Question 17 re. the most appropriate development option for Battle

Comment

Representation ID: 18515

Received: 30/11/2006

Respondent: HOWARD HUTTON & ASSOCIATES

Agent: HOWARD HUTTON & ASSOCIATES

The medium growth option is supported for the reasons given in answer to question 16 (see response 18514).

Comment

Representation ID: 18530

Received: 06/12/2006

Respondent: Wm. Morrison Supermarkets Plc

Agent: Peacock & Smith Ltd

The town of Battle is a much smaller centre than Bexhill, located within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The historic core of the town was designated a Conservation Area in 1970. Therefore, at Question 17, our client considers that Development Option 1 - continued development to support the town's role - would be most appropriate, as this would bring consolidation and enhancement of Battle's service centre and tourism role, whilst at the same time maintaining its historic, 'small town' character.

Comment

Representation ID: 18543

Received: 07/12/2006

Respondent: Town and Country Planning Solutions

Agent: Town and Country Planning Solutions

Battle should be identified for medium growth in accordance with Option 1. While Bexhill is the main settlement within the District, it has constraints that restrict its potential for meeting all future development needs.
While Battle and Rye also have constraints, there is potential for limited expansion at Battle to help accommodate future development needs without harming the town's rural setting and landscape quality. Promoting Option 2 would add to development pressures on less sustainable smaller settlements and reduce the scope to sustain existing facilities within Battle as well as providing social benefits such as affordable housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 18544

Received: 07/12/2006

Respondent: Town and Country Planning Solutions

Agent: Town and Country Planning Solutions

As response to question 16.

Comment

Representation ID: 18586

Received: 29/01/2007

Respondent: Crowhurst Parish Council

Continual development to support the towns role. Option 1 gives Battle the best chance to adapt and grow without losing its unique character. It is better to have controlled change than try to slow down the pace as in Option 2.

Comment

Representation ID: 18629

Received: 31/01/2007

Respondent: Hastings Borough Council

In respect of the area strategies for the areas outside Bexhill, HBC does not consider the options are likely to have a significant direct impact as long as the emphasis for future growth continues to be on the Bexhill and Hastings area. However, of the 2 options for Battle, HBC favours Option 1.

Comment

Representation ID: 18666

Received: 01/02/2007

Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd

Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited

It is not considered that another development site of a similar scale proposed at Blackfriars could be found at Battle without having a negative impact upon the natural, historic and built environment. In this respect, Croudace considers that the Council should seek to limit small scale development within the confines of the existing built up area or immediately adjacent to it, to maintain the town's internal sustainability and vitality .

Comment

Representation ID: 18741

Received: 08/02/2007

Respondent: Highways Agency

It is noted that there are traffic congestion issues in Battle. It is suggested that the Bexhill Hastings Link Road and an improved connection between Queensway and the A21 at Baldslow will remove traffic from Battle. We would be interested to discuss this further with you.

Comment

Representation ID: 18774

Received: 09/02/2007

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Whilst further new housing may well generate more children of primary school age, the need for a second primary school will still have to be justified on the final mix of dwellings and the numbers at Battle & Langton CE Primary School prevailing at the time. If there is no justification for a new school it will be necessary to provide additional permanent places at Battle and Langton CE Primary School, funded from new housing development.

Comment

Representation ID: 18823

Received: 13/02/2007

Respondent: AmicusHorizon Ltd (Rother Homes)

In the longer term, given the high property prices in Battle and the continuing erosion of rented housing through Right To Buy and Right To Acquire, it is considered vital that one or two other smaller sites are identified for affordable housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 18859

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: The National Trust

The National Trust supports the current objectives for Battle as set out in the Local Plan. We believe new development should be confined to infilling and redevelopment within the confines of the existing development boundary and therefore favour Option 2 for Limited Growth. Higher levels of growth and development outside the current boundaries would be likely to threaten the AONB and the historic setting of the town without delivering any real benefits and could aggravate rather than alleviate congestion.

Comment

Representation ID: 18943

Received: 19/02/2007

Respondent: Rother Voluntary Action

Option 1.

Comment

Representation ID: 18954

Received: 22/02/2007

Respondent: Southern Water

Southern Water is committed to meeting the demand for water and wastewater services arising from new development, as identified in adopted DPDs.

Need to ensure capacity needs of the Local Planning Authority are delivered in phase with development. Adopted LDFs will inform Southern Water investment plans.

Detailed knowledge of the location of new development is required. It is anticipated that Site Allocations DPD will quantify the precise location, scale and timing of the development. This will inform Southern Water’s investment programme. Southern Water unable to provide the services necessary to serve major new development until funding for the investment required is approved by OFWAT.

Comment

Representation ID: 18964

Received: 22/02/2007

Respondent: Mrs Joan Goldsworthy

More off-street parking is required. The main local traffic problem is streets clogged with parked vehicles. Battle High Street is at certain times of the day virtually at a standstill. Fire engines had great difficulty recently getting through the High Street to reach a fire on Battle Hill. Motorists should pay parking charges as part of the cost of owning and driving a car.