Inaugural Meeting of the East Blatchington Conservation Area Residents Association held in the church hall of St. Peter’s Church East Blatchington at 19.30 on November 27 2010.
Present: Mr. R. Castleden (acting chairman). Mr. G. and Mrs. P. Cheetham, Mrs. S. Drader, Mr. C. Trenfield (pond), Mr. P. and Mrs A. Ray, Mrs. J. Moat, Mrs L. Hill, Mr. R. Hill , Mrs. A. Forde-Smith, Mr. D. and Mrs J. Johnson, and Mr. T. and Mrs K. Kay. Apologies from Mr. A and Mrs L. Stuart. My apologies if I have missed someone’s name.
1. a. Definition of the Conservation Area: Mr Castleden: (see Agenda).
Using a projected slide defining the extent of the Conservation Area (embracing Norlington House [15 Avondale Rd.], the pond, Blatchington Hill, parts of Belgrave and Upper Belgrave Roads and lower Firle Road) as set in its immediate environment, Mr Castleden opened the meeting by stating that a number of people living close to the Conservation Area with whom he had recently spoken were unaware that there was a conservation area, or what its definition or purpose was. He considered it essential that people generally understood this to ensure a greater support base. The area embraced at its centre the downland village of East Blatchington whose houses were built mainly of flint, with on each side brick-built houses of 1910-1930 built by local architects (e.g. Rowland Hawke Hall and Alwyn Underdown) in the ‘arts and crafts’ style. The area was regularly appraised by the Planning Office who were ‘responsible for it’ (and had been since 1976), and three houses at the area’s northern boundary in Firle Road had recently been added to it. The Planning Office recognised that it was desirable to allow some development within the Conservation Area, but would ensure that any such development (such as alteration to existing houses) was commensurate with existing building(s). Despite this Mr Castleden questioned why the most recent appraisal of 2006/2008 did not specifically mention the church and flint buildings as being integral to the Conservation Area’s character and raised the possibility of local residents creating their own appraisal: such appraisals, known as Village Design Statements, would be recognised and used by the Planning Office although the whole local community would have to be involved.
b. What should the residents association be responsible for?
A list of nine points was set out in the meeting agenda, evolved from the returns of the 2006 questionnaire (copy available). These were accepted by the meeting as still the community’s main concerns.
A Residents Neighbourhood Watch scheme had been set up decades ago by Jean Moat; Mr Palmer of the Spinney took it over from her and Odette Valpolière-Pierrot from him, but it had lapsed for the last three years. The resurrection of this scheme would be a worthwhile thing and might even lead to a reduction in house insurance. Mrs Drader commented that Seaford Town now had such a scheme. To be considered.
A discussion ensued about the standard of council maintenance in the conservation area, including the pond and its surroundings, streets and verges. Main drains were left blocked, there was minimal and erratic litter clearance and Mrs. Ray pointed out that grass debris from verge maintenance was simply being left where it lay. It was felt that sub-contracted workers needed to be given a more precise schedule of work required and to be more diligent in carrying it out. At the same time it was sensible for each resident to pick up rubbish from the frontage of their own house.
c. How can EBCARA widen its membership?.
There are 64 households and perhaps 100-150 residents in the conservation area. It was agreed generally that a social function (in warmer weather) would create suitable informal opportunities to talk to people in a convivial atmosphere, and hopefully raise their interest to the point of committed involvement. It was generally accepted that at present there are not enough people directly involved to be a real force for change; a greater volume of support is needed. Mrs. Drader suggested that the church hall, as the focal point of the conservation area, might be the best place to hold such a gathering.
