I am very disappointed to see the number of sites listed for Bexhill and the extent of the development. Little attention seems to have been given to the semi-rural nature of many parts of Bexhill - particularly on its northern and western fringes. There has been no attempt to protect the character of these areas - in particular, the former De La Warr Estate in Cooden - broadly to the north of the Cooden Beach Golf Course - should be formally designated as a conservation area.

In terms of the sites listed, it is difficult to argue against the use of BX101 (the former Northeye Prison), although it is moot whether this should be for housing or for other development. All the other sites that run close to Barnhorn Road involve urban sprawl over rural locations, causing significant loss of amenity.

No less importantly, it is already clear that the A259 in the mile or so to the east of the Little Common roundabout is at peak capacity. Nor is there the other infrastructure to support the significant additional housing capacity.

I have the strongest objection to the proposed development of BX116. Not only would it mean the loss of green fields, at a stroke it would move the urban boundary of Bexhill closer into the Pevensey Levels that the development plan says it wishes to protect.

Given the investment of so much Government money in the Bexhill-Hastings Link Road, and the existing commitments to mixed use development along the route, I believe that North Bexhill (BX124) represents the least worst of the sites, although even this presents challenges to the Little Common roundabout as considerable additional traffic can be anticipated along Pear Tree Lane and St Mary's Lane.