Question 8 re. securing the necessary infrastructure to achieve sustainable development and communities

Comment

Representation ID: 18510

Received: 30/11/2006

Respondent: HOWARD HUTTON & ASSOCIATES

Agent: HOWARD HUTTON & ASSOCIATES

see response to question 6 (see representation 18509)

Development allocations can be required to include missing facilities in rural locations eg village hall, meeting room etc (or even missing mains drainage if large enough) and thus produce more of a win win outcome.

Comment

Representation ID: 18528

Received: 06/12/2006

Respondent: Wm. Morrison Supermarkets Plc

Agent: Peacock & Smith Ltd

In accordance with PPS6 we recommend that the Core Strategy document should set out a clear retail hierarchy for the Rother District. Our client considers that a balanced approach to locating new facilites and services is most appropriate. Policies should be criteria-based to ensure that new retail development is considered in light of the key tests of PPS6.

Comment

Representation ID: 18532

Received: 06/12/2006

Respondent: Wm. Morrison Supermarkets Plc

Agent: Peacock & Smith Ltd

With reference to paragraph 9.27, our client considers that any requirements for developer contributions must be in line with Government guidance set out within Circular 05/2005.

Comment

Representation ID: 18548

Received: 07/12/2006

Respondent: Hastings and Rother Primary Care Trust

Infrastructure and community facilities must promote healthy lifestyles.

This section needs to take account of the PCT's annual Primary Care Development Plan, which makes recommendations about the capacity of GP surgeries in Rother and also the future decisions which will be made more than likely in 2007, about the configuration of hospital acute services within East Sussex and neighbouring counties.

Comment

Representation ID: 18549

Received: 07/12/2006

Respondent: Hastings and Rother Primary Care Trust

For proposals in the District such as those at north east Bexhill, west Bexhill, to the north west of Hastings and at Blackfiars in Battle the Hastings and Rother Primary Care Trust would like Rother District Council to consider the need for Health Impact Assessments to be undertaken in order to measure the impact of these large complex developments on the health and well-being of the local population.

Comment

Representation ID: 18569

Received: 29/01/2007

Respondent: Learning and Skills Council Sussex

Re paragraph. 9.8 of the Issues and Options document: it is unclear if the Rother and Hastings wide proposals re post 16 education are fully understood. The statement (which refers to access to 16+ education at Battle and Rye) may lack balance and encourage a negative reaction. A broader based statement would benefit the understanding of the residents and the Council’s policy making.

Comment

Representation ID: 18578

Received: 29/01/2007

Respondent: Crowhurst Parish Council

(a) Yes, but poor standard of Crowhurst village hall.
b) Crowhurst School has inadequate classroom and assembly facilities. Parking by school run parents is appalling and a danger to children and other road users.
c) Better facilities in a new village hall for weekly surgeries.
d) Totally inadequate and only having a 10 year projected lifespan.
e) Shop
f) Hastings needs to double or treble the size of its Priory Meadow shopping centre.
g) Without a viable shop Crowhurst is badly served. With the 3 retail outlets we are covered but more frontline retailers are required.

Comment

Representation ID: 18593

Received: 30/01/2007

Respondent: Beckley Parish Council

Campaigns to retain the PO, pub and newsagent in Beckley have failed. Villages wished to retain these services but the Parish Council was unable to help them do so. Beckley acts as a satellite to the neighbouring parishes of Northiam and Peasmarsh. With a doctor’s surgery, PO and many other shops in Northiam and a supermarket in Peasmarsh, the return of Beckley shops is difficult to imagine.

Beckley school’s academic attainment and management has been criticised by Ofsted. Parish Councillors want the very best educational opportunities for village children. Unfortunately the Parish Council does not have influence over the school.

Comment

Representation ID: 18605

Received: 30/01/2007

Respondent: Etchingham Parish Council

Specific to Etchingham:
¨ The Local Plan allocation will make the village a more sustainable community with a new school, hall and affordable homes. The new hall may give space for health care provision.
¨ The village hopes for traffic calming, pub and public conveniences in line with the emerging Parish Action Plan.
¨ A site for a recycling project is sought.
¨ The village supports the community shop which, with the butchers and PO, caters for most daily needs.
¨ Villagers travel to surrounding small towns for other needs using the rail service and limited bus service.

Comment

Representation ID: 18615

Received: 31/01/2007

Respondent: Ewhurst Parish Council

Development proposals should not be considered without consultation with utility providers, education authorities and healthcare providers.

