HE FORGOTTEN POWERHOUSE: HOW A WORLD-CLASS HERTAGE SITE WAS OVERLOOKED IN THE RUSH FOR EXECUTUVE HOMES

By our investigate team

On the edge of the quiet East Sussex village of Herstmonceux, tucked behind hedgerows and ageing trees, sits a relic of Britain’s industrial ingenuity. It is not signposted. It does not appear on the parish council’s website. Most residents have never been told it exists.

Yet this unassuming brick building — the oldest surviving electricity generating station in Europe, complete with Victorian battery load-levelling technology decades ahead of its time — should, by any reasonable measure, be a protected national treasure. Some experts argue it may even qualify for UNESCO World Heritage status.

Instead, it has been quietly sidelined.

And in its place, a 70-home executive estate has risen on the greenfield that once fed the ancient well supplying the generating station. The development was approved by Wealden District Council despite long-standing planning policies that normally prohibit building on such land unless it delivers genuinely affordable housing, in exceptional circumstances. These homes do not.

To understand how this happened, you have to follow a trail of omissions, overlooked duties, and local connections that raise uncomfortable questions about how planning decisions are made — and whose interests they serve.

A HERITAGE ASSET HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT

The generating station in Lime Park is the kind of site that heritage officers dream of: intact, historically significant, and technologically unique. It tells the story of early rural electrification, of Victorian engineering ambition, and of a community that once powered itself long before the national grid existed.

Under normal circumstances, any development affecting such a site would trigger mandatory consultation with Historic England and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. UNESCO’s UK committee would likely be informed. Archaeologists would be called in. Hydrologists would assess the ancient well.

None of that happened.

Wealden District Council approved the development without consulting the statutory heritage bodies. No heritage impact assessment was commissioned. No mention of the generating station appeared in the planning officer’s report. The parish council’s website — which lists local assets ranging from churches to bus shelters — makes no reference to it at all.

For a site of this calibre, the silence is deafening.

THE GREENFIELD THAT BECAME A GOLDMINE

The field chosen for development had long been considered unsuitable for housing. It lay outside the village boundary, on land that helped recharge the well feeding the generating station. Local plans designated it as countryside. Policies restricted development unless it delivered affordable homes.

Yet in 2015, the land was suddenly reimagined as a prime location for 70 executive houses to be built by Clarion, or Persimmon and Charles Church — some of the UK’s largest developers.

WHY THE CHANGE?

One explanation lies in the financial incentives. A development of this scale brings in:

- Significant Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments

- Dozens of new council tax accounts in higher bands

- Long-term revenue streams for a cash-strapped district council

Self-build plots, by contrast, generate no CIL and typically fall into lower tax bands. Heritage protection generates no revenue at all.

In a district under financial pressure, the choice between a heritage-led conservation zone and a lucrative executive estate is not a neutral one.

LOCAL CONNECTION AND UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS

The land belonged to Tim Watson, a former auctioneer in Heathfield. Two long-standing residents allege that he once worked with the chair of Wealden’s Area Plans South committee — the very committee that approved the development. Mr Watson is also said to be related to a parish councillor.

These are allegations, not proven facts. But they raise legitimate questions about transparency and conflicts of interest.

Under the Nolan Principles and the Localism Act, councillors must declare any personal or financial interests that could influence their decisions. Even the appearance of bias is enough to require recusal.

No such declarations were made.

To be clear: there is no evidence of wrongdoing. But the absence of transparency, combined with the extraordinary heritage omissions, has fuelled local suspicion.

A PATTERN, NOT AN ACCIDENT

 

What happened in Herstmonceux is not an isolated anomaly. Across the country, councils under financial strain are increasingly dependent on developer contributions and council tax revenue. Heritage assets, especially those not yet formally listed, are often treated as obstacles rather than responsibilities.

