web advertising.
We feel sure they will not be content to sit in a field all day or to use the smallish swimming pool or the gym all the time.
They will be coming in and out by car all the time and this has been our experience in 2013.
Campers cannot, in our opinion, walk safely along the B2165 to the village shop or pub safely in the daytime. It is a 60mph road with no footpath and a blind bend. The public footpath alternative is a very long way round and not practical.
Additional traffic along the length of Beacon Lane
There is no reference in the main appeal document or in Mr Rollings traffic report as to the increase in traffic along the length of Beacon lane as a result of the commercial activity at Wattle Hill Oast.
Beacon Lane is very narrow with few passing places. It is signed as “Unsuitable for Wide vehicles”.
It has been one of the few quiet lane for walking, pushing a pram, exercising the dog, horse riding and so on. Recently it has become more dangerous.
The commercial activity at Wattle Hill Oast has, in our opinion, created a lot of additional traffic along the length of the lane because: –
* Campers will inevitable want to explore the area, make visits to places of interest, such as Rye, Winchelsea, Camber etc. and the turning south out of Wattle Hill Oast and down the length of attractive Beacon Lane is a natural route to want to take. Their Sat Navs will probably take them that way.
* The other problem is Sat Nav. The post code TN32 5QP which is for Wattle Hill Oast is located on a side extension off the middle off Beacon Lane, please see below.
* It means Wattle Hill Oast clients can, and will, be directed to the centre of the lane and will have to stop and turn around. We believe this supports one of the concerns Highways have raised.
It also means that anyone using Sat Nav arriving at Cripps Corner from the south or west or coming via Brede from Rye and the coast is directed up the length of Beacon Lane from its southern end.
Even the Wattle Hill Oast website recognises the problem.
“Please note that if you follow your sat nav to get here they tend to take you into the opposite end of Beacon Lane, so we would be the last house on the right hand side. It is quicker to follow the instructions above or give us a ring enroute and we can help you.”
7.0 Conclusions
We totally support Rother District Council’s refusal of this application, supported by the Officers, East Sussex Highways and the Parish Councils recommendations.
It is also opposed by all the Neighbours to Wattle Hill Oast and the majority of homes in Beacon Lane. No one from Beacon Lane has supported the application.
The few supporting letters are from people who do not live close by and have not experienced the effect of this activity on the local Environment, Amenities and Highway safety on a regular basis.
For all the reasons we have given, we would submit that the Appellants case and conclusions are incorrect and that this site is inappropriate for camping or any other commercial activity because: –
* The information in the CLM appeal document does not give the Planning Inspector the complete picture.
* In our opinion, those being asked to make a judgement on Mr and Mrs Harleys planning applications for Yurt Camping and Swimming Lessons and Safari Tents were not given the full information on all of the activities at Wattle Hill Oast at that time.
* This site is not vital to local tourism in that there are already plenty of other local sites offering camping.
* If approved, the Safari tents will be seen for far more that 7 years from along the footpath and along Northiam road. The proposed screening and existing fence are inadequate.
* We think that the information given to Mr Corke on 27/3/2012 concerning a revised proposal for a Safari Tent campsite was perhaps misleading and the details given were probably not complete.
* It is clear from East Sussex Highways recommendation for refusal for both the Swimming lesson/Personal Training application and the Safari tents, that this location is inappropriate for the generation of commercial traffic given the issues highlighted concerning the sub standard visibility of the junction with B2165 and the additional traffic being generated along the length of Beacon Lane. We strongly feel that this is not a location suitable for any commercial exploitation.
* Our amenities, as we hope we have demonstrated, are being and will be very seriously affected.
* We continue to pose the question as to why Mr and Mrs Harley need approx. 30 car parking spaces when they are only budgeting for 8 for the camping in this application appeal?
* We are concerned that if full Leisure use of the pool house were to be granted it could well open up the “flood gates” to a massive increase in commercial activity throughout the year and 7 days per week. This would be almost virtually impossible to ‘Police’.
We already have Campers using the Pool House facilities, Personal Training being advertised by Lifestyle PT and on the Wattle Hill Oast website together with Beauty and Massage treatments and we have seen “Wattle Hill Oast Health Club coming soon “on their website which has now been removed.
We also note, from Company records, that Mrs Harley is appointed Health and Fitness Manager as well as a Director of Wattle Hill Oast Ltd.
Given Mr and Mrs Harleys apparent “track record” on planning matters, we are very concerned about further commercial development at this location.
* Without even waiting for the outcome of this appeal, Mr and Mrs Harley are already taking bookings for bell tent camping in 2014 with no reference to the 28-day rule and with the offer of full use of the pool house facilities.
* We submit, that the Policies quoted by Mr Polito very much support the case for opposing the application on the grounds of :-
* Prejudicing the quality and character of our AONB.
* Causing harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties.
* Resulting in unacceptable volumes of traffic using the substandard junction with the B2165.
* Finally, we are very mindful of the 2006 Planning Inspectors refusal based on the effect of just one dwelling on the site and its effect on the location.
We would ask that the Rother Planning decision to refuse the application, which was supported by East Sussex Highways and the Parish Council, be upheld please as it protects the character of the area, the environment and the amenities of the neighbours and the residents of Beacon Lane.
We would ask the Planning Inspector to please take into account what we have had to suffer and are currently experiencing with no planning permission being granted except for the extension of the pool house with a condition of no commercial use.
We would hope that the appeal is refused.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.