Box 5 - Preferred Strategy for Development Boundaries

Object

Representation ID: 19084

Received: 11/11/2008

Respondent: Courtley Consultants Ltd

Agent: Courtley Consultants Ltd

add
(c)(ix)
where possible improve access to the countryside, its landscape and features for recreational use.eg Riverside walks

Comment

Representation ID: 19188

Received: 28/01/2009

Respondent: Northiam Parish Council

The Parish Council is obviously very keen to be fully involved in the preparation of the 'Site Allocations' DPD which, it is understood, is already in preparation and would welcome details of possible sites being put forward by developers as early as possible.
The criteria for RDC's consideration of development boundaries under (c) are largely considered to be sound but as always are subjective and the PC will want to ensure that the unique character of the village is not lost by enlarging the development envelope and encouraging further large scale development.

Comment

Representation ID: 19202

Received: 28/01/2009

Respondent: Salehurst & Robertsbridge Parish Council

Development Potential - We find the existing development boundaries very useful and wish to retain and if possible enhance them - in particular we would like the planning strategy strengthened in relation to development along Brightling Road between Knelle Road and Bugsell Lane to retain the rural aspect of this road and not allow any further development along it.

Comment

Representation ID: 19204

Received: 28/01/2009

Respondent: Salehurst & Robertsbridge Parish Council

Any residential development at the former Mill site should be included in the total allocation for Robertsbridge and not to be treated as 'windfall'. All 'infill' developments should be counted as part of the increased housing allocation for Robertsbridge.

Object

Representation ID: 19255

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Aroncorp Ltd

Agent: Broadlands

The definition of development boundaries should acknowledge planning permissions on green-field sites.

Object

Representation ID: 19279

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Ian Dunlop

Rother's primary strategy should be to protect the AONB from any further development,as any development damages what is left. There will be no AONB if housing and roads continue to destroy the countryside.Many villages have already had their character wrecked by the building of housing estates in them,eg Robertsbridge.The AONB is the most precious asset that Rother has and it must be protected more vigorously.

Support

Representation ID: 19653

Received: 02/03/2009

Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry

We strongly support the retention of Development Boundaries, subject to individual review.

Comment

Representation ID: 19827

Received: 04/02/2009

Respondent: Crowhurst Society

In planning development the maintenance of strategic gaps is vital if the aim of protecting the countryside is to be realised- this included planning against ribbon or fringe development.

Little mention of 'local' need!
'C' is vital as is the involvement of the Parish Councils in such deliberations as only they have the closeness to the electorate to be able to truly identify need!

Object

Representation ID: 20008

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: The Newcombe Estates Co. Ltd.

Agent: Martin Robeson Planning Practice

The intention to continue to define and review settlement boundaries is supported. However, consideration c(iv) of Box 5 is not a true determination of change, rather a driver of the review process itself.

Object

Representation ID: 20009

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: The Newcombe Estates Co. Ltd.

Agent: Martin Robeson Planning Practice

Objection is raised regarding the intention to review current settlement boundaries through the Site Allocations DPD process. The role of a site allocations document is to identify suitable sites to meet development requirements and not to review fundamental development boundaries, which in our view should form part of the Core Strategy process.

Support

Representation ID: 20020

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. A. Miskin

Agent: DMH Stallard

Support the review of development boundaries as part of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD). It is considered that Breadsell Farm is ideally located for development due to its situation at the urban fringe and its lack of enviornmental or physical constraints.

Object

Representation ID: 20082

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Messrs. F. Mitchell and Cartwright

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Box 5: Development Boundaries - development boundaries should be considered as part of the Core Strategy using the criteria under 'c'.

Object

Representation ID: 20091

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. R.T. Caine

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Development boundaries - development boundaries should be considered as part of the Core Strategy using the criteria under 'c'.

Object

Representation ID: 20100

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: TOM SACKVILLE

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Box 5: Development Boundaries - development boundaries should be considered as part of the core strategy, using the criteria set up under 'C'.

Object

Representation ID: 20109

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. J. Auer

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Box 5: Development Boundaries - development boundaries should be considered as part of the Core Strategy, using the criteria set under 'c'.

Object

Representation ID: 20203

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. & Mrs. Block

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Development Boundaries - development boundaries should be considered as part of the Core Strategy using the criteria under 'C'.

Comment

Representation ID: 20397

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Sussex Wildlife Trust

Development boundaries should be managed to ensure that development does not act as a barrier to biodiversity, particularly species movement. ths is of importance in the context of climate change.

Object

Representation ID: 20494

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: The Newcombe Estates Co. Ltd.

Agent: Martin Robeson Planning Practice

Option 2 (para 5.86) is ruled out without any supporting justification. More allocations in certain towns and villages would better reflect population distribution.

There is also a broad assumption that all villages should grow organically. This can only be aspirational, since the requirement for growth in towns and villages is driven by housing demand and in the most sustainable location.

The Core Strategy should be suitable flexible and housing contingencies set out in the first place.

Object

Representation ID: 20501

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. & Mrs. Block

Agent: Batcheller Thacker

Development boundaries should be considered as part of the Core Strategy using criteria under 'C'.