Why is Bexhill’s Spindlewood Drive building plan not being dismissed?

Why was the Rother District Council Planning Committee meeting of February 14 so predictable? Bet Fred at Little Common could have lost thousands to punters who ‘knew’, and still do, how this fiasco will eventually end. Despite pages submitted to RDC by an expert surveyor stating the objections and unsuitability of development at Spindlewood Drive, then not one but two votes which said ‘no’ to the application, the Committee chairman Cllr Kentfield said the reasons presented were erroneous and not planning related, so without any good reason decided to pass the application to Full Council. The question we must ask is ‘why’? In case readers are unaware, the chairman of planning is also ward councillor for Kewhurst, which is virtually on top of the Spindlewood site and he knows full well that it should be rejected. This along with several other dubious decisions, begs the question why so adamantly supportive when a majority of his committee voted against. Where do the developers feature in this? We see all the time the pressures and fixes they can bring to bear. There is also the pressure from above. The leader was very quick to intervene and support a decision to Full Council, which instantly showed the ulterior motive. Let’s face it, regardless of all the voting and people against this development, once it goes to Full Council with its majority of ‘do as they are told’ councillors the result is a forgone conclusion. We all know how committed the leader is to keeping all developments in and around Bexhill and away from the villages that keep his supporters in power. His CV resonates this ideal when he states, “the people in my community live in a very beautiful area and we must work hard to see it stays that way”. Says it all! People need housing, but none of these developments benefit our local young people so why so keen to drown this area in expensive housing and flats that it doesn’t need, whose current infrastructure can’t cope and whose ecology is under threat. It’s easy to quickly roll out it’s “only 160” properties, but first tell everyone that Little Common has already had built and approved 490 homes, with, if all these life-changing proposals are accepted, make the total up to 900. It is not only unacceptable but insane. I have had first-hand experience of the tactics of large companies and spent the past few years studying the performance and improbable decisions of councils up and down the country. It’s beginning to seem as though I should look closer to home, especially with the elections only two-and-a-half months away.