We do NOT agree to the inclusion of Policy BEX9 and, in particular, site BX116 as either an Option Site or a Preferred Option site.

Our rationale was set out clearly in our responses to question 27 but we summarise below the critical grounds of objection:

* Inappropriate application of Town and Country Planning principles in the assessment of selection criteria
* Inappropriate and poor analysis of Council data about actual historic and forecast housing numbers
* Ill considered assessment of transportation/road infrastructure impact and incorrect conclusions as to the consequences of the allocation of Site BX116 as an Option or Preferred Option site
* Unbalanced assessment and appreciation of the effects of Site BX116 allocation on the physical environment, ecology, landscape, flora and fauna of the site and its surrounding areas including Sites of Special Scientific Interest and RAMSARS. These impacts have been understated by Council officers in pursuance of the very narrow housing site numbers
* The site is in the wrong location for volume housing compared with other sites (e.g. BX124) which already have additional capacity and are better placed in terms of community, access to Bexhill's facilities, major shops, schools and transport links

We request that Policy BEX9 and, in particular, Site BX116 be removed from the site allocation plan.