Retirement village battlewill go to judicial review

A DETERMINED Bexhill woman is to mount a test case legal challenge to plans for a multi-million-pound retirement village - complete with an indoor bowling rink.

Anne-Marie Loader, of Knole Road, who has lived and worked for 25 years in the area, has been battling to block the controversial project at Gulliver’s Bowling Club for more than three years.

And, in a case which a top judge recognised raises issues of “general importance”, she says a Government planning inspector currently considering Churchill Retirement Living Ltd’s bid for planning permission, misapplied European environmental protection laws.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Churchill plans to demolish existing buildings and replace them with 41 new homes, along with a clubhouse, car parking, landscaped gardens, an outdoor bowls green and an indoor bowls rink on a 0.7 hectare site.

Rother District Council refused planning permission for the scheme in 2007, making criticisms of the project’s design and saying it would be “out of character with the existing street scene” and a nearby Grade II-listed terrace.

Churchill’s appeal to a Government planning inspector was successful, but the planning permission granted was overturned by the High Court in June 2008, on grounds that there had been no consideration of whether an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was required.

The Government is now reconsidering Churchill’s application - and a public inquiry is pending. In September last year, an inspector decided that the development would not have “significant environmental effects” and that an EIA was not necessary.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It is that decision Ms Loader is now challenging at London’s High Court, in a case which raises vital issues concerning the impact of European law on environmentally sensitive developments.

Her legal team, headed by specialist planning barrister James Pereira, says Churchill’s project raises numerous environmental concerns - including wildlife protection, greenhouse gas emissions and the potential for “hazardous waste” to be generated by the demolition work.

Attacking the inspector’s decision as “irrational”, Mr Pereira also argues that he took the “wrong approach” and failed to apply guidance from the European Commission about the need for EIAs to be carried out where a building scheme could have “significant environmental effects”.

Last week, top judge Lord Justice Sullivan opened the way for Ms Loader to mount a full judicial review challenge to the inspector’s decision.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He said the question of European law raised “is undoubtedly an issue of general importance” and declared Ms Loader’s complaints “arguable”.

No date was set for the full hearing of Ms Loader’s case at the High Court.