In this case, the incentives aligned neatly:

- A greenfield site that could be transformed into a revenue-generating estate

- A heritage asset that, if properly acknowledged, would have blocked the development

- Local connections that eased the path

- A parish council that said nothing

- A district council that consulted no statutory heritage bodies

- A planning committee that approved the scheme despite policy barriers

The result is a development that should never have been approved under normal planning principles — and a heritage site left vulnerable, unprotected, and largely unknown.

THE COST OF SILENCE

The generating station still stands, but its context has been irrevocably altered. The ancient well that fed it has been disrupted. The greenfield buffer that once protected it is set to become a cul-de-sac of executive homes. The opportunity to celebrate a world-class industrial heritage asset has been lost — perhaps permanently.

For residents, the episode has become a symbol of something larger: a planning system where financial incentives outweigh cultural duty, where heritage is ignored when inconvenient, and where local connections can appear to smooth the path for development.

Whether or not any rules were broken, the public trust has been damaged.

And in the quiet of Lime Park, the old generating station — a monument to innovation — remains unlisted, uncelebrated, and almost forgotten.

 

Councillor Matthew Beaver

Hastings - Maze Hill and West St Leonards

Conservative - Chair of Place Scrutiny Committee

 

Councillor Colin Belsey - Eastbourne - Ratton

Conservative - Chair of HOSC

 

Councillor Nick Bennett - Arlington, East Hoathly and Hellingly

Conservative - Deputy Leader and Lead Member for Resources and Climate Change

 

Councillor Bob Bowdler - Wealden East - Conservative

Lead Member for Children and Families

 

Councillor Charles Clark - Bexhill East - Independent

 

Councillor Chris Collier - Peacehaven

Labour

Leader of the Labour Group

 

Councillor Anne Cross - Heathfield and Mayfield - Green Party

 

Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Hastings - Braybrooke and Castle - Labour

 

Councillor Johnny Denis - Ringmer and Lewes Bridge

Green Party - Leader of the Green Party Group

 

Councillor Penny di Cara - Eastbourne - Sovereign - Conservative

Lead Member for Economy

 

Councillor Chris Dowling - Uckfield South with Framfield - Conservative

 

Councillor Claire Dowling - Uckfield North - Conservative

Lead Member for Transport and Environment

 

Councillor Kathryn Field - Battle and Crowhurst

Liberal Democrats - Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group

 

Councillor Aidan Fisher - Hastings - Ashdown and Conquest - Reform UK

 

Councillor Gerard Fox - Hailsham New Town - Conservative

 

Councillor Roy Galley - Maresfield and Buxted

Conservative - Chairman of the County Council

 

Councillor Nuala Geary - Bexhill West - Conservative

 

Councillor Keith Glazier OBE - Rye and Eastern Rother - Conservative

Leader of the Council and Leader of the Conservative Group

 

Councillor Alan Hay - Hastings - Baird and Ore - Conservative

 

Councillor Julia Hilton - Hastings - Old Hastings and Tressell - Green Party

 

Councillor Ian Hollidge - Bexhill South - Conservative

 

Councillor Stephen Holt - Eastbourne - Devonshire - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Johanna Howell - Crowborough North and Jarvis Brook

Conservative - Chair of People Scrutiny Committee

 

Councillor Eleanor Kirby-Green - Rother North West - Conservative

 

Councillor Carolyn Lambert - Seaford South - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Tom Liddiard - Pevensey and Stone Cross - Conservative

 

Councillor Philip Lunn - Crowborough South and St Johns - Conservative

 

Councillor James MacCleary - Newhaven and Bishopstone - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Wendy Maples - Lewes - Green Party

 

Councillor Sorrell Marlow-Eastwood

Hastings - St Helens and Silverhill - Conservative

 

Councillor Carl Maynard - Brede Valley and Marsham

Conservative - Lead Member for Adult Social Care and Health

 

Councillor Matthew Milligan - Chailey - Conservative

 

Councillor Steve Murphy - Hailsham Market - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Sarah Osborne - Ouse Valley West and Downs - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Paul Redstone - Northern Rother - Conservative

 

Councillor Christine Robinson - Telscombe - Labour

Deputy Leader of the Labour Group

 

