9. Rural Areas
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19475
Received: 24/02/2009
Respondent: Environment Agency
Paragraph 9.63 on page 79 considers the upgrading of holiday caravan and chalet developments, however we must note that it is unlikely that an extension to the occupancy of existing holiday caravans or chalets would be acceptable in areas of flood risk. We support the resistance to caravans and chalets to become permanent homes in areas of flood risk, and permanent single-storey mobile home accommodation is considered as 'highly vulnerable'.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19575
Received: 23/01/2009
Respondent: Mr. D. Redhead
Agent: Kember Loudon Williams Ltd
Para 9.74.
Under 'Villages (e)" landowners should be included as a 'partner'. Without owners bringing their land forward for development, ther will be no development.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19608
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
9.11 Does anyone understand what you mean by 'place-shaping'? Please define.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19610
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
Page 71, Para 9.15 The service centre solution does provide the correct measure of balance of communities, provided the total number of houses does prove to be too aggressive or challenging a figure for those local resources. It cannot be assumed that just because a community does have support facilities, that it can accommodate any number of new houses.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19645
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
The biggest weakness in document is issue of traffic in rural areas. It should identify problem of excessive speed and volume of traffic passing through villages as key concern. In public consultations across the district (most recently, Police Priority-Setting Panels), this problem has been repeatedly prioritised by residents of rural areas. Traffic has a major adverse impact on the quality of life in villages and is responsible for the severance of many communities. The LDF must acknowledge the problem, so that measures to mitigate existing problems and avoid future problems are built into planning decisions. In the current Local Plan and in various places in the document, the need to reduce travel is accepted. Indeed, this need is a driver of the choice of Distribution Option 2 for rural areas. It needs to be highlighted as a strategic objective.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19701
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
(b) For the Countryside Economy
There should be reference to the need for the telecommunications infrastructure that is crucial to all economic activity these days and which would facilitate new activities such as home-working and high-value creative business.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19703
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
Infrastructure
Once again, we would urge reference to telecommunications infrastructure, the local quality of which is often poor in rural areas.
Little thought has been given to developing human capital in the form of life and employment skills, and capacity building in the community. The availability of capable and qualified labour is essential to longer-term economic development and attracting high-value employment. Communities need to be capable of initiating and implementing projects to improve the social infrastructure. Much of the district is poorly served for adult education and facilities like libraries.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19704
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
Implementation
We are sceptical of the commitment to implement "Conservation Area improvements in line with Conservation Area Character Assessments". As noted earlier, the Winchelsea Conservation Area Appraisal still lacks any management policy to ensure conservation and implement improvements. Action is needed.
It would also be helpful to have guidance on Village Design Statements and on improvement of the Public Realm. Guidance on Village Design Statements would enhance genuine community involvement. A useful draft policy on the Public
Realm was produced by the County Council some years ago, but seems to have been buried. It needs to be resurrected and published. Such guidance would be in line with the intention in the Design Quality and the Built Environment section to provide recognised criteria for design and has been provided in other districts.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19705
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
Lead Agencies / Partners
As parish councillors, we find it difficult to give credence to the idea that parish councils will be partners in implementing the strategies and policies of the LDF . No framework exists to ensure there is systematic and meaningful engagement between Rother District Council and parish councils on the LDF (or anything else).
There is a gap in the coverage of rural areas by Partnerships. Some village and rural areas are covered by the Battle and Rye Partnerships. The WARR Partnership in theory covers all villages and rural areas, even those covered by the other two. However, whereas Battle offers wide coverage, Rye is more restrictive and somewhat uncertain, and cuts across parish boundaries in the case of Rye Harbour. WARR is not equivalent at all to Battle and Rye, in that its funds are more rigidly controlled. In effect, villages and rural areas outside the Battle and Rye areas do not have a Partnership. This gap needs to be filled.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19727
Received: 02/03/2009
Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry
We became increasingly concerned that references to infrastructure, particularly in the Rural Areas chapters, were limited to roads and water, and neglected IT, only to find that issue addressed in paragraph 11.14. Similarly, the sensible approach in paragraph 11.7, that the contribution of land use policies should be considered within wider context of education and skills, is not reflected in the Preferred Strategies for the Economy of Villages and Rural Areas.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19784
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: East Sussex County Council
We would welcome new housing development in areas that would help to provide the required number of pupils to sustain schools with surplus spaces.
