Comment

Representation ID: 20035

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Rother Environmental Group

Paragraph 8.34(e)(ii) is weak, misleading and unhelpful. Rother claim that an additional supermarket is required. However it is debatable as to how this will help the High Street and the local economy. There is evidence that this will cause considerable damage. There is no suitable site for a large supermarket within or adjacent to the centre of Rye. My strong preference is to see paragraph 8.34(e)(ii) removed, as no site is available.

Freda Gardham school site: The proposed future usage must be considered under the LDF.