This is one just policy option available within the.SA. It is clear from this table that Robertsbridge is being asked to accommodate far more housing than other villages, thereby impacting on its character. Therefore, there is a clear need for this to be redressed and housing numbers cut and spread across villages in Rother to avoid service centres or hubs becoming more like towns in their character and service supply.

This is against Green Belt policy with NPPF allowing urban sprawl to gather momentum at the expense of quality of life for present residents and ones in the future, impact on their housing value, unnecessary destruction of natural fields and wildlife, a basic tenet of NPPF. Flooding risk and insurance problems remain rife for such villages as Robertsbridge.

No clear financial reward for the villages in question to succumb to greater development and there has been no commitment from businesses to wish to locate in Robertsbridge and local villages.

In summing up, this Modification process, the rationalisation of planning guidance, and the broad and conflicting views expressed within the SA and NPPF and Modifications are extremely alarming.

The process is highly complex, exclusive and not available for all members of the community to access. These have legal repercussions and are against the NPPF with its desire for local inclusion in planning matters. Insufficient consultation with residents who know the area in which they live very well and the current examined documentation loses many important checks and balances to preserve the environment. It may be suggested that the Government's wish to use the construction industry as an economic recovery agent is highly flawed and has serious repercussions for the future. Housing numbers must be in line with business & employment opportunities.

Because of the pressures of increased immigration as part of the free movement of people within the EU, people living much longer than in previous generations, people living singly, the break-up of families, expensive and unsustainable housing costs and rents, lack of investment in public transport in rural areas, pressures to water supply and C02 emissions increasing due to excessive housing development, these modifications are flawed and inconsistent with common sense, safety and the preservation of natural resources for future generations. RDC & central government have not made a substantive claim that can support such excessive housing numbers.