Down Mill ruin - the debate goes on

Councillors at last month's planning meeting were not prepared to grant the residents' management company permission to demolish the Grade II Listed remains.

Instead, they resolved to defer the company's application for a month to allow the residents to carry out negotiations on other options to secure the future of the ruin.

It was a condition of planning consent for Old Mill Park that the ruin should be maintained.

While English Heritage does not object to the demolition proposal, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings strongly opposes it because of the ruin's archaeological and historical interest.

Rother has received 13 letters objecting to demolition.

In a further letter to the planning department, the management company repeats its concerns about the safety of the structure and says it wants to take down the timber without further delay.

The company has requested that the timber structure is inspected by an appropriate Rother officers to see the deterioration for themselves.

The letter also states that the company's insurers have required that entrances to the structure are secured and warning signs displayed.

The letter also repeats the company's view that Old Windmill Management Company's obligation to maintain and repair the structure under the Section 106 Agreement does not cover "replacement".

A report from planning officers to councillors says: "Old Windmill Management Company members decided unanimously that they would not be willing to pay for replacement. It is also said that this matter is affecting their human rights."

The company requested that officers and members should inspect the ruin without delay because of deterioration since their last visit.

Members are advised: "From this letter it is clear that the applicants do not wish to carry out negotiations on options to secure the whole of the existing remains of the mill as requested by members at the last meeting.

"The applicants seek the removal of the whole structure in the application but in the very least, request that they be able to remove the timbers immediately for safety reasons.

"The council's legal services manager has advised the applicants that their interpretation of the extent of their obligations under the Section 106 Planning Obligation is not correct and in particular, the word 'repair' has, as a result of various judicial decisions, acquired a specific legal meaning and does include an obligation to 'renew' parts of the structure."

But the conservation and design officer considers that Listed Building consent could be granted for demolition subject to a condition requiring an appropriate memorial sign recording the former presence of the mill.

Councillors were advised: "Contrary to this opinion, members will see from the consultation responses that the demolition is not supported by the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

"Clearly, opinions are divided on this matter. In the circumstances, if members hold the same views expressed at the January meeting, they may wish to refuse Listed Building consent."