QUESTION 16: Do you agree with the policy approach to shopfronts and advertising and the proposed policy wording?
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 21921
Received: 18/12/2016
Respondent: Ms Val Hunnisett
Agree with the proposed policy.
Agree with the proposed policy.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 21966
Received: 20/12/2016
Respondent: Vanessa Crouch
Agent: Stiles Harold Williams
No comment
No comment
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22162
Received: 31/01/2017
Respondent: Rye Town Council
Q15 - Shopfronts and advertising - Strongly support proposed (more prescriptive) policy
Comments by Rye Town Council on the Rother DC Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) (Local Plan)
1.The 2014 Core Strategy recognised that it needed a Development and Site Allocations Plan [DaSA Plan] (up to 2028) to identify the sites required to meet its provisions and to elaborate certain policies. It would need to tackle two specific issues affecting dwellings: to consider adjusting existing development boundaries to reduce the constraints on meeting targets; to address the shortfall of deliverable sites against the 5-year target.
2. It is noted that the DaSA Plan records the preferred sites across Rother District in two categories:
- sites where no Neighbourhood Plan (NP) is being made
- sites identified in Neighbourhood Plans; Rye is in this category.
4. Rye Town Council has considered the DaSA Plan in its three parts.
- It has NOTED Part A - the Context: (the Core Strategy), with its development requirements (not for review), and related policies. Where NPs are being prepared these are listed (Rye is listed).
- It COMMENTS on Part B - Development Policies as below. Many of these draft policies affect the RNP. Some have argued that it would have been useful to have had these as Rye was drafting its RNP, but we are where we are. We have been specifically encouraged to consider the definitive housing requirements for the Rye Neighbourhood Plan area (Rye targets have already been reconciled by Rother officers) and the policies for Development Boundaries and "Gaps".
- It has NOTED Part C - There are the Site Allocations for those parishes where no NP is being made. The only site allocations in this section relating to Rye are in Rye Harbour which we have considered in the RNP. Also there is discussion of traveller sites including one in Rye.
5. Whereas we had, at first sight, presumed that Part B might conflict with the emerging Rye NP, this is not the case. As agreed, here is the Rye TC comments in consolidated form on the three parts of DaSA.
The Rother District Development and Site Allocations Local Plan
Part A - Neighbourhood Plans (NP) - Rye NP is listed as being drafted. Version 8 emerging plan is on the website. www.ryeneighbourhoodplan.org.uk
Rother Officers have reconciled numbers in the RNP with the DaSA.
Part B Q1 - Water Efficiency -Support approach: adopt standard through Bldg Regs
Part B Q2-4 - Suggest Rye Harbour for turbines and biomass. Solar panels are not mentioned and could be fitted to large industrial and educational buildings in Rye. Support approach - should adopt national guidance standards.
Q5 - Retention of sites of social or economic value - Support approach and proposed criteria for retentions.
Q6 - Equestrian development - Support approach - as drafted
Q7 - Affordable Housing - Support Option B, in line with PPG (None under 10; 30% over 10 dwellings)
Q8 - Access to housing and space standards (Older people) - Support Option E
Q9 - 10 - Custom and self-build housing - 1% of target of 160 houses= 2 for Rye Rye could support 5 homes which is around 3%. Support Option D; a site is identified in Rye NP
Q11 - External residential areas - Support proposed policy
Q12 - Extensions to residential gardens - Support proposed policy
Q13 - Extensions and alterations, including annexes - Support proposed policy
Q14 - Boundary treatments and accesses -Support proposed policy
Q15 - Shopfronts and advertising - Strongly support proposed (more prescriptive) policy
Holiday Sites - Support proposed policy
Q16 - Existing Businesses and Sites - Support proposed policy
Q17 - Landscape and AONB - Support proposed policy
Q18 - Strategic Gaps - Rye-Rye Harbour to be extended Support the proposed definition of strategic gap, but given the unique nature and profile of Rye could be extended to gaps on the Eastern and Western approaches: New Road, Military Road and New Winchelsea Rd
Q19 - Bio diversity and Green Space - Support the policy approach
Q20 - Drainage - Support the policy approach
Q21 - Land Stability - There is a risk of (sandstone) rockfall around Rye. The rock structure is of similar composition to cliff structure of Fairlight / Pett . The risk locations include East, South and West Citadel; land above Military Rd and at Cadborough. Rye should be specifically identified and a similar policy applied to land at risk above and below where historical falls have occurred. Propose inclusion of Rye as for Fairlight and Pett Level
Q22 - Environmental Pollution - Support policy approach
Q23 - Comprehensive Development -Support policy approach
Q24 - Development Boundaries - The RNP proposes two changes to the development boundary of Rye. Policy approach should cater for this.
