Robertsbridge residents push back against plan for nine new homes on village hall site
Locals say the scheme would alter the character of the picturesque East Sussex village, worsen traffic, and strain already stretched services.

Robertsbridge residents are mounting opposition to plans to build nine new homes on the site of a village hall and a vicarage in the East Sussex village, a project they say would erode local character and raise traffic and service pressures.
The development is proposed by Peak Developers, owner of Geko Development, and would sit on land reserved for housing in the council’s neighbourhood plan. The site lies on Fair Lane, a narrow cul-de-sac that residents say cannot safely accommodate additional traffic, with the High Street and the village center within easy reach of any new access.
The plans were first submitted last year for ten homes, including four two-bedroom houses, four three-bedroom houses and three four-bedroom houses. After strong local backlash, planners reduced the scheme on September 8 by one dwelling, bringing the total to nine. Officials say the revisions include road and access alterations intended to provide a safer pedestrian route through the site to the High Street and to improve access generally. The plans also note a commitment to low density development and the use of off-site construction to limit disruption during building. Robertsbridge, a picturesque village of about 2,600 residents, is famed for its association with Gray Nicolls cricket bats and lies close to Bodiam Castle, a 14th-century moated fortress.
Local residents argue the project would destroy the village’s character and strain infrastructure. Sue Croft, 63, who lives in Robertsbridge, called the development a “nightmare” for access and described it as an “accident waiting to happen.” She warned that the extra traffic would overwhelm Fair Lane and the surrounding roads in a community not designed for larger volumes of vehicles. Others echoed similar concerns about congestion and safety, noting that emergency services would face greater challenges navigating the narrow road network.
Ivor and Jenny Lewis, both 81 and long-time villagers who live opposite the site, said their primary concern was road access. They questioned how emergency vehicles could reach properties if the development went ahead and cited the potential impact on their own daily routines, including access to healthcare in a village where doctors are already stretched across several practices serving nearby parishes. Jenny Lewis added that the plan could “affect the safety and response times” of emergency services, a concern shared by several residents who spoke to the parish authorities.
Rosy Clements, 50, a local supply teacher, said she was not opposed to development in principle but had “serious concerns about access” and the apparent lack of affordable housing in the plan. Nick Brown, chair of Robertsbridge Parish Council, described the houses as “completely out of keeping with Fair Lane” and warned there were “a lot of problems with access.” He noted that the projected number of cars—roughly one or two per dwelling plus visitors—could overwhelm on-street parking in the narrow lanes surrounding the site.
The opposition is not limited to individual residents. Salehurst and Robertsbridge Parish Council has written to express that the proposal amounts to overdevelopment on a constrained site, with insufficient parking and concerns about whether the project respects the historic conservation area. Several residents also raised online objections, including worries about potential damage to nearby properties during construction and the risk of long-term impact on house prices.
Elliott Thorne, 76, who has lived in the village for six years, said he would be “appalled” if the plans were approved, arguing the project could set a precedent for further development and threaten the village’s identity as a picturesque community rather than a growing town.
Some residents offered a more measured view. Rosy Clements said she did not object to the development in principle but remained cautious about traffic, access, and the absence of affordable housing in the scheme. Others pointed out that the site was identified as suitable for redevelopment in the council’s planning process and indicated a willingness to consider revisions that improved access and minimized disruption.
Peak Developers, through a spokesperson, defended the proposal, noting that the site is allocated for development in the council’s neighbourhood plan and that extensive pre-application discussions have taken place with statutory consultees, including the parish council and county highways. The company said the revised design was shaped by planning officers and heritage consultants to be sympathetic to the conservation area and to better integrate with the surrounding streetscape.
"The proposed road and access amendments will provide a far better arrangement than the current access to the worship hall and safer pedestrian access for Fair Lane through the site to the High Street," the spokesperson said. "The style of the development was very much steered by the council's planning officers and heritage consultants to arrive at what is considered a sympathetic design. The development will utilise off-site construction, with units being manufactured off-site and delivered partially complete, resulting in the disruption to local residents being kept to a minimum. The development is at an extremely low density, especially with the loss of a further unit, again reducing the impact on the environment. The previous scheme was withdrawn to allow significant alterations requested by the planners and consultees to be incorporated into the revised scheme."
Officials say the planning process continues at the local level, with no final decision yet recorded. In Robertsbridge, the debate over the nine-home proposal reflects a wider national conversation about how small communities balance growth, housing supply, and preservation of historic character. As residents prepare to present further feedback to planning authorities, the village remains a focal point for discussions about how best to accommodate change without erasing the features that make Robertsbridge unique.