We will have to do further work on the fit between the villages proposed for housing growth and the capability of rural schools to support that growth. Our initial conclusions are that the number of dwellings will be beneficial to many villages in terms of helping sustain primary school numbers except possibly in the following schools where there may be problem with capacity and expansion.
Westfield
Winchelsea Beach
Etchingham
Catsfield
Fairlight Cove
Crowhurst
Stonegate
Sedlescombe
Netherfield
Brightling
Both rural secondary schools (Robertsbridge Community College and Claverham Community College) are operating above capacity, but have large sites with potential for expansion if necessary.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19785
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: East Sussex County Council
Strategy Directions - Countryside (infrastructure)
Para 9.72 refers to infrastructure requirements including at bullet point 4:
• "Schools and Education schemes in line with ESCC programmes".
It should be noted that Schools and Education schemes are not solely undertaken in line with ESCC programmes. They are undertaken through consultation and cooperation with
stakeholders, private sector partners, the Diocese and Trusts
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19810
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: East Sussex County Council
Villages and Rural Areas
No adverse comment is made on the distribution of development in the rural areas. However, it is evident that further technical studies are required to assess the impacts of growth at these locations. The County Council welcomes the opportunity to work with the District council on this.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19838
Received: 04/02/2009
Respondent: Crowhurst Society
Again in 9.11 the important role of Parish Council should be stressed. Parish Councillors are the only level of elected representatives that are largely a-political and work to ensure that they know what local people want.
9.13 Village needs are often ignored- i.e. traffic calming in Crowhurst. 9.18 On what service centre is the development at Upper Wilting based!? 9.29 Does this mean that the discussion is devoid of any hard facts? 9.45 What help is offered by RDC to small villages like Crowhurst struggling to meet village needs with an inappropriate Village Hall at its centre.
9.46 The fate of Adam's Farm in Crowhurst illustrates the fragility of the historical landscape and heritage.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19913
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.15 Croudace does not support the reliance placed on the Council's approximate estimates of development. It is not clear how this was calculated and, as required by Policy ST5 of the South East Plan, is not supported by a clear justification that a lower housing requirement is necessary to deliver the overall housing requirement for the District. Notwithstanding this concern, the level referred to in paragraph 9.15 is not reflective of the number of dwellings identified in the table on page 30, i.e. 1,300 dwellings which more accurately reflects the Council's preferred option towards Spatial Development.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19914
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.18
Support
The hybrid of preferred options is supported, and is considered to provide an appropriate development strategy for the villages which primarily concentrates development in the service centres but also has consideration for other criteria.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19915
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.20
Croudace supports the identification of Robertsbridge as a Rural Service Centre. The conclusions of the Rural Settlement Study in relation to the village's development potential are also supported. However, it would be beneficial to ascertain how the Council has estimated that the village could accommodate 55 - 100 dwellings up to 2026, which includes the existing two allocated sites providing approximately 46 units. It is assumed that further information regarding this level of development will be made available when the SHLAA is published
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19916
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.24
Support
The acknowledgement that greenfield development in the villages will be required and that such development will need to have regard to the surrounding landscape is supported.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19918
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.32 - 9.33
It is not accepted that "a good track record of windfall housing developments" constitutes a genuine local circumstance and that a more robust justification is needed to support the Council's claim. Whilst past trends do give a relatively good indication of how development has taken place, recently this has been supported by a period of economic boom. Given current market conditions, it is likely that a significant reduction in the number of windfall sites coming forward will occur, thus if the Council continues to rely heavily on windfall sites, this could lead to a housing shortfall.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19919
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
Paragraph 9.34
The phasing of development along the A21 towards the latter part of the plan is unjustified as the Council offers no evidence to suggest that the A21 as existing is not capable of accommodating any additional development. Should the Council wish to pursue a stringent phasing for developments along the A21, this must be supported by robust highways evidence (as is the case at North Bexhill) which demonstrates that developments should be phased. Such an approach will have significant implications for the Council's development strategy for the rural areas given that Robertsbridge, the main service centre, is itself located on the A21. It is noted in Box 17, that only developments at Hurst Green and Filmwell are intended to be phased for the later part of the plan, this needs to be made clear throughout the document.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19920
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Charles Planning Associates Limited
It is important to ensure that housing delivery in the rural centres is balanced with employment development to promote a sustainable pattern of development which seeks to reduce the need to travel for employment opportunities. It is therefore important that existing employment areas are retained for that use where possible or to be developed as part of a mixed use scheme with employment being the main land use, subject to robust viability assessments.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19969
Received: 26/01/2009
Respondent: Rother Valley Railway Heritage Trust
RVR comments on paragraph 9.39:
The Kent & East Sussex Railway is a significant tourist attraction operating on 181 days with around 90,000 passenger journeys. The National Trust at Bodiam has expressed its support for completion of link between Robertsbridge and Bodiam to provide public transport to the major attraction of Bodiam Castle via the mainline.