Comment

Representation ID: 18626

Received: 31/01/2007

Respondent: Hastings Borough Council

The document clearly states that in terms of infrastructure and community facilities, new development will only be permitted where the services are available, or will be provided in the future. This view is supported by HBC.

Comment

Representation ID: 18639

Received: 31/01/2007

Respondent: Rye Conservation Society

Shopping: support the aim of strengthening the role of town centres, particularly Rye’s High Street shops. Rye’s shopping facilities are adequate.

Recreational facilities: the Town Salts are of the greatest importance to the setting of Rye and inappropriate development in pursuit of improved recreational activity has diminished the quality of the area. The Sports Hall includes little to attract users. The swimming pool has been built to budget cost with provision for, for example, solar panel heating.
Healthcare: we stress the importance of retaining services at the Conquest.

Comment

Representation ID: 18657

Received: 01/02/2007

Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd

Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited

Whilst Croudace accepts its responsibility to provide necessary infrastructure improvements commensurate with the proposed level of development, it is considered that strategic investment from central and regional government is required in order to provide for strategic infrastructure needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 18683

Received: 02/02/2007

Respondent: Rastrum Ltd.

Agent: DMH Stallard

By supporting the maintenance of the harbour so its condition stays suitable for commercial shipping.

Comment

Representation ID: 18711

Received: 05/02/2007

Respondent: NHS Hastings and Rother Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)

The PCT’s recent Primary Care Development Plan sets out premises developments over the next 10 years or so. (copy of Plan enclosed with letter).

Comment

Representation ID: 18715

Received: 08/02/2007

Respondent: Rye Allotments Association

No objection to aims.

Allotments are not mentioned, but are a vital aspect of the quality of the lives of residents. Allotments are used by the young as part of their education and by residents with no garden who are able to extend their physical and mental boundaries.

Cultivated green open spaces have a beneficial impact on the local environment and Love Lane and South Undercliff allotments must be retained. Their boundaries should be respected.

Comment

Representation ID: 18736

Received: 08/02/2007

Respondent: Highways Agency

Development of carefully sited community facilities supported, as may have potential to reduce the need to travel to larger urban areas and therefore meets objective to reduce the need to travel.

Comment

Representation ID: 18748

Received: 09/02/2007

Respondent: Bexhill and District Gardens & Allotments Society

. Recreation, open space and Allotment provision to be included.

. Housebuilding proposals excessive and unsustainable. Need infrastructure.

. Ensure adequate water supply for gardens/allotments and recreation facilities.

. Need provision for collection/disposal of green waste from allotments/gardens. Encourage residents to compost.

. Support (financial and practical) should be given to all residents to undertake gardening and allotment tending. This would meet the core aim of promoting leisure/healthy community life.

. Expand/encourage Bexhill allotments competition and Bexhill in Bloom.

. Ensure adequate fencing and paving for allotments.

. Provide for allotment holders needs, including disabled.

. More affordable/sustainable village/community facilities

Comment

Representation ID: 18756

Received: 09/02/2007

Respondent: PREM (Rooster) Limited

Agent: Montagu Evans

Current Local Plan policy that seeks to prevent loss of shops that provide a vital service to a local community is noted. It is submitted that the chances of the economic survival of such shop units and services is best enhanced by ensuring that growth provided for within the rural areas is directed to those larger villages and the rural towns that currently have facilities.

Contributions from developers as a planning obligation must meet all the tests as set out in Circular OS/2005: Planning Obligations. An identified 'need' does not automatically mean that a developer should provide for the 'need' from any particular development

Comment

Representation ID: 18768

Received: 09/02/2007

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Themes 5 & 3 make no reference to infrastructure policies in the South East Plan (Policy CC5), Structure Plan (Policies S2, S3) and Circular 05/05 and the Planning Gain Supplement.

It is important to be aware of the infrastructure requirements of development options although their detail can only be realistically determined at a later LDF stage. The advice in Circular 05/05, paragraph B30 should be noted.
ESCC should be involved in providing the evidence base for development contributions and the setting of policy requirements.
The Preferred Options should acknowledge potential changes if the Planning Gain Supplement is introduced.

Comment

Representation ID: 18798

Received: 12/02/2007

Respondent: Sainsburys Supermarkets

Agent: White Young Green

Support paragraphs 9.10 and 15.4 which both identify that further convenience retail provision is focused in the main centres including Bexhill and Rye where capacity has been identified.

