Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Comment

Representation ID: 19803

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Infrastructure:

This definition differs from the definition in 5.22. To avoid confusion the Glossary should simply refer to the definition in para 5.22.

The County Council would welcome the opportunity to work with the District Council on the matters outlined above

Comment

Representation ID: 19804

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

The Environment needs to be seen as an asset, this can be applied to the Landscape Stewardship section and Biodiversity and Greenspace. This is addressed to some extent in the latter in the context of the creation and enhancement of green networks.

Also relevant to this is the concept of Ecosystem Services. Provision for maintaining natural environments could be incorporated into policy frameworks.
With reference to green networks and green infrastructure, a consistent terminology should be applied throughout the document.

Note that Box 30 (e) contains an incorrect reference; this should be policy NRM5, not 4, of the South East Plan (proposed changes).

Comment

Representation ID: 19805

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Whilst it is welcome that the strategy has regard, and refers, to the County Landscape Assessment 2007; this is no longer a draft document. It should also refer to the regional strategy for landscape character, Countryside Character Volume 7 South East and London, The Countryside Agency 1999.

The strategy should refer to the High Weald Management Plan 2004 and HWMP Review 2009, and aim to Conserve, enhance and manage the high quality historic, built and natural landscape character.

Some reference should be made in this section to Green Infrastructure and or Multifunctional green networks as these can bring together the various elements listed in i) to )ix
Clause iii) Should refer to historic designated landscapes as well as those that are registered.

Comment

Representation ID: 19806

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Design Quality and Built Environment

High quality design in the context of landscape character needs to recognise the significance of local settlement patterns, especially in villages and other rural areas. This should be mentioned as a bullet point under the Preferred Strategy.

Comment

Representation ID: 19807

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

• All proposed areas would need to be considered in the context of local character and the need for green infrastructure.
• f) refers