Housing

Comment

Representation ID: 19131

Received: 26/01/2009

Respondent: Councillor David Vereker

10.21 This seems to disregard the fact that there is not that much demand in the rural areas.

Object

Representation ID: 19284

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Ian Dunlop

There is absolutely no reason for" making Rother a more attractive place for young people to live" Young people require attractions and types of employment that Rother will never be able to offer, so it is a pointless exercise to try.Pandering to the "affordable housing" gimmick as some sort of solution is a delusion.

Comment

Representation ID: 19459

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Lucas Land & Planning

All housing needs must be catered for in the CS including 'live-work' housing. We trust the document adequately reflects broader requirements of the community not just affordable housing.

Object

Representation ID: 19477

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Environment Agency

It is acknowledged that residential mobile homes provide a valuable source of affordable housing, however these types of dwellings are also classed as 'highly vulnerable' in PPS25. Therefore unlike conventional housing residential mobile homes will not be permitted in Flood Zones 3a or 3b, regardless of the Sequential and Exception Test or Flood Zone 2 where the Sequential and Exception Tests cannot be demonstrated. Recommendation 9:
Paragraph 10.22 on page 90 should refer to the high vulnerability of residential mobile homes in areas at risk of flooding.

Comment

Representation ID: 19522

Received: 25/02/2009

Respondent: Beulah Baptist Church

1. HOUSING - 5600 more dwellings 2006-2026 (280 per year)
Care to be taken not to create imbalance just because ot "social-economic" pressures.
40 % new properties for Affordable Housing, but also encourage family house building with appropriate rooms.

Object

Representation ID: 19577

Received: 23/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. D. Redhead

Agent: Kember Loudon Williams Ltd

Paragraph 10.30
It is considered that affordable housing provision should be consistently applied bewteen alloocated and other types of site.

Comment

Representation ID: 19710

Received: 02/03/2009

Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry

There needs to be consideration of the role of second homes in creating a housing shortage. In Winchelsea, just over 20% of houses are second homes.

Object

Representation ID: 19711

Received: 02/03/2009

Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry

There needs to be reference to the traffic and parking impact of new development, particularly in small villages and heritage sites

Comment

Representation ID: 19843

Received: 04/02/2009

Respondent: Crowhurst Society

10.21 Will the social housing be subject to a right to buy?
10.26 If few houses are to be built then priority MUST be given to affordable housing.

Object

Representation ID: 19990

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: SEERA

While we acknowledge the characteristics of the borough, we would like to see the core strategy make a commitment to contributing to the regional density target of 40 dwellings per hectare (as set out in Policy H5 of the Proposed Changes to the South East Plan) and examine how higher densities might be achieved at the local level.

Comment

Representation ID: 19995

Received: 16/01/2009

Respondent: Lark Row Developments Ltd.

Re box 20: We are generally supportive of the proposed strategy for Affordable Housing, with the following comments:
While accepting the case for 50% affordable housing in rural centres, the split between intermediate housing and social rented housing should be applied flexibly in light of the existing housing mix in each centre.
We have concerns about raising the requirements for one or two bed properties to 40% in rural areas as it will be a constraint on encouraging home working.

Support

Representation ID: 20477

Received: 02/03/2009

Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry

We strongly support the policy in paragraph 10.22 on preventing replacement with permanent dwellings. Again, we would make the point that such sites must not be allowed to establish a development footprint in the countryside that can leveraged to provide housing. The test should really be that, when the current use ceases, it should be possible to return the site to its original state. In addition, given the scale of caravan and chalet developments, they typically intrude upon the landscape setting: greater screening around the edge and within these sites should be required. We note Paragraph 10.23, which states that "their form and appearance are incompatible with the character of rural areas, especially the countryside of the High Weald, and they constitute inappropriate, sporadic and unsustainable development."

Comment

Representation ID: 20479

Received: 26/01/2009

Respondent: Councillor David Vereker

10.20 surely the higher level of social rented housing would have a much worse impact on a small rural sites.