Vision for Rother in 2028...

I would disagree that Robertsbridge has 'evolved organically'. This village has been the subject of over 300 new houses within the last 20 years. This is an excessive amount. Most of the houses are inhabited by people who have move into the village and the old sense on knowing your fellow villagers is a thing of the past.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.

Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.

Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.


Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.


Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.

Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

Preamble

* The Bexhill Hastings Link Road underpins the Rother LDF. Whether or when it proceeds could be the difference between success and failure in delivering the councils vision in the core strategy.

* The council has decided to publish the proposed submission stage core strategy before a decision is made on funding the Link Road. A funding decision is expected in late 2011.

* The Plan as drafted contains in effect two strategies, one that is based upon the Link Road and one with it being further significantly delayed or cancelled. The latter is heavily reliant upon further work.

* Two days before the original 30 September 2011 deadline for the receipt of representations the consultation was extended to 11 November 2011. It is possible a decision could be made by that date on the link road.

* At the time of responding to the councils consultation we do not know what the outcome of the funding decision will be. The representations that follow have had to have been made in that context. They have been so worded so that as appropriate -

a. If a decision is made to proceed with the road with implementation circa 2014, my client finds the plan unsound in a number of key respects, or
b. If the road is significantly delayed or cancelled my client argues that the contingency plan is insufficiently developed as it would fail to meet the needs of the district.

* When later it is known hopefully what the funding decision is, given the significance of the Link Road, I would urge the council to consider re consulting on an amended plan that removes some of the uncertainty and presents a more coherent strategy.

Detail re Vision and Objectives

* The Council's vision and objectives should refer to the Link Road. The Plan is reliant upon this infrastructure for the development opportunities that it would provide. It is insufficiently clear that the Plan will meet needs District wide if the Link Road is delayed or cancelled.

CPRE Sussex welcomes and supports the Vision for Rother in 2028, particularly the following elements:

There is a strong commitment to a more sustainable, low carbon future and adapting to climate change. There is sensitive stewardship of environmental resources and conservation of the area's outstanding environmental and cultural assets.

The inland and essentially rural areas of Rother, falling mainly within the High Weald AONB, retain their essential local character.

The character and diversity of villages has also been retained. They are vibrant and inclusive, having evolved organically in a manner sensitive to their surroundings.

The countryside continues to be protected for its intrinsic value as well as being more accessible and economically active, while change is carefully managed to respect its character.

It is disappointing that the 'cultural' role of Rye is not recognised within the Vision. Rye has historically attracted an artistic and literary community and does so to this day. The town boasts several art galleries, two accredited museum sites, and supports a number of diverse cultural groups. The expected acquisition of the Lion Street site by the Fletcher Theatre illustrates that there is a strong local interest in improving the cultural offer of Rye.

The Sustainable Community Strategy for East Sussex includes cultural activities as a local priority. Culture is listed within the 'Top 10' strategic development issues particular to Rother. Culture is also mentioned as one of the main policy areas cited at 16.15.

The Rother Environmental Group recognises that the Core Strategy addresses many of our concerns. In particular we welcome the leading statement of the Vision for Rother in 2028 on page 23.

Support is made for the vision for Rother, Policy BX3 - the development strategy for Bexhill and the Inset Map for Bexhill, showing land to the north of the town as a 'Potential Broad Location for Further Development'.

Spatial Vision (Chapter 5, Page 23)

Summary
1. Our concern in respect of the Spatial Vision is that there is a lack of clarity as to
the Council's objective for new housing, which will render the Vision/Core Strategy ineffective.

Representations
2. The Vision makes no explicit recognition of the substantive need to deliver new
housing to meet local needs. The 5th paragraph refers to "Development and
change has contributed significantly to meeting local needs", but it is unclear as to
what "local needs" this particular paragraph is referring to, and there is no mention of meeting the need for housing (for all sections of the community) anywhere else in the Vision.

3. If paragraph 5 is intended to refer to or encompass meeting housing needs, then it is in any event extremely unclear as to what the Vision actually entails. The first part of the paragraph refers to "meeting local needs and aspirations", but the two are not necessarily the same thing, and in many cases the aspirations of some sections of the community can be very different to the needs of other sections of the community.

4. This paragraph goes on to state that meeting "local needs" will take account of
both "the district's circumstances, as well as to regional and sub-regional
imperatives". Again, on the face of it, this sentence is potentially contradictory in
nature, but essentially the problem is that the Vision is offering no clarity as to
what the Core Strategy is trying to achieve in terms of addressing 'local needs',
and therefore the result will be that the Core Strategy will be ineffectual and
undeliverable, because it has no clear Vision.

Proposed Amendments
5. The Spatial Vision needs to be revised to provide a clearer framework to enable the delivery of new housing to meet all sectors of the community.