Proposals to build around 140 new homes on four sites in Rye have been unveiled by Martello Developments. The multi-million pound plans, which are yet to be officially submitted, include a range of different sized homes and building on a new site between the town boundary and Rye Harbour, which is likely to prove very controversial.
At least 30% of the new homes will be affordable / social housing say developers. Martello say they expect planning restrictions to prevent any of the new homes being used as Airbnbs.
A new base for Rye Creative Centre and refurbishing the Tilling Green Community Centre also feature in the proposals.
Representatives from Martello explained their plans for the new homes at a meeting at the George on Tuesday November 26, with further events planned for the new year.
The proposals are unlikely to be put forward to planners at Rother District Council until early summer next year, with work not expected to start before 2026 if approved.
Three of the four sites are already allocated to housing in the Rye Neighbourhood Plan. The latest plans suggest 30% of the new homes will be affordable at each of the three sites.
At Tilling Green, 21 new homes are planned (4 one-bedroom, 7 two-bedroom and 10 three-bedroom) for the green space next to the Community Centre. The Centre will be also be refurbished by the developers. The land is owned by East Sussex County Council (ESCC)/Rye Partnership.
The brownfield site at Rock Channel has a mix of 14 three-bedroom, 1 two-bedroom house, and 9 one-bedroom apartments in the proposals. A total of 24 new builds. A new riverside walk is planned on land already owned by Martello.
The Freda Gardham School site, currently home to Rye Creative Centre and RX Architects, will see a completely new layout with the current buildings demolished. Instead, there will be 10 two-bedroom, 16 three-bedroom, 6 four-bedroom, and 3 five-bedroom homes and 12 two-bedroom apartments – totalling 47 new homes. The land currently allocated for a new petrol station on New Road will see commercial development if the plans are approved. Martello currently lease the site from ESCC.
The fourth site, on Harbour Road, is currently not identified as a space for development. Not only will it face scrutiny because the high flood risk, it is also on land the Rye Neighbourhood Plan describes as the “strategic gap” between Rye and Rye Harbour. The Plan states development should be resisted, with proposals needing to demonstrate that all alternative sites around Rye have been exhausted. Monday’s Planning Committee meeting at Rye Town Council agreed to support keeping this area free of development.
The proposals are for the land next to the river beyond the Jehovah’s Witness Chapel, and include 45 new homes made up of 8 two-bedroom, 10 three-bedroom, and 8 four-bedroom houses along with 19 two-bedroom apartments. 30 art studios are planned in what could be a new home for Rye Creative Centre. A new nature reserve is also included in the proposals. 40% of the new homes will be affordable / social on the Harbour Road site say Martello.
“We will do this right for Rye,” said Alex Cheneviere, Martello’s Chief Strategy Officer. “This is four sites consolidated under one vision. It’s flexible with community benefits. When you are building in the town you live in, you do it responsibly.”
He denied the proposals would see a strain on local resources. “There is a huge housing shortage in Rye. The housing list is incredibly high, these plans go some way to addressing that problem. As part of the consultation process I hope local people will suggest how the Community Infrastructure Levy that we will pay should be used to support the local area.”
The developers are confident the new homes will not be used for Airbnbs according to planning consultant Molly McLean. “The current rules are that new homes need planning permission to be reclassified as Airbnb or holiday lets. There’s no way that change of use would be approved and the new government is looking at further restrictions.” Rye Town Council has suggested there are over 400 Airbnbs in Rye.
Martello say they are keen to engage with the local community to discuss their plans. In an acknowledgement that they have learnt from the Ferry Road and Winchelsea Road proposals a spokesperson for Martello said they wanted to hear a wide range of views before submitting the plans officially. “Developers often consult at the last minute. Martello want to do it differently.” Briefings have already been held with Rother District Council and Rye Town Council.
The buildings on all four sites are being designed by local architects RX. Rob Pollard from the firm, which hopes to move to Grist Mill on Winchelsea Road, said the plans had been inspired by local building. “There’s a link to what you can see now on the Strand in our designs. It’s not just about homes, these proposals could also see a new arts quarter on the Harbour Road, alongside a new nature reserve.”