2. Measures to increase understanding of the significance of the Conservation Area.
Mr Cheetham said that it was clear that attempts by individuals to change the status-quo were ignored out of hand by the various councils, and an organised structure with the broadest base of united opinion was the only way to achieve such changes by placing areas of concern in the public domain. Changes almost invariably cost a lot of money and government departments were very reluctant to dispense any: however Cllr Freeman had stated that there was a substantial sum set aside to repair environmental damage demonstrably caused by developers, some of which he thought might be used to fund a scheme which clearly reduced or obviated the risk of potential future damage. Politicians liked local issues that were not excessively difficult to solve to keep them in good standing (there has been a significant involvement by Norman Baker in the past). With this in mind Mr. Cheetham suggested that EBCARA needed to make the Conservation Area more widely known. Articles about historical events and stories, not negative or reactionary but neutral and factual, could be written and published in the local Seaford paper, opening the significance of the area to Seaford generally. Mrs. Mote suggested that the press should be informed of this inaugural meeting (along the lines of ‘E.B. Conservation Area a special feature of your town’), and Mrs. Drader suggested a similar note should be sent to local estate agents and lawyers, and copied to Norman Baker. Mr. Cheetham undertook to draft this.
3. Draft Constitution Document.
This had as its prime focus the preservation of the conservation area, not just the general aims of a residents association, and it was accepted with only one agreed change, namely that the words ‘ there should be no restriction on the length of terms of office’ should be removed. Its modus operandi should be a voluntary committee within an agreed framework, not a platform to be used for personal aims. Membership should devolve primarily upon residents within the area, but a small number of others should definitely be included; for example Cedric Trenfield as chairman of the Blatchington Hill Pond Preservation Group, the current Rector of St. Peter’s Church. Unavoidable costs were emerging, and it may become necessary to spread these by charging a small subscription. Mrs. Drader suggested that it might soon be necessary to elect a treasurer and set up a bank account.
4. Meetings.
After a brief discussion it was agreed that meetings at regular intervals (? every 2/3 months) should be the initial aim, but this did not rule out the convening of a more immediate meeting if some urgent topic arose that needed swift action. The next meeting would sensibly be after Christmas and New Year; a date would be suggested.
Current issues.
a). Yellow Lines.
The matter of the yellow lines recently installed left a lot to be desired. According to the press release from Seaford Town Council, this was a County Council initiative which the Local Council warmly approved of, but the initial concept appears to have come from a group calling itself the Seaford Seniors. Mr. Castleden has now joined this group, chaired (disinterestedly one hopes), by John Freeman. Notices of intent were posted on telephone poles up Blatchington Hill at a point in January which coincided with a period of cold snowy weather two out of the original three were later found on the ground), and a result the concept was missed by almost everyone. Subsequently at a meeting at Mr. Castleden’s house each of two candidates for the initiation of this idea accused the other of instigating it. It was ultimately agreed that the Council would ensure that the proper conservation-area dimensions and colour of the lines would apply, and on that basis, as the only objector, Mr. Castelden agreed to remove his objection to the scheme but has made it clear to Jon Freeman that as there is now an East Blatchington Residents Association, any initiative that involves the East Blatchington Conservation Area should be made known to that Association.
b). Traffic.
Mr. Cheetham reported that the volume and speed of traffic up and down Blatchington Hill has been a bone of contention for years. It is clear to residents that to avoid the town centre at peak periods, traffic uses Belgrave Road – Blatchington Hill – Avondale Road as a short-cut. A traffic survey by camera (attached to a telephone pole on the west side of the road) was established around May 2009 to identify the current volume and speed of traffic up and down Blatchington Hill. A letter from Helen Pace (East Sussex County Council - Transport and Environment, Lewes) to Mr. Cheetham, dated 24 June 2009 states that Blatchington Hill carries 50% more traffic than ‘other comparable routes through the area’ (but doesn’t draw any conclusion from that), and that ‘the current mean speed of traffic on Blatchington Hill had been recorded at around 23 mph’, a figure ‘sufficiently low to be consistent with what might be expected if the speed limit was lowered to 20 mph’ (another local suggestion) and that ‘to reduce speeds still further, physical traffic calming measures would have to be implemented and Blatchington Hill was not high enough in the priority list for this to be done at the present time’. On this basis it seems that nothing can be done, and that therefore the requirement of the ‘Highway Authority’ is to ensure that Blatchington Hill is maintained ‘as a highway which can safely be negotiated’. Blatchington Hill is one of 27 sites ‘under review’ but the council’s response was considered negative and ‘dissmissive’. Mr Castleden referred the meeting to Jon Freeman’s suggestion set out in point 2; this might be used to establish some traffic calming measure, but it seems clear that it would not be in the council’s interest because it would come out of their budget.
