This modifications sets to find ways of increasing numbers in villages which for Rother means villages in AONB, so the NPPF criteria apply. It does not appear than RDC have applied this in simply increasing numbers so the higher original allocations get more. RDC have effectively put the cart before the horse and studied and identified specific sites in the villages where numbers have been increased. It seems wrong in principle to have an overall policy which effectively prejudges any site selection process which should happen afterwards, as these individual village numbers are so specific and must perforce relate to identified sites by RDC. Therefore the whole principle of identifying numbers for each village is clearly unsound whether they are stay the same in the modification or in many cases now an increased number.
In light of the increases suggested for certain villages the only possible way to achieve such numbers would be to create large estates which are totally out of keeping with the principles of AONB let alone environmental and cultural constraints within individual villages.