Comment

Representation ID: 25178

Received: 11/07/2024

Respondent: Mrs Emma Weller

The snappy punchline of 'Green to the core' and 'Live well locally' is a bold attempt to show a commitment to protecting rural communities and local ecology but your HELAA land allocation of CAT0001 and potential site CAT0016 in Catsfield fly in the face of these claims/promises. The proposal of 60 new houses (some proposing to be built on protected AONB land) in this small rural village (doubling the size of the main village), is absolutely shocking and I object strongly to these sites being included for allocation in this plan. These proposals would not only destroy ancient woodland, biodiversity and protected wildlife habitats, they would also severely impact the lives of local residents with increased pollution and a serious decline in the already insufficient utilties and local infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 26250

Received: 17/07/2024

Respondent: Burwash Parish Council

considering?
Should consider the base level of housing need rather than profit of the developer.

Comment

Representation ID: 26437

Received: 22/07/2024

Respondent: Bexhill Heritage

Q29. The Council should consider that better transport or movement links may allow for a lower density.

Comment

Representation ID: 26906

Received: 22/07/2024

Respondent: Brede Parish Council

The comment ‘Active Travel England’s has an overall objective for half of all
journeys in towns and cities to be cycles or walked by 2030’ isn’t really
achievable unless the intention is to create cycle lanes along the very busy A
roads in the district. Not many will choose to cycle along the A28 for example,
given the state of the road, the volume and speed of traffic.

Comment

Representation ID: 27397

Received: 22/07/2024

Respondent: Catsfield Parish Council

Focus on small developments in small villages

Comment

Representation ID: 27565

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Southern Housing

We support the approach and welcome the range of densities and the fact the policy is based on evidence set out in the Rother Density Study. While this is the case, we believe “compact development”, as described in the supporting text (paragraphs 4.12-4.13), is only likely to be achievable in Bexhill, Rye and some of the other larger settlements. The reason being that some parts of Rother are very low density. RDC should, therefore, consider amending the term “Compact Development”. A more appropriate term could be “Making effective and efficient use of land”.

Comment

Representation ID: 27742

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Rye Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

P64 Q29: Emphasis should be on requirements for local people, not on expensive gated developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 27954

Received: 22/07/2024

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

There is no reference to upgrading and improving strategic connectivity by road, via the strategic road network managed by National Highways and the major road network of the most economically important A class roads in the county, which are managed by the County Council. Whilst our preference for journeys is undoubtedly via active travel and public transport, it is recognised this won’t be a viable option for all, and the need for a high-quality road network is an important consideration and needs to be included. Therefore, ESCC suggest adding some detail about the need for a high-quality road network to improve strategic connectivity and support for the local transport authority (ESCC) and National Highways developing a road network that tackles congestion hotspots, reduces journey times, and prioritises buses / cycles.