Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 24699
Received: 27/05/2024
Respondent: Mr Jonathan Vine-Hall
There does not appear to be enough sites for G and T's shown in the possible site allocations compared to the evidence base . The site allocations show a potential of 19 pitches and the evidence base shows a need of 22 ethnic based pitches 12 PPTS and 9 work based. It is clear that the watermill lane site is undeliverable as the owner (seachange) has not released this since its previous allocation 9 years ago so this site should be discarded as unavailable and therefore not being able to meet the test to allocate a site. RDC could have sought compulsory purchase of this site from Seachange but has not done so. The result of this leaves only one site (Loose Farm) available with all other sites yet to be fully assessed. That assessment should have taken place for this consultation.
There does not appear to be enough sites for G and T's shown in the possible site allocations compared to the evidence base . The site allocations show a potential of 19 pitches and the evidence base shows a need of 22 ethnic based pitches 12 PPTS and 9 work based. It is clear that the watermill lane site is undeliverable as the owner (seachange) has not released this since its previous allocation 9 years ago so this site should be discarded as unavailable and therefore not being able to meet the test to allocate a site. RDC could have sought compulsory purchase of this site from Seachange but has not done so. The result of this leaves only one site (Loose Farm) available with all other sites yet to be fully assessed. That assessment should have taken place for this consultation.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 24843
Received: 13/06/2024
Respondent: Ms Brooke Ramsdale
With reference to the points: iv, v, vii. The site is on a highly dangerous road: fast, huge trucks, heavy traffic. We recently had a man killed and dragged by a truck, near the site in question. The truck didn't even realise it had hit the man, and there was nothing left of the body within moments - I witnessed it moments after it happened and saw the result. there is no footpath/foot access, and nor should there be given the danger. Plus when post men stop outside the neighbouring houses it causes hugely dangerous conditions on the crest of a hill, cars trying to go around, with fast moving trucks coming the other way. I cannot stress how dangerous is it, and how much adding traffic will add danger and inconvenience for everyone, esp cars pulling in and out (even more so caravans!)
With reference to the points: iv, v, vii. The site is on a highly dangerous road: fast, huge trucks, heavy traffic. We recently had a man killed and dragged by a truck, near the site in question. The truck didn't even realise it had hit the man, and there was nothing left of the body within moments - I witnessed it moments after it happened and saw the result. there is no footpath/foot access, and nor should there be given the danger. Plus when post men stop outside the neighbouring houses it causes hugely dangerous conditions on the crest of a hill, cards trying to go around, with fast moving trucks coming the other way. I cannot stress how dangerous is it, and how much adding traffic will add danger and inconvenience for everyone, esp cars pulling in and out (even more so caravans!)
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 25778
Received: 22/07/2024
Respondent: Mr Ben Linker
Unless adequate provision for enforcement of any obligations by the site occupiers is in place, there is a high probability that such obligations (tree preservation orders, refuse disposal, interference with nearby residents etc etc) will be ignored, resulting in misery for locals and large and unsustainable costs by the council in trying to enforce and supervise. Just like all the laws that apply to the rest of us, there is no point in having them if you can't enforce. Aside from all the other criteria regarding suitability, the occupiers should enter a covenant that allows for expedient eviction if they fail to abide by their responsibilities. Anecdotally I have been advised that in some cases the council does not have the resource to enforce notices, and in that case they should not be considered as viable.
Unless adequate provision for enforcement of any obligations by the site occupiers is in place, there is a high probability that such obligations (tree preservation orders, refuse disposal, interference with nearby residents etc etc) will be ignored, resulting in misery for locals and large and unsustainable costs by the council in trying to enforce and supervise. Just like all the laws that apply to the rest of us, there is no point in having them if you can't enforce. Aside from all the other criteria regarding suitability, the occupiers should enter a covenant that allows for expedient eviction if they fail to abide by their responsibilities. Anecdotally I have been advised that in some cases the council does not have the resource to enforce notices, and in that case they should not be considered as viable.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 25913
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mr Ian Houghton-Brown
GYP0002 & GYP0003
Both sites are in the National Landscape (ANOB) and should be afforded the highest level of protection.
Under the National Planning Policy Framework Section 15 Para 180 - 186 in summary cover all the provisions to protect the National Landscape from ANY development except under exceptional circumstances.
A Gypsy site or indeed any development is not an exceptional circumstance in such an area.
The most recent NPPF guidance note dated 01.05.24 requires all developments to achieve biodiversity net gain this cannot be achieved with the loss of valuable habitat that would inevitably occur.
GYP0002 & GYP0003
Both sites are in the National Landscape (ANOB) and should be afforded the highest level of protection.
Under the National Planning Policy Framework Section 15 Para 180 - 186 in summary cover all the provisions to protect the National Landscape from ANY development except under exceptional circumstances.
A Gypsy site or indeed any development is not an exceptional circumstance in such an area.
The most recent NPPF guidance note dated 01.05.24 requires all developments to achieve biodiversity net gain this cannot be achieved with the loss of valuable habitat that would inevitably occur.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Representation ID: 26009
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mr Ian Houghton-Brown
GYP0002 Objection to this site at Broomhill, Flimwell.
The local wildlife will be negatively affected by any occupation on this site as an area of AONB (now called National Landscape) close to ancient woodlands. Contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 172 which emphasises the conservation of and enhancement of AONBs. The site also includes historical field boundaries bordering the ancient woodland. Would contravene policy GTC8 as would not be possible to develop this area as a traveller site and demonstrate a biodiversity gain plan.
According to RDC website Point 1.35 " The extent of Ancient Woodland is also significant, covering 16% of the district - the greatest of any district in the south east (See Ancient Woodland Inventory 2010) this is a irreplaceable habitat of ecological value for nature recovery as well as carbon sequestration and cultural importance"
I believe these points will also be relevant to GYP0003
GYP0002 Objection to this site at Broomhill, Flimwell.
The local wildlife will be negatively affected by any occupation on this site as an area of AONB (now called National Landscape) close to ancient woodlands. Contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 172 which emphasises the conservation of and enhancement of AONBs. The site also includes historical field boundaries bordering the ancient woodland. Would contravene policy GTC8 as would not be possible to develop this area as a traveller site and demonstrate a biodiversity gain plan.
According to RDC website Point 1.35 " The extent of Ancient Woodland is also significant, covering 16% of the district - the greatest of any district in the south east (See Ancient Woodland Inventory 2010) this is a irreplaceable habitat of ecological value for nature recovery as well as carbon sequestration and cultural importance"
I believe these points will also be relevant to GYP0003