Policy RA2: General Strategy for the Countryside

The RVR Robertsbridge to Bodiam re-connection project will support enjoyment of the countryside by allowing access by train and by conserving the built heritage of a Rural Light Railway.

The K&ESR is a major tourist attraction, economic generator and public transport provider that not only wishes to improve its existing facilities but also extend the existing railway from Bodiam to Robertsbridge to provide a direct link with main line rail services. Support the strategy in Policy RA2(iii), (vi) and (vii) to limit new development in the countryside to that which supports economic and tourism needs, support enjoyment of the countryside through improving access and support tourism facilities.

With reference to Northiam and the soundness of point 12.6
(iii) "To support sustainable local employment opportunities and economic viability of rural communities"

With reference to the soundness of reducing car movements in Northiam point 12.6

(vi) "To reduce both the need to travel and reliance on the private car, by promoting the use of public transport and supporting viable accessible service and facilities within villages"

We object to the soundness of point 12.6
(vii) "To protect the open countryside and retain it intrinsic rural character for the benefit of residents and Visitors."
(ix) "To protect and conserve the historic landscape mosaic, particular in the High Weald AONB."

Agricultural holdings

Some agricultural builings, when converted into accommodation should be allowed to have some acreage to encourage small holdings and young farmers.

Refer to www.the-democratic-link.co.uk see menu, go to Agriculture and food, also EU, for more insight

CPRE Sussex welcomes and supports Policy RA2 on the General Strategy for the Countryside, particularly the following criteria:

(iii) strictly limit new development to that which supports local agricultural, economic or tourism needs and maintains or improves the rural character;

(viii) generally conserving the intrinsic value, locally distinctive rural character, landscape features, built heritage, and the natural and ecological resources of the countryside.

Greater linkage should be made between the two policies to ensure that the promotion of tourism in EC6 is equally reflected in RA2 for the rural areas. Improved economic activity in the District based on tourism should not be limited to the towns and villages. Whilst Policy RA2 (vii) provides a broad policy direction, it needs to be more positive in seeking to attract better levels and quality of tourism including accommodation and self-catering facilities in rural locations. In addition it should promote the improvement of facilities related to existing tourism facilities or the Core Strategy should include a specific tourism policy reflecting and reinforcing paragraphs 12.28 - 12.30. The policy would be more effective in terms of supporting rural-based tourism and would better reflect the importance that tourism plays in the national, regional and local economies, as reflected in current PPS21 and emerging NPPF policy.

In addition, it is felt that Policy EC6 would be more effective in promoting tourism development if the following was added to the list of opportunities under paragraph 16.32:

" for holiday parks to become hotels in towns, villages and in rural locations"

Southern Water is unable to support the Core Strategy as sound because Policy RA2 fails to recognise water and wastewater infrastructure as acceptable forms of development in the countryside. This approach is unduly restrictive and could prevent delivery of necessary infrastructure. This is contrary to paragraph 27 (iv) of PPS1 which requires the provision of essential infrastructure to be taken into account to deliver sustainable development.

Southern Water fully appreciates the planning authority's wish to control development in the countryside. However, it is important that policies do not unduly restrict provision of essential water supply and wastewater infrastructure. Policy RA2 should recognise that essential utility development is acceptable in the countryside if it is required to serve new and existing development.

Furthermore, although we accept that impacts on the countryside should always be minimised, in some cases total avoidance is not possible.

In such cases, and where the benefit of the development outweighs the negative impact, mitigation or compensation might be the most sustainable way to proceed. This approach is consistent with paragraph 19 of PPS1.

RA2 (iii) makes adequate reference to tourism within the general strategy for the countryside.

RA2 (vii) should be deleted. The purpose of this policy sub-clause is ill-defined.

What could "respond to identified local needs" mean and lead to in the context of tourism? What does "scale and location in keeping with the rural character of the countryside" really mean and add?

This is an overarching strategy for the countryside but there is specific reference to "touring caravan and camp sites". Yet touring caravan sites are not referred to in Policy EC6, the Tourism Core Policy, save perhaps in the supporting text which promotes the replacement of "older caravan provision" with holiday lodges.

The policy is unclear, unsuitable for overarching countryside strategy, replicates content which should fall within a Core Policy only and promotes a different type of development to the Tourism Core Policy, as it is currently drafted.

Please read in conjunction with Objection to EC6 and tourism text.



RA2 (viii)

Delete "generally" and replace with "conserve and enhance natural beauty".

83% of the district is designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and there is nothing within this overarching strategy to recognise the designation exists and that it is important.

It is RDC's statutory duty to conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Perhaps the role of environmental stewardship could be mentioned in the supportive text of this policy. Environmental Stewardship is an agri-environment scheme that provides funding to farmers and other land managers in England to deliver effective environmental management on their land.
Funding and advice through Environmental Stewardship is helping land managers to conserve, enhance and promote the countryside by:
■ looking after wildlife, species and their many habitats;
■ ensuring land is well managed and retains its traditional character;
■ protecting historic features and natural resources;
■ ensuring traditional livestock and crops are conserved; and
■ providing opportunities for people to visit and learn about the countryside.
Underlying these benefits, Environmental Stewardship is helping the natural environment to adapt to climate change, for example, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, providing and protecting carbon storage, and helping to manage flooding.
These agri-environment schemes provide crucial financial support to help landowners in the sustainable management of their land both within the designated sites and outside. There are a substantial number of agreements in the Rother areas, around 40 - 50 agri-environment schemes, across the wider area of Romney Marsh, Walland Marsh, Pett Levels and Brede Valley alone. A core element of Natural England‟s work is setting up new schemes