Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26141
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Rye Conservation Society
Housing
P213 to 292
Q109 – 113
Rye - Please see earlier remarks about “sustainable development”. P18. Proposed Policy HOU1: Mixed and Balanced Communities P214 Rye - HOU1 (iii) One of the most pressing priorities in Rye is the need for affordable and social housing. With around one fifth of the stock in Rye now second homes or buy to let, developers must not be allowed to argue on viability grounds (using their own procured studies) that schemes cannot provide. The Community tell us all the time that there are few options for young people in the hospitality industry, on which Rye depends, on minimum level wages to live. All options must be considered including perhaps blocks of single bedroom units for shared ownership, lease or purchase. This requirement is a higher priority to units for older people.
Housing
P213 to 292
Q109 – 113
Rye - Please see earlier remarks about “sustainable development”. P18. Proposed Policy HOU1: Mixed and Balanced Communities P214 Rye - HOU1 (iii) One of the most pressing priorities in Rye is the need for affordable and social housing. With around one fifth of the stock in Rye now second homes or buy to let, developers must not be allowed to argue on viability grounds (using their own procured studies) that schemes cannot provide. The Community tell us all the time that there are few options for young people in the hospitality industry, on which Rye depends, on minimum level wages to live. All options must be considered including perhaps blocks of single bedroom units for shared ownership, lease or purchase. This requirement is a higher priority to units for older people.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26211
Received: 17/07/2024
Respondent: Mrs Susan Cavilla
Brownfield sites and disused buildings should be identified and used for any new development NOT Greenfield sites
I will start off by commenting that it is a very detailed ambitious plan covering many aspects of life in Rother. I am not sure whether many parts of it will come to fruition due to the cost and I understand that Rother is putting aside a huge sum of money to repair our dreadful roads. The roads suffer from the amount of lorries and industrial vehicles which thunder through our towns and villages.
Due to the incompetence of the Council the Plan which should have been out on 2024 is now due in 2026.
Our local plan which was worked on for 3 years and is very detailed was supposed to take us to 2039. That has now been changed without consultation to 2028. Why?
My comments of course mainly relate to Peasmarsh where I live but I have made comments on other parts of the Plan
In section 1.9 Peasmarsh has been missed out as one of the Villages which have a Local Adopted Plan so it should state 8 Villages – not 7.
In Fig. 35 on Page 173 it does state that Peasmarsh has a Local Adopted Plan.
Our Village, Peasmarsh suffers from flooding, sewerage problems and electricity failures.
The warden assisted development in the Maltings was closed – people were relocated away and a large new development built on the site ( the only 3 storey development in Peasmarsh). The grassed area was built on and now properties in Farm Gardens below this development have flooding problems as no measure was put in place to cope with the problems caused by concreting this entire area. Also the roads were left in a poor state from all the heavy equipment and vehicles used to erect this development.
I agree with high standards for building (though no mention was made of fire safety).
The very old listed Church, at the highest point of the Village, suffered from flooding last year and this year so half of the Graves and the path were under water. Not much hope for the Village which is lower down!
No mention is made of the specific needs of children and the facilities required to enable them to do well in this area.
Farmland should be protected which will help food security and fits well with your Green to the Core and Live Well Locally emphasis in the Plan
Our farmers need all the help they can get and their produce and livestock means we can buy locally (less food and transport miles)
8.94 I agree that it is not appropriate to make provision for higher levels of care beds.
Mention was made in the Plan of Roads and Streets but none about Lanes – which you find in most Villages.
Public Rights of Way should be upheld though a proviso should be added regarding dogs being kept on leads on fields containing livestock. Again a sheep owned by our local farmer was savaged by a dog allowed to run loose.
I agree that Ancient Woodlands, SSSI’s should be protected and Dungeness which is a unique site in itself.
I agree that Habitats and Dark Skies should be protected. I hope we never have street lighting in Peasmarsh.