Rother District Councillor Simon McGurk attended the meeting, along with representatives from local businesses and the media. He said he was cautiously optimistic about the new plans. “I’m waiting to see the detailed proposals when they are submitted, but Rye urgently needs new housing and there’s a good mix of social / affordable homes here.”
A further meeting is taking place with artists from Rye Creative Centre on Friday November 29.
A new website with all the plans is expected to go live later in December.
Image Credits: RX Architects/Martello , Martello/RX Architects , James Stewart .
Let not forget that the strategic gap on Rye harbour, was actually given permission for 99 homes by Rother District Council some time ago, but never implemented. With the promise of art studios which artists desperately need also planned, it’s time to move with the times,it may also help obscure the hideous Oil Refinery, which has been a blight on the skyline for decades.
Current RDC and Rye Neighbourhood Plan (town council) policies – for good reason – forbid building in the vital strategic gap between Rye and industrial Rye Harbour. It would produce a very negative impact on the historic character of Rye to link the two conurbations. In my view, the proposed art studios, ‘nature reserve’ and the lure of ‘affordable homes’ are merely being proposed to tempt councils to ignore their own planning rules. Martello’s previous apartments by Rock Channel were marketed at very high prices and took ages to sell. ‘Affordable homes’ are not affordable to local people, social housing would be. An additional problem is building on low-lying, flood-prone land. The strategic gap must be protected at all costs.
I think what Rye needs is social housing. The issue of ‘affordable homes’ is of course commendable but there are many local people who will never afford a £250,000 home whilst living on the minimum wage. I thought there were new rules coming in that councils could now build social housing? If they own some of these sites they should get on with it for local people at affordable rents.
These are interesting proposals and all seem to address the need for diversified housing in Rye. Rye desperately needs housing for current and future permanent residents and the Rye Harbour Road location seems an excellent location for homes and for the relocation of the Rye Creative Centre, an important asset for the town. Giving up the ‘strategic gap’ to housing, art studios and a nature preserve will far benefit the town more than an empty field. This new development will not impact on the historical aspects of Rye. As to concerns about flooding, the Netherlands frequently builds homes in flood areas and designs the homes to withstand flooding. A Dutch company is currently fortifying the River Rother’s food defences and they likely could be consulted on this proposal. Ideally, the homes and studio building would have solar panels.
Sadly, you are entirely wrong. Why do RDC and RTC both have strict written planning policies on maintaining the strategic gap? It’s there for a reason, the reason being to maintain Rye’s distinct compact character and to stop the town looking like every other urban agglomeration. The town council fully accepts that development space in Rye is extremely limited and wishes to prevent further encroachment on this gap. Unsuitable, flood-prone land in a key strategic gap should not be built on merely to boost developer profit. The adverse visual impact of building in this gap will far outweigh any ‘benefit’ to the town. Most of the artists could work from home, a Rye studio is not essential for them, other premises exist. The field in question sits in Flood Zone 3, designated as the most at risk areas for flooding. It is also outside the Rye development boundary. The Dutch don’t live below sea level by choice. It’s utterly ridiculous to build on low-lying land that councils define as a vital strategic gap.
While I agree that we need more accommodation will these new ones blend in with the older properties nearby or will they stick out like sore thumbs. Also has the other Elephant in the room been taken into consideration ‘Services’ has there been monies set aside to update the sewage system not only the pipes but the sewage works themselves or are they going to rely on the current system and then complain that there have been spills into the river.
I totally agree , especially over the issue of ‘Services’.
Both planners and the developers over look the impact of developments on water and power supplies.
The biggest problem is sewerage treatment. The system can’t cope with the existing demand.
The planners need to insist that there is a sewerage treatment plant, large enough to cope with the increased demand is in place, BEFORE any building work takes place.
Developers will only build to the bare minimum and maximise profits.
I agree with Phil in that social housing is what’s needed. Huge sums of government money is being spent in housing those with no homes in hotels/bed and breakfasts etc which is not suitable nor cost effective in the use of tax payers money.