Mr. Hill then spoke about the average speed of ‘around 23 mph’ recorded by the 2009 traffic survey. He drew the meetings attention to correspondence regarding two previous surveys, one from the Director of Transport and Environment dated 26 June 2001 which gave an average recorded speed of 29 mph, and the other from the Highways and Transportation Department dated 11th July 1985 which recorded average figures for traffic, travelling uphill as 26 m.p.h and downhill as 27 m.p.h., a combined average of 26.5 m.p.h. He stated that in June of this year he had used a digital stop-watch (whose accuracy he had checked against the telephone ‘speaking clock’) to manually time five batches of cars (totalling around 100 cars) travelling uphill over an accurately measured section of the upper part of Blatchington Hill, on different days of the week and at different times of the day. The progress of every car timed was unimpeded. Discarding the top 10% of speeds recorded to compensate for any inaccuracy in the use of a manual recording method, the resulting average was 30.63 mph, only 1.63 mph. faster than the survey of 2001. He queried how it could be possible that the lowest figure he had recorded, 24.64 mph, was clearly higher than the average speed of ‘around 23 mph’ recorded by the council camera in 2009 over a two day period of unexceptional weather conditions, a figure some 6 mph. slower than the survey of 2001.
Two residents underwent SID training, but the only agreed site to use the camera was at the bottom of Blatchington Hill (since using it on the pathway would, it was alleged by the authorities, interfere with pedestrians).
c. Parking of large Commercial Vehicles opposite St. Peter’s Church in Belgrave Road.
Returning to the problem of large non-domestic vehicles parking opposite the Church Mrs. Drader said that a notable number of potential weddings had been lost because of them, with the consequent loss of income for the running and upkeep of the church. She referred the meeting to notices on the sea front, forbidding parking there, but drawing attention to an alternative location where overnight parking was possible (the Buckle Car Park). The meeting agreed this concept in principle provided the sign on Belgrave Road was inconspicuous (the conditions of the longer term parking being placed at the site where that parking was allowed), and the availability of a suitable alternative parking site. Mr. Sam Wylie the builder of the two [add] new houses on land sold by Belgrave House was known to be concerned about this matter; it was agreed that he should be contacted and invited to join EBCARA.
d. Access to Sherwood Road.
Mrs. Ray referred to suggestions made over many years to change the both-way access to Sherwood Road, and in particular to prevent vehicles ‘grounding’ when trying to exit turning left (or in an attempt not to do so, swinging so wide that bollards on the west side of Blatchington Hill were uprooted, which has happened twice this year) but again no action has been taken so far. Recently traffic using Blatchington Hill was disrupted for over a hour because of such an incident, which required a police presence. It seemed likely that the cost of erecting a sign would be less than the cost of disrupting the traffic and the involvement of the police. Contact with the Highways Dept revealed that reported incidents are logged. Members are urged to report incidents, in as much detail as possible, to the Secretary for formal reporting in batches to the Highways Department.
e. Resident’s Survey distributed 2009
Returning to point 1c above, Mrs Hill said that only 57% of people to whom questionnaires had been sent had responded. To ensure the residents association has some possibility of making an impact there needs to be a much greater percentage of involvement otherwise the council will never feel it has to take the association seriously. However, 100% of residents who responded said that traffic speed in Blatchington Hill was excessive, 85% of responders stated serious concerns about more general traffic issues and the erosion of the quality of the Conservation Area, and agreed to further action being taken by residents.
In conclusion, the Chairman asked members to urge their neighbours to join the association. The way forward was by increasing membership.
The date of the next meeting is to be agreed.
Richard Hill.
