The objector believes that the plan identifying the development boundary tight to the northern side of NBAR is fundamentally unsound as is not consistent with existing saved general development plan policies, in particular criteria (vi) of policy GD1 , principle (v) of Policy DS1 from the saved policies of the 2006 Rather District Local Plan, Policy OSS2 of the Rather Local Plan Core Strategy 2014 and the existing planning permissions including outline planning permission (reference RR/2017/2181/P) covering the employment development of the existing BX3 allocation. In respect of policies GD1 and OSS2 the development boundary does not respect the topography of the sites surrounding the road and would result in the creation of a number of fields that are constrained by the road, topography and natural landscape features that are too small for commercial agricultural uses, failing to respect the objectives of this policies which require development to respect topographies and state that development boundaries will be reviewed in the DaSA following physical features, unless this may suggest a potential for development that is inappropriate.
In respect of policy DS1, principle (v) is that best use is made of existing infrastructure, including transport, community facilities, mains drainage and all other necessary service media given that the proposed development boundary would limit the utilisation NEAR, halving the volume of development that could be enabled by one of the largest public infrastructure projects in the area. It should be noted that NBAR has been constructed as the primary service corridor for the urban extension with strategic mains supplies and ducts designed to serve development on both sides of the road, installed during the construction of the road and that this corridor remains the natural gravity drainage corridor for Southern Water's foul drainage proposals. The proposed development boundary is directly in conflict with this policy by restricting the use of this infrastructure. Given the existing planning permissions, we propose that the development boundary is redrawn to the north of
NEAR so as to follow natural landscape features following the significant ancient woodland lined ridge that tops the valley through which the road has been routed as indicated on the plan attached.
The land to the north of NBAR identified on this plan is not subject to any Green Belt or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty designations and is classified as primarily being within Flood Zone 1 and was predominately allocated as part of the BX3 employment allocation in the North East Bexhill Supplementary Planning Document 2009. It should however be noted that this plan also utilised the road as a development boundary on an alignment which was routed through the established ancient woodland on the ridge to the north of the of the present alignment.
To accord with national planning policy and avoid the ancient woodlands the developer amended the routing of NBAR to the south. Reducing the volume of land contained within the area between the road and the existing settlement considerably.
Given that parts of this land had previously been identified for development and there are no apparent development constraints, this land should be identified for development for a mixture of employment, leisure and sports facilities. Potential uses include the development of a mixed-use facility to accommodate several units suitable for small businesses to compliment larger employment uses on the BEX1 allocation and recreational facilities.