Part C - Targets
Rye (and Rye Harbour) Overall Targets: 355-400 dwellings (40 in Rye Harbour), 10-20,000 sqm employment. Dwellings Number Breakdown has been agreed with Rother DC Officers:
Total Completions Large Site Small Site Windfall
355 198 22 6 22
Balance: 107
Rye Harbour - Allocation to Rye Harbour - 40 dwellings - Support policy approach; as directed by Rother DC, and for historical reasons, the RNP has text covering the target of 40 dwellings in Rye Harbour (Icklesham Parish)
The 40 are included in the Rye target of 400 as above.
Traveller sites - Traveller Site - Rye Gritting Depot is listed but not a preferred option - Support policy approach
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22239
Received: 20/02/2017
Respondent: AmicusHorizon Ltd (Rother Homes)
Option B but again needs some flexibility in terms of timescales to prevent sites staying empty for too long.
Option B but again needs some flexibility in terms of timescales to prevent sites staying empty for too long.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22273
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Darwell Area Conservation Society
We support DEC2 to prevent damaging development in the AONB
We support DEC2 to prevent damaging development in the AONB
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22327
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Rosalyn Day
It depends on what is considered appropriate. Sign illumination can be very thorny, particularly in areas that have little or no street lighting and the increasing drive towards reducing light pollution and improving "dark skies". I think the policy surrounding free-standing adverts on streets should be stronger - there are quite a few that reduce the usability of the pavement.
The policy on adverts in rural areas and "clutter" in the countryside should be more strongly worded to prevent too many roadside or field based signage.
It depends on what is considered appropriate. Sign illumination can be very thorny, particularly in areas that have little or no street lighting and the increasing drive towards reducing light pollution and improving "dark skies". I think the policy surrounding free-standing adverts on streets should be stronger - there are quite a few that reduce the usability of the pavement.
The policy on adverts in rural areas and "clutter" in the countryside should be more strongly worded to prevent too many roadside or field based signage.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22364
Received: 19/02/2017
Respondent: Salehurst & Robertsbridge Parish Council
We agree with draft Policy DEC1, but would wish to see, in relation to Conservation Areas, a provision which prohibits continued reliance upon previous permitted development which are not in harmony with the principles of the Conservation Area, for example vinyl window coverings, which are not acceptable.
We agree with draft Policy DEC1, but would wish to see, in relation to Conservation Areas, a provision which prohibits continued reliance upon previous permitted development which are not in harmony with the principles of the Conservation Area, for example vinyl window coverings, which are not acceptable.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22399
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Ticehurst Parish Council
Option B preferred
A more detailed policy which sets out the different types of proposals as well as issues raised and provides detailed criteria against which proposals would be judged
Option B preferred
A more detailed policy which sets out the different types of proposals as well as issues raised and provides detailed criteria against which proposals would be judged
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22425
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Northiam Conservation Society
NCS agrees with policy approach and wording
NCS agrees with policy approach and wording
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22484
Received: 20/02/2017
Respondent: Miss Judith Rogers
Option B is the best solution especially in village environments.
Option B is the best solution especially in village environments.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22507
Received: 18/02/2017
Respondent: Rye Conservation Society
Rye Conservation Society strongly supports the proposed policy and wording.
Rye Conservation Society strongly supports the proposed policy and wording.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22560
Received: 19/02/2017
Respondent: Mrs Sheena Carmichael
Agree with Option B and wording
Agree with Option B and wording
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22628
Received: 20/02/2017
Respondent: Salehurst & Robertsbridge Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group
We value your approach to shop fronts, which can create significant disadvantages, particularly in Conservation Areas such as we have in Robertsbridge. Our SRNP Policy EC1 specifically refers to this problem, where we require shop fronts and lighting to be in keeping with the Conservation Area. We go further and ask for positive restoration to a suitable character of shop fronts which have been allowed to become non-compliant in the past.
We value your approach to shop fronts, which can create significant disadvantages, particularly in Conservation Areas such as we have in Robertsbridge. Our SRNP Policy EC1 specifically refers to this problem, where we require shop fronts and lighting to be in keeping with the Conservation Area. We go further and ask for positive restoration to a suitable character of shop fronts which have been allowed to become non-compliant in the past.
Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 23232
Received: 18/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Dominic Manning
Agree on Option B. Again, serves to clarify previously ambiguous policy.
Agree on Option B. Again, serves to clarify previously ambiguous policy.