Paragraph 9.64: It is also a significant contributor to the local economy around Tenterden. Not only is there an economic impact from salaries paid to staff but tourists visiting the railway also visit the local shops and other attractions spending more money while in the area. It is anticipated that there will be a similar impact on Robertsbridge when it becomes part of that tourism corridor.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 19975
Received: 23/01/2009
Respondent: R & BG Properties LLP
Agent: WS Planning
9.27 - The provision of limited housing and community facilities in smaller settlements outside development boundaries is supported.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20110
Received: 29/01/2009
Respondent: Mr. J. Auer
Agent: Batcheller Thacker
Para 9.20: Identification of Catsfield as a local service village.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20161
Received: 01/01/2009
Respondent: Crowhurst Parish Council
The Preferred Strategy for the Rural Area -(b) we would be interested to learn if Rother is considering contributing to a new Village Hall for Crowhurst, which is badly needed, when it states 'improving provision where necessary'?
Parish Council is naturally interested in benefits to our community, in particular any developer's contributions from housing development and monies arising from the proposed Hastings/Bexhill Link road. These would greatly assist the successful implementation of our Parish Plan.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20191
Received: 21/01/2009
Respondent: The National Trust
The Trust welcomes the support given in the strategy for the role of tourism as an important component in the local economy. The need for additional tourist accommodation should be recognised and positive support given for the retention of local shops, pubs and tearooms in villages.
Comment
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20213
Received: 30/01/2009
Respondent: Batcheller Thacker
Question whether there is adequate provision within the plan to allow for development in rural areas that meets an identified rural need, and therefore whether that should be recognised in principle within the Core Strategy, eg to allow for specific infrastructure developments.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20440
Received: 28/01/2009
Respondent: Crowhurst Park
Agent: Kember Loudon Williams Ltd
The conclusion drawn in paragraph 9.54 is felt to be over-simplistic.
This part of the Core Strategy needs to be more positive in its emphasis to support tourism in the District. Greater latitude needs to be given for the District's quality tourism facilities to be appropriately improved and upgraded so that greater investment may be engendered with greater tourist spend patterns in the District. Encouragement should also be given to improve the provision of recreational facilities in the District.
Object
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20441
Received: 28/01/2009
Respondent: Crowhurst Park
Agent: Kember Loudon Williams Ltd
The approach to static caravan sites should also be applied to existing holiday chalet parks so its potential benefits to upgrade the area's tourism product may be applied much more positively in the Core Strategy.
In this context, sympathetic and appropriate growth of these kinds of tourism faciltiies should not be ruled out. It is felt that this needs to be facilitated in the section.
Support
Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008
Representation ID: 20447
Received: 27/01/2009
Respondent: Mrs. L. Fraser
Agent: Strutt & Parker
In principle we agree with the general thrust of the Core Strategy proposals, in particular with regard to policy for Rural Areas.