Comments on Background Evidence Studies (Please clarify which)

Object

Representation ID: 20222

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Battle Chamber of Commerce

Retail Study: Rother District Council's conclusions for the retail industry in Battle are based on a shopping assessment prepared by GL Hearn, Property Consultants.
The Chamber considers the evidential base to be flawed and in no way sufficiently robust to draw from it the conclusions made by GL Hearn.
Approximately 1.7% of Battle's population was canvassed. it is considered by the Chamber that a 1.7% of the residents in no way could be considered a consultation with a truly representative sample of residents in the Battle area.

Object

Representation ID: 20225

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Battle Chamber of Commerce

Retail Study
Stakeholder workshop: Was attended by 9 people with no representatives directly involved in the tourism industry. It is considered by the Chamber that 9 people in no way could be considered a consultation with all the principal stakeholders in the Battle area.
Nonetheless, suggested improvements from this meeting included:
- parking provision needs to be improved and free short-stay shopper parking needs to be provided
- future food shop provision must be in the town centre.

Object

Representation ID: 20227

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Battle Chamber of Commerce

Stakeholder workshop cont: From the telephone survey and the stakeholder workshop, both of which clearly indicate parking as the principal problem, with the need for a new supermarket nowhere in the survey or workshop -
GL Hearn's conclusion is that Battle needs a new provision of 1,000 sq.m. of supermarket within or adjacent to the town centre by 2016.

Object

Representation ID: 20238

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Battle Chamber of Commerce

Retail study: The impartiality of GL Hearn with regard to supermarket provision is questioned. On their website in the strategic planning advice summary of services offered they state "It is important that landowners and developers are engaged in the development of new planning policy in order to ensure their interests are protected in both the long and short term." They do not mention engaging local communities and existing stakeholders. They list many of the national supermarket chains as prime clients.

Object

Representation ID: 20386

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Ms. Alexandra Duthie

Rural Settlement Study

Consider Pett Level has development potential. It is accessed by a good service road and a regular bus service to Rye.

Comment

Representation ID: 20433

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: BWEA

In accordance with the Climate Change Supplement to PPS1, planning authorities should have an evidence-based understanding of the local feasibility and potential for renewable and low-carbon technologies, including microgeneration, to supply new development in their area. Drawing from this evidence-base, local authorities should :
1. Set out a target percentage of the energy to be used in new development to come from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources, where it is viable. The target should avoid prescription on technologies and be flexible in how carbon savings from local energy supplies are to be secured,
2. Where there are particular and demonstrable opportunities for greater use of decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy than the target percentage, bring forward development area22 or site-specific targets to secure this potential; and, in bringing forward targets,
3. Set out the type and size of development to which the target will be applied; and
4. Ensure there is a clear rationale for the target and it is properly tested.

Comment

Representation ID: 20443

Received: 07/01/2009

Respondent: Mrs. Ann Cook

Rural Settlement Study

Suggestions for textual changes to part 2 - Village Appraisals relating to Ticehurst. Suggestions to development potential which stages that this should not encroach on more productive arable land.

Comment

Representation ID: 20444

Received: 07/01/2009

Respondent: Mrs. Ann Cook

Rural Settlement Study

Para 2 "Landscape constraints" - it depends whether the planners value "landscape" more highly than production of food. Why not site houses where they have minimal impact on profitable agriculture. For the sustainable future of settlements, surely it is right to give consideration to a prosperous agriculture in rural areas as it is more important than fringe employments which may well collapse in times of economic stringency.

Support

Representation ID: 20459

Received: 14/05/2009

Respondent: Natural England

Appropriate Assessment
12.Natural England commends the Council for incorporating the Comments we made on the HRA screening for the Core Strategy. We support your measures to work with neighbouring Councils on cross cutting issues that have been identified through the screening process. In particular the need to work with Wealden District Council on the assessment of impacts on Pevensey Levels Ramsar (water and air quality).

Comment

Representation ID: 20468

Received: 26/01/2009

Respondent: Cllr Susan Prochak

RSS
Bodiam Parish Council have identified the need for a village hall in their LAP.

Comment

Representation ID: 20469

Received: 02/06/2009

Respondent: Cllr Susan Prochak

RSS
Bodiam Parish Council have identified the need for a village hall in their LAP.

Comment

Representation ID: 20470

Received: 02/06/2009

Respondent: Cllr Susan Prochak

RSS
Salehurst and Robertsbridge Parish Council have identified Northbridge Street and Salehurst hamlet as potential conservation areas.