Brick company challenges Rother cemetery extension

A JUDGE this week set the scene for a court battle over Rother plans to extend Bexhill Cemetery onto land adjoining Ashdown Brickworks, zoned for landfill use.

Mr Justice Blake said on Wednesday that it was "arguable" that Rother had failed to consider the noise impact on those visiting loved ones' graves, who had a right to expect at least some tranquility.

The district council granted itself planning permission in February last year to extend the existing cemetery onto a neighbouring plot of about three hectares off St Mary's Lane.

The cemetery is expected to reach capacity in the next few years and the council says the extension is vital to provide space for future burials.

However, Ibstock Bricks Ltd., which owns the adjoining brickworks and quarry, fiercely objects to the council's proposals and on Wednesday won the first round of its High Court challenge.

The company's barrister, Richard Harwood, said the quarry when excavated, had already been earmarked as a landfill site in the local Waste Plan. Ibstock Brick also has plans to use the disputed plot as a a clay stockpile once quarrying is complete.

Mr Harwood told the court that, before granting itself planning permission, Rother council had provided itself with "no details whatsoever" regarding noise abatement or how the proposed cemetery extension was to be screened from the landfill site.

He said users of the cemetery would expect a "degree of tranquility" and that might well conflict with the inevitable noise of heavy machinery on the landfill site.

He also argued the council's decision breached local planning policy as the cemetery planning consent might "prejudice" the existing allocation of Ibstock's land as a landfill site

Mr Justice Blake said he was unimpressed by Ibstock's arguments that the cemetery extension was an "urban development" requiring a full environmental impact assessment to be carried out before planning consent could be granted.

However, observing that users of the cemetery would require "a degree of tranquility and peace and quiet," the judge said there was an "arguable case" that the council had failed to consider the noise abatement and screening issues before granting itself planning consent.

Unless the dispute can be resolved by agreement in the meantime, Ibstock's challenge will now go ahead for a full High Court hearing on a date which has yet to be fixed.