Figure 8: Approximate Development Levels

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20525

Received: 23/08/2011

Respondent: Devine Homes

Agent: Courtley Consultants Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Robertsbridge should not be placed within the catagory of "villages" as this under estimates its role within the distict as the signual largest settlement out side the coastal towns of Bexhill Battle & Rye.

Robertsbridge has a more important role than being classified under the blanket catagory of villages.

Full text:

Robertsbridge should not be placed within the catagory of "villages" as this under estimates its role within the distict as the signual largest settlement out side the coastal towns of Bexhill Battle & Rye.

Robertsbridge has a more important role than being classified under the blanket catagory of villages.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20554

Received: 21/09/2011

Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd

Agent: Portchester Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Figure 8 should be revised to indicate how the Council would propose to re-distribute the housing dependent upon the Bexhill/Hastings link road in circumstances where funding for the road is not secured.

This should include utlising the full potential of the Rural Service Centres, in particular Robertsbridge.

Full text:

Figure 8 is objected to as it does not indicate how, in circumstances where funding for the Bexhill/Hastings link road is not secured and the Council then seeks to reduce the overall housing target, (notwithstanding the projected need to accommodate some 3,918 additional households during the plan period - Figure 8 2010 SHMA Up-date report), how the Council would manage this situation.

Figure 8 should have 2 versions - a) and b). Version b) would indicate how the Bexhill/Hastings link road related housing (that could not be released without the link road) would be re-distributed across the District, including in the Rural Service Centres (such as Robertsbridge the full potential of which is not being utilised in the draft Core Strategy).

In addition, and in any event, it is considered that the total housing number allocated to the villages is too low and should be increased to 1,250 dwellings to more fully reflect the potential of the Rural Service Centres to accommodate additional development in sustainable locations, serving the rural hinterlands.

In the absence of a contingency approach the Core Strategy could fail as it would be incapable of delivering its poicies are proposals in PPS 12 terms if funding for the road was not secured.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20637

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: J J BANISTER

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20650

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: Mr. R.T. Caine

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the Link Road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the Link Road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20663

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: J BLOCK

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20676

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: J MITCHELL

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the Link Road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the Link Road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20689

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: A AINSLIE

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.

Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 20704

Received: 30/09/2011

Respondent: TOM SACKVILLE

Agent: Mr NICK IDE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need.

Full text:

* With or without the link road, the house building target will not meet housing need. The Core Strategy will not be in conformity with the Regional Plan, nor reflect key evidence that supported the Plan.

* Para 7.22 states that the South East Plan target is no longer sustainable - two reasons cited for this are the Link Road delay and the downturn. Instead of 'sustainable', 'feasible' may be a more appropriate description. If the Link Road is not built then the South East Plan target would in all likelihood be unsustainable but a decision on funding the road is awaited. Whilst the Council says the downturn raises doubts as to whether the South East Plan target for the District can be met, the Plan horizon is to 2028. There is a risk therefore that the Council is taking too short term a view.

* House building levels are presented as a range. In para. 8.55 it is explained this provides flexibility, it allows site specific circumstances to be reflected and it acknowledges general uncertainties regarding future growth. There are other ways of dealing with such factors without having to resort to presenting a range of provision eg. in allowing for an overall contingency provision.