Policy BA1: Policy Framework for Battle

Policy BA1(iv) relating to the enablement of new local employment opportunities by providing 10,000 sq.m. of employment floorspace refers to Marley Lane as one of the options for expansion for Battle. Technically the Marley Lane site sits within the Sedlescombe Parish boundary although as it is situated on the Battle side of the A21 there may well be an argument for it to be more formally subsumed into the Battle Town Council area. The A21 presents both a physical and intellectual barrier with the Marley Lane site remaining remote from Sedlescombe Village.

Policy RA1(ii) supports the encouragement of high quality and sustainable economic growth in rural areas, Sedlescombe being one of those listed in Figure 10 as needing new employment floorspace. It would seem appropriate for any new employment floorspace for Sedlescombe to be located more conveniently to the village and its housing particularly as Appendix 5 of the Rural Settlements Study shows a ratio of 0.46 of in:out commuting for Sedlescombe and a need for local employment. There are sites that might be appropriate for this, e.g. on the current footprint of the unused buildings at the Pestalozzi Village, perhaps offering opportunities for small businesses focused on crafts related to the High Weald's agricultural heritage. This could also support policy CO4 (ii) in providing accessible employment opportunities for young people.

Refer to my comments made on policy EC1, in particular to BA1 (iii) and (iv).

A substantial number of the proposed new houses in Battle at the Blackfriars development that is unlikely to be built as approved due to the exceptionally high costs of providing the essential spine road connecting the development with Hastings Road A thus producing a greater shortfall in new house units in the town.

Paragraph 11.8 suggests that between 400 - 440 new dwellings might be accommodated in Battle during the Plan period. Paragraph 11.9 states that taking into account existing commitments and allocations (as well as a small element of potential windfall sites - Appendix 3), a further 100 dwellings might need to be allocated (although Appendix 3 refers to a 82 - 122 dwelling range).

If it is found that the PSCS is in conflict with the housing requirements set out in the South East Plan and/or if the Bexhill - Hastings link road scheme is delayed or shelved, there may be a need to redistribute housing growth in other parts of the District. As one of the District's three main towns, future housing growth at Battle beyond the 100 dwelling figure/82 - 122 dwelling range, should not be ruled out in such circumstances.

While Battle has environmental constraints, there remains scope for small scale housing growth at peripheral locations around the town and this is a matter that would need detailed investigation at the site allocations DPD stage and should not be prejudiced by the Core Strategy Policy.

Broad development areas in Bexhill, Hastings Fringe, Battle, Rye and surrounding villages are identified within the Core Strategy. The scale of development in Bexhill is dependent on the delivery of the BHLR. In the event that the link road is not constructed we support the policies that set out that the level of development at Bexhill will be reduced.

We are pleased to note that proposals within the broad development areas include plans to improve sustainable transport links within and between urban centres. We welcome this approach as it could help reduce development impact on the SRN and is therefore welcomed.