Brownfield sites and disused buildings should be identified and used for any new development NOT Greenfield sites
In principle I agree with ENVI – Coastal Water and Flood Risk Management and EC07.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26302
Received: 17/07/2024
Respondent: Burwash Parish Council
HWMP and design guidance within it should be noted.
Please see attached comments from Burwash Parish Council.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26626
Received: 22/07/2024
Respondent: Ticehurst Parish Council
1. All residential development should be of a density appropriate to its context, having due regard to key design principles. – This requirement appears to have been removed without explanation.
2. These changes do not give clarity on development strategy and could be interpreted in conjunction with viability assessments to the detriment of the locality and AONB.
Individual comments made on specific policies as logged
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26666
Received: 29/07/2024
Respondent: Stephen Nicholls
Comments on proposed policy on general development considerations.
Please see attached comments for text.
Please see attached submission.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26818
Received: 31/07/2024
Respondent: Northern Parishes Group
48) The group particularly welcomes the sentence at part ii).
Full representation attached
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 27080
Received: 22/07/2024
Respondent: Westfield Parish Council
See points 109-111 in the attached submission.
Please see attached document for the full submission from Westfield Parish Council.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 27318
Received: 22/07/2024
Respondent: Wadhurst Parish Council
1. All residential development should be of a density appropriate to its context, having due regard to key design principles. – This requirement appears to have been removed without explanation.
2. These changes do not give clarity on development strategy and could be interpreted in conjunction with viability assessments to the detriment of the locality and AONB.
Support for representations made by Ticehurst Parish Council.
Individual comments made on specific policies as logged.
Please also see attached a draft policy for Bewl Water drawn up by the Northern Parishes Group.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 27610
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Southern Housing
We agree with the aims of this policy in principle. As this is a review of Policy OSS4 in the current Core Strategy, the loss of criterion v) (relating to housing density) should be justified. The current version of the NPPF (December 2023), includes guidance on density (paragraphs 128 – 130) and the draft Plan includes Policy LWL1: Compact Development. The need for appropriate densities therefore remains a key issue at both the national and local level. In light of this, RDC should consider retaining a similar point in the current policy. Point iii) could also be strengthened to encourage the delivery of high-quality design, for example: “Demonstrates a strong understanding of the local context and that all opportunities have been taken to deliver high-quality design that respects and does not detract from the character and appearance of the locality”. This approach will be in line with Chapter 12 of the NPPF and ensure the need for good design is seen as a priority.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 27784
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Rye Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group
Rye agrees: “In addition to considerations set out by other policies, all development should meet the following criteria:
-To meet the needs of future occupiers, including providing appropriate amenities and the provision of appropriate means of access for disabled users;
-Not to harm the amenities of adjoining properties;
-To respect and not detract from the character and appearance of the locality;
-To be compatible with both the existing and planned use of adjacent land, and to take full account of previous use of the site.”
Rye - Sustainable development and the presumption of sustainable development must include a full consideration of all three key factors described in the comments on P17/18.
Please see attachment
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 27852
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mr Alex Ainslie
Agent: Bidwells
3.4.1 Overall, the intention of Draft Policy DEV1 is supported; development should meet the needs of its occupiers without harming the amenity of adjoining properties or the character of the locality. However, the requirement that all development “takes full account of the previous use of the site” should be clarified.
3.4.2 A site undergoing development will often not be retaining its previous use, and therefore the requirement to ‘take full account’ of the previous use of the site needs further explanation. We suggest that this refers to acknowledging the site’s heritage and history within the design process. The requirement cannot be more prescriptive than this, given the wide range of previous uses that exist, alongside variation in constraints and development requirements meaning that each site requires a unique approach to development.
See the two attachments which comprise the representation from Bidwells LLP on behalf of the landowner of HELAA Site BEX0050: Land south of Barnhorn Road which comments on the Local Plan itself as well as the suitability of site BEX0050.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 28269
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Environment Agency
We would welcome the development of historic landfills where remediation is appropriate and feasible.
Please see full the Environment Agency's representations, please see attached submission document.