Box 35 - The Preferred Strategy for Transport and Accessibility

Object

Representation ID: 19369

Received: 17/02/2009

Respondent: Natural England

The preferred strategy for strategic accessibility does not adequately support investment in public transport. The various road schemes supported by the draft Strategy are likely to have significant cumulative adverse impacts on air pollution and traffic generation. Improvements in the rail network and bus service in line with growth in the number of journeys is critical to mitigate against pollution and congestion impacts and to promote public health and accessibility between key settlements.

Support

Representation ID: 19370

Received: 17/02/2009

Respondent: Natural England

Natural England welcomes the draft Strategy's requirement at the local level for development to be 'carried out in a manner that makes full provision for walking, cycling and public transport as an integral part of scheme design' (Box 35(b(ii))), and the draft Strategy's specific focus on 'improvement in the availability, quality and efficiency of bus routes and pedestrian safety [and] cycle networks and facilities' (iii).

Object

Representation ID: 19401

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Rother Environmental Group

The railway options should be given a higher priority over road building.
If roads are to be built the priority should be on linking Hastings to the M25. It has been shown in Brighton that regeneration is intimately related to journey times to and from London.
The option (iv) Investment in rail infrastructure is too limited. There are clearly agreed objectives to dual the line between Hasting and Ashford.
Re option (v) It should be recognised that there are already severe capacity constraints on this line already due to the demand.
Re option (viii) also reserve land needed for the upgrading of track between Hasting and Ashford.

Object

Representation ID: 19402

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Rother Environmental Group

There should be a separate section on cycling. The introduction of a comprehensive cycle network with associated facilities should be an ambition of the strategy. Developer contributions should be sought, land safeguarded etc.
An SPD on cycling is needed.

Object

Representation ID: 19423

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Campaign for Better Transport

A ( Strategic accessibility)(ii) and (iii) are likely to (confirmed by the SACTRA Report) result in damage to local economies which will suffer through expansion to links north. Car-borne commuting will expand.

Comment

Representation ID: 19620

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE

Page 125 Box 35 We have already indicated our opposition to the BHLR and the Baldslow link.
Investment in rail needs to be balanced across all the lines in Rother and RDC should not be supine to the rail operator who may have clear financial interests in promoting the Ashford High Speed line.
Emphasise the provision of cycle routes for work and leisure.

Object

Representation ID: 19725

Received: 02/03/2009

Respondent: Messrs. Chishick, Commotto and Terry

It is important to ensure that the intensity of a development is not out of scale with the locality in terms of the traffic and parking pressure that they generate.

Given the importance attached by residents across the district and county to the problem of excessive traffic volume and speed through villages, the Preferred Strategy should seek traffic calming where needed.

Support

Representation ID: 19878

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: BALI

BALI supports the Preferred Strategy for Transport and Accessibility, welcoming the attention given to public transport, particularly by rail, and the provision of pedestrian and cycle routes.
We are pleased to note that environmentally destructive roads considered elsewhere in the Core Strategy e.g. extending the so-called "Country Avenue" from the Link Road to the A269 and then, it seems (in 6.33), to the A259 are merely suggestions and do not form a part of the Preferred Strategy.

Support

Representation ID: 20028

Received: 27/01/2009

Respondent: Mr. A. Miskin

Agent: DMH Stallard

Consider the land at Breadsell Farm would help support Hastings in developing its role as a regional hub and improve connections to it from the towns and villages in Rother District. Furthermore, the location of the site is considered sustainable in relation to transport, particularly when considered alongside the development of land at Breadsell Lane in Hastings Borough.

Support

Representation ID: 20344

Received: 12/01/2009

Respondent: Sussex Enterprise

We welcome transport infrastructure to meet the increased demand created by the proposed new homes. This is particularly necessary in rural areas.

Comment

Representation ID: 20352

Received: 12/01/2009

Respondent: Sussex Enterprise

The sustainable economic growth will prove impossible if an effective and efficient transport infrastructure is not secured. This currently has a sizeable effect on businesses, costing each in Sussex an estimated £29,000 every year. We believe the transport issues should be a priority, in particular the Bexhill-Hastings Link Road. We back the swift implementation and building of this road as a major source of providing sustainable economic growth through easier access to the Conquest Hospital, jobs, sites that may be developed for housing and to ease congestion on other roads.

Comment

Representation ID: 20419

Received: 29/01/2009

Respondent: Sussex Wildlife Trust

(a) For strategic accessibility -object to the emphasis on unsustainable transport options that encourage car travel and increase pollution and emissions of carbon etc.. Support (vi), (v).

(b) Support this, although it conflicts with development decisions hinged on the Bexhill Hastings Link Road.

It is important that safe routes are developed for cyclists and pedestrians and that any new routes provided through development are well connected, possibly through developer contributions to off site improvements.