Core Strategy Issues & Options

Comment

Representation ID: 18846

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support the issues and options brought forward in the core strategy. We believe the Council’s preferred options need to focus on retail, and in particular out of town retail. Additional leisure sites should be identified, which could be used to enhance the vitality of town centres. We support the broad themes with particular reference to providing local shopping, which will enhance the economy, and improve the retail offer at Bexhill. Effective recreation/community facilities are essential for viability of the District, and such locations should be identified.

Comment

Representation ID: 18847

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support Aim 2 of the Rother Local Plan to ensure that there is adequate infrastructure and services to support thriving communities and facilitate new development. We emphasise the need for further retail investment in Bexhill and the Borough.

Comment

Representation ID: 18848

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support the key aims of providing for local shopping needs; and providing sufficient and effective recreation and other community facilities.

We note that Bexhill does not currently accommodate many multiple retailers and the current town centre retail offer is poor. There is therefore a large amount of leakage to other larger centres such as Brighton. Improving the retail offer would be economically beneficial to the town and Borough as a whole.

We believe that quality recreation facilities can be provided in the Borough, and priority sites need to be identified for such use in appropriate locations.

Out of centre retailing can provide a more appropriate offer for shoppers and should be enhanced.

Comment

Representation ID: 18849

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support the broad principles for the location of development, particularly the priority to make best use of urban land, especially through the re-use of previously developed land / buildings.

With regard to retail, we recognise that the size and location of existing units do not provide for an attractive shopping environment for customers and occupiers. Therefore, alternative locations are required, and existing out of centre locations should be considered appropriate for further retailing, such as Ravenside Retail Park.

Community and recreation facilities in out of town location may not be the most appropriate location as modernisation and expansion in existing locations would not be possible.

Comment

Representation ID: 18850

Received: 14/02/2007

Respondent: Land Securities plc

Agent: CGMS Ltd

We support Option 3: Coordinated development at Bexhill and on the edge of Hastings through improving retail opportunities, which would be beneficial for Bexhill and Hastings. Retail parks in this area would improve the retail offer and provide a local/district centre for the additional dwellings proposed. Furthermore, improving leisure facilities by identifying sites would prevent the settlements from becoming dormitory, as is often the case with people travelling further afield for such facilities.