Comment

Representation ID: 18814

Received: 13/02/2007

Respondent: AmicusHorizon Ltd (Rother Homes)

All rural communities need regular public transport links to shops, employment, schools, and surgeries.

Gas providers should be encouraged to extend gas supplies to all villages.

Recycling facilities should be extended to smaller villages.

Comment

Representation ID: 18837

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Musgrave Budgens Londis

Agent: GR Planning Consultancy Ltd.

Support focussing shopping development within the main town centres.

Quantitative/qualitative need must be shown for edge/out of centre proposals.

â€~Need’ only one test to comply with. Must be assessed against and comply with sequential approach, impact on vitality/viability and accessibility/sustainability objectives.

Retail study pre-requisite determining need for large-scale increase in retail floorspace. Should be undertaken as a priority. Must inform the Core Strategy/Site Specific Documents.

Currently no evidence base to respond to queries such as the need for “providing for local shopping needs”.

Direct modest growth in retail floorspace to town centres.

Comment

Representation ID: 18843

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Rother Environmental Group

Theme 5: not enough weight is given to promoting grey water systems and strategies to reduce water consumption.

The document makes little mention of the facilitating of reducing, re-using and recycling of waste'- both" household and commercial. In particular, the location of a household waste and recycling site needs to be-identified in Eastern Rother, which is the only area within all of East Sussex not covered by such a facility, as stated in the Waste Local Plan.

Sites need to be identified for Material Reclamation Facilities and community composting. This aim needs to be clearly stated.

Comment

Representation ID: 18845

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Ms. Pat Field

Agree with the comments made by Dominic Manning (Rother Environmental) in response to Question 8.

Comment

Representation ID: 18848

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support the key aims of providing for local shopping needs; and providing sufficient and effective recreation and other community facilities.

We note that Bexhill does not currently accommodate many multiple retailers and the current town centre retail offer is poor. There is therefore a large amount of leakage to other larger centres such as Brighton. Improving the retail offer would be economically beneficial to the town and Borough as a whole.

We believe that quality recreation facilities can be provided in the Borough, and priority sites need to be identified for such use in appropriate locations.

Out of centre retailing can provide a more appropriate offer for shoppers and should be enhanced.

Comment

Representation ID: 18868

Received: 15/02/2007

Respondent: BALI

Regarding 9.4 to 9.6., as stated, waste management (including disposal) is not simply a matter of infrastructure. These paragraphs are bald and refuse to recognise any serious issues raise by waste sites both currently and in the future at Pebsham and the massive landfill site proposed at Ashdown Brickworks. These are 'elephants in the room' and the failure of your core strategy is its complete avoidance of controversial issues such as these, whether or not they are in RDC's power to solve. The treatment of the subject of waste in the Core Strategy document is totally inadequate.

Comment

Representation ID: 18874

Received: 15/02/2007

Respondent: Forestry Commission

You note that a network of green spaces with linked leisure opportunities may be appropriate for towns in particular. We consider it also important to ensure that there is appropriate access to greenspace for those who live in rural areas, as much of the countryside is inaccessible. We suggest that you consider using the English Nature access to Natural Greenspace standard as part of the audit.

Comment

Representation ID: 18910

Received: 16/02/2007

Respondent: Councillor David Vereker

Burwash needs improvements to the Sports Hall and the School should have a swimming pool.

There is a crying need for a pre school kindergarten which County refuse to pay for.

Burwash has an excellent Doctors' surgery.

Village Hall needs constant and expensive upkeep.

Youth club, but volunteers are working on it.

The village shops have most things,but at a price. I would give the Heathfield supermarkets only 5/10.

Comment

Representation ID: 18935

Received: 19/02/2007

Respondent: Rother Voluntary Action

By lumping very different issues together it is difficult to define a coherent strategy. Using the term community facilities is now slightly out of date. Community Services is a probably more accurate description of this theme.

Physical infrastructure facilities should be covered under a revamped Social Sustainability theme - especially the availability of sport and community buildings which in Bexhill's case are completely lacking outside the traditional Church Hall.

However you should ensure that you have the right infrastructure through benchmarking against a "best in class" town and establishing the gap between what we have and the benchmark. In Bexhill's case there is no doubt that any such exercise would establish a serious shortfall for sections of the community e.g. young people.