We want more cheap homes

PLANS to build family homes in Hailsham were blocked by district councillors last week due to a lack of small, cheap houses in the district.

Members of the planning panel decided to refuse permission for 40 of the 51 proposed houses, which would have been built an area of grassland off Upper Horsebridge Road.

Of the 40 refused, only four were two-bedroom houses while eight were five-bedroom. There were also 24 three-bedroom and four four-bedroom homes.

'We need a decent number of affordable starter houses in a big development like this,' said Cllr John Blake, from Hailsham. 'The odd one or two is not enough.'

Plans for the full 51 homes were split into three separate planning applications, two for 20 houses and one for 11. They were first looked at by the district council in October 2000 nearly two years before a decision was finally reached.

The smaller application is made up of four two-bedroom and seven three-bedroom homes. Councillors voted in favour of it going ahead as planned, subject to 31 technical conditions.

One of these conditions states that the floor levels of the houses must be 60cm off the ground, to protect them from flooding.

The issue of flooding has dogged the applications since March. Despite Environment Agency assurances that the land is safe to build on, local residents and councillors have expressed grave concerns about the risks.

Cllr Blake said: 'It's no good just raising these houses off the ground. Even if we build them on stilts, there are still the gardens to consider.'

Cllr Sylvia Tidy added: 'I feel we stand a much better chance of meeting the needs of local people by going for refusal on this one.'

The applicant, Redrow Homes, is expected to appeal against the refusal. However, the council's decision was based on official planning policy, which makes its argument stronger.

Planning officers prepared the following wording: 'The housing development is not considered to provide for an appropriate mix of housing types and sizes, and is therefore contrary to policy HG5.'