Councillor Pat Rodohan - Eastbourne - Upperton - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Phil Scott - Hastings - Hollington and Wishing Tree - Labour

 

Councillor Daniel Shing - Polegate and Watermill - Independent Democrats

 

Councillor Stephen Shing - Willingdon and South Downs - Independent Democrats

Leader of the Independent Democrats Group

 

Councillor Alan Shuttleworth - Eastbourne - Langney - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Bob Standley - Wealden North East - Conservative

Lead Member for Education and Inclusion, Special Educational Needs and Disability

 

Councillor Colin Swansborough - Eastbourne - Hampden Park

Liberal Democrats - Chair of Audit Committee

 

Councillor Georgia Taylor - Forest Row and Groombridge

Green Party - Deputy Leader of the Green Party Group

 

Councillor David Tutt - Eastbourne - St Anthony's

Liberal Democrats - Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group

 

Councillor John Ungar - Eastbourne - Old Town - Liberal Democrats

 

Councillor Trevor Webb - Hastings - Central St Leonards and Gensing - Labour

 

Councillor Brett Wright - Eastbourne - Meads - Liberal Democrats

 

 

REGISTRATION OF MEMBER'S INTERESTS

1. Subject to paragraph 14, you must, within 28 days of—

a) this Code being adopted by or applied to your authority; or

b) your election or appointment to office (where that is later), register in your authority’s register of members’ interests (maintained under section 81(1) of the Local Government Act 2000) details of your personal interests where they fall within a category mentioned in paragraph 1(a) under personal interests, by providing written notification to your authority’s monitoring officer.

2. Subject to paragraph 14, you must, within 28 days of becoming aware of any new personal interest or change to any personal interest registered under paragraph 1, register details of that new personal interest or change by providing written notification to your authority’s monitoring officer.

SENSITIVE INFORMATION

1. Where you consider that the information relating to any of your personal interests is sensitive information, and your authority’s monitoring officer agrees, you need not include that information when registering that interest, or, as the case may be, a change to that interest under paragraph ‘registration of members’ interests’.

2. You must, within 28 days of becoming aware of any change of circumstances which means that information excluded under paragraph 1 is no longer sensitive information, notify your authority’s monitoring officer asking that the information be included in your authority’s register of members’ interests.

3. In this Code, “sensitive information” means information whose availability for inspection by the public creates, or is likely to create, a serious risk that you or a person who lives with you may be subjected to violence or intimidation.

ANNEXURE – THE TEN GENERAL PRINCIPLES - CODES OF CONDUCT

1. Selflessness – Members should serve only the public interest and should never improperly confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person.

2. Honesty and integrity – Members should not place themselves in situations where their honesty and integrity may be questioned, should not behave improperly and should on all occasions avoid the appearance of such behaviour.

3. Objectivity – Members should make decisions on merit, including when making appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards or benefits.

4. Accountability – Members should be accountable to the public for their actions and the manner in which they carry out their responsibilities, and should co-operate fully and honestly with any scrutiny appropriate to their particular office.

5. Openness – Members should be as open as possible about their actions and those of their authority, and should be prepared to give reasons for those actions.

6. Personal judgement – Members may take account of the views of others, including their political groups, but should reach their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions.

7. Respect for others – Members should promote equality by not discriminating unlawfully against any person, and by treating people with respect, regardless of their race, age, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability. They should respect the impartiality and integrity of the authority’s statutory officers, and its other employees.

8. Duty to uphold the law – Members should uphold the law and, on all occasions, act in accordance with the trust that the public is entitled to place in them.

9. Stewardship – Members should do whatever they are able to do to ensure that their authorities use their resources prudently and in accordance with the law.

10. Leadership – Members should promote and support these principles by leadership, and by example, and should act in a way that secures or preserves public confidence.

 

See the: Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, enacted on the 18th December 2025.

 

If you have information relating to any of these allegations of impropriety, you can write in confidence to the:

 

Domestic Corruption Unit

Economic Crime Directorate

City of London Police Guildhall Yard

London, EC2V 5A