It has always been a sad scenario in Rye,whenever anything is proposed for this town,out of the woodwork come the Nimbys over the years we have seen it with the proposed bypass which the highways agency gave several good and others not so good options,sadly all rejected, we have seen supermarket proposals at Slade yard and ferry road all fall by the wayside.A garage proposed another development refused, and now we have the fiasco on Winchelsea road with highways, which would never have happened if we had got the bypass that we all wished for,and now we have a developer who are willing to develop 4 sites for the future of the town with houses and maintaining a creative hub for all to work and enjoy. Paul Camic is right look after the Citadel, and let’s not forget this area on te harbour road has been the subject of one planning application that was passed,so let’s forget about negativity, western barn was deemed a flood plains, did it stop them building on it,NO, let’s take Rye into the 21st Century, and hopefully RDC will ignore these Nimbys, that will do their upmost too stop this town from progressing, like all the towns around us.
Unfortunately I believe that the RDC is run by the Nimbys.
However I think that, as a whole, the people of Rye are all for progress.
There is no doubt that we need affordable homes and an affordable supermarket.
A bypass that will take away the traffic pressures from the town, would be a real boost.
This would encourage more business to the area and create employment for the locals.
There is no getting away from it, there are too many people in this world
A bypass always leaves a Noman’s Land ripe for development.
I totally agree, Ian. The old adage “a pint pot can only hold a pint” springs to mind.
I’ve read about the strategic gap and keeping Rye nice and compact, I’ve also read that there are plans afoot to build 140 new homes in Rye that will hit one set of buffers after another and might get built in the dim and distant future.
It seems strange to me that a town so desperate for housing has twice that many second homes and holiday lets, that figure will only increase and market forces dictate that local working class people couldn’t afford them anyway.
Estate agents advertise houses in this area as ideal investment opportunities, they really couldn’t care less about Rye as long as they get their sale.
The citadel may be Ryes wonderful asset but for those of us on the other side of the tracks it’s also a millstone round our necks holding back any progress.
While “concreting over the countryside” is a downside that will be feared by many, there is a great chance here to provide for beneficial attractive wildlife by building in provision for attractive co-domestic building-dependent species like Swifts, House Martins and Bats, that provide a benefit to us all by eating only insects, many of them harmful ones, and are all in serious decline. By law, new developments like this must now provide an increase in biodiversity from that which existed before. But far too many new developments end up providing what turns out to be useless “green-washing” often in the form of small patches of so-called “wildflower meadows” that become local dog toilets or even sites for fly tipping, and have no wildlife (or aesthetic) value at all. But by incorporating low-cost special Swift and Bat Bricks into the fabric of the buildings great permanent biodiversity value can be achieved with no maintenance costs, as these creatures do not need cleaning up after them. We provide free advice on how to achieve this. We have been working with government, local authorities, many architects and concerned individuals to achieve this since 2003, and we would be delighted to assist here too.
Very true, your comment about wildflower meadows. As proposed there will be hundreds more dogs being “exercised” at the existing RH nature reserve (usually off the lead).
Anthony, the Rye Harbour Nature Reserve’s prime purpose appears to be a dogs exercise yard, toilet and restaurant and should be renamed ‘Dogs ‘R’ Us’. Friends and I would love to enjoy this wonderful reserve without free range dogs making nuisances of themselves, being tripped up by dogs on long leads, or playing dodge-the-turd. Just saying…
I so agree with Margot. RH reserve used to be a tranquil and safe place to walk to the sea. My son was born at RH and I used to push his pram down to the sea and didn’t encounter loose dogs, this was 40+ years ago . Please ensure that dogs are on short leads and not running loose. During Covid on my daily hour of exercise a dog on an extendable lead tripped me up resulting in a broken collarbone.
Let RH be enjoyed by everyone free of loose dogs and their associated mess. I appreciate that not all dog owners are so inconsiderate.
Listening to Radio 4 reporting on the ‘housing crisis’, perhaps there wouldn’t be a problem if empty ‘second homes / holiday lets’ were made available to desperate families? Let’s hope greedy owners of this type of ‘investment’ don’t choke on their festive turkey dinners.