Box 34 Aim and Objectives

Showing comments and forms 1 to 13 of 13

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19171

Received: 26/01/2009

Respondent: Mr Nigel Jennings

Representation:

Sustainable transport solutions are very important. The coastal railway has the potential to provide a better service and increase capacity. I would like to see support within this document for the dual tracking of the line to facilitate additional trains and the provision of more services to Winchelsea, Doleham and Three Oaks. This would also facilitate railway walks for tourists.

Full text:

Sustainable transport solutions are very important. The coastal railway has the potential to provide a better service and increase capacity. I would like to see support within this document for the dual tracking of the line to facilitate additional trains and the provision of more services to Winchelsea, Doleham and Three Oaks. THis would also facilitate railway walks for tourists.

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19400

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Rother Environmental Group

Representation:

We strongly support the policy of increasing the potential to travel by train or public transport.
The high speed train services at Ashford to both London and Europe could contribute greatly to the regeneration of this corner of the Southeast and this should be recognised.

Object

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19415

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

The 'Scope and issues' section gives very mixed messages. 'How to maximise accessibility to jobs, shops and services is identified as being 'the main issue' (13.1) which suggests that a 'travel to work area focus' on forming strategy would be appropriate. In contrast however, paragraphs 13.2 - 13.4 move us quickly on to a discussion on big regional infrastructure. There is a lack of coherence. Access by buses is singled out as a specific issue , but that is only one of many issues around modes that have to be addressed. It is misleading to begin a debate on modes of transport at the objectives setting phase of a draft strategic document.

Object

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19416

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

In 13.2 an assertion is made that 'Rother generally is disadvantaged, at least in economic terms, by the journey time involved in travelling to London/Brighton/Ashford and the South East.' There is no evidence to support this.

The negative view of infrastructure - often characterised in terms of, for example, 'long journey times to London', ignores geography. Comparisons are often made with Brighton and its 'under one hour' train journey times to London. This is largely irrelevant: Brighton is considerably closer to London than Bexhill/Hastings, and unlike the Brighton line, the Charing Cross line has to traverse the hilly High Weald, often on tight curves. To reduce rail journey times, a completely new line would have to be built.

Object

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19417

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

The word 'peripherality' is frequently used to give a negative impression of Rother, with the need of big new roads to bring it 'closer' to London. Rother District is where it is, and infrastructure investment of the sort that is often suggested, is unaffordable, would hugely damage local economies and wreck the natural assets that are a significant part of those economies. It would also undermine efforts to build on the considerable strengths of the area - outstanding countryside, unique natural environments and cherished heitage.

It is important to reflect that geography is less of a consideration in a context of the growth in 'home-working' possibilities.

Comment

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19418

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

The aim/objectives seem broadly acceptable, provided that the starting point is an examination of the potential for improving access within travel to work areas (TTWAs) by sustainable modes. Such new links, as well as improved links, as are needed with the rest of the region should mesh with the improved 'sustainable linkages' within the TTWAs and should themselves lead to increased opportunities for travel by sustainable modes.

Comment

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19419

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

For us, it clearly follows that if links and opportunities to use sustainable modes within TTWAs are expanded and of high quality, then there would be far greater clarity about the need, scale and nature of linkages with the wider region. Thus, there need be no conflict or competition for funding between the 'local' and the 'regional'. Then there would be no need to characterise big and expensive infrastructure as 'strategic'. In this scenario, the conundrum described in para 13.6 ceases to exist.

Object

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19420

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

Para 13.11 strongly makes the point that 2/3rds of people travel to work by car, but fails to make the point that this presents a positive challenge and opportunity to tackle the problem it represents, as if preparing us for failure to deliver mode shift. Paras 13.12/13 make some sense (they are after all official policy).

Object

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19421

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

Representation:

We strongly believe that the Link Road, if built, (a (i) would undermine opportunities to move significantly towards 'rebalancing transport away from the car and towards non-car modes'. It is also acknowledged by the promoters to have major negative environmental impacts. If built, it would be a disaster and undermine, not support regeneration.

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 19514

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Guestling Parish Council

Representation:

The aim, objectives and preferred strategy, subject to the reservations on the Baldslow junction mentioned above (comment 19482), are good.

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 20127

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Highways Agency

Representation:

Paragraph 13.5

The HA welcomes and supports the transport and accessibility aims and objectives stated in this section and the emphasis on sustainable travel generally in the Core Strategy.

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 20305

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: SEEDA

Representation:

SEEDA strongly supports the early implementation of the link road, and other necessary infrastructure to facilitate the objectives of the core strategy and welcomes the initiatives outlined in Box 35 which identifies various strategies for reducing dependency on the car, improving opportunities for walking and cycling and requirements for travel plans.

Support

Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Representation ID: 20418

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Sussex Wildlife Trust

Representation:

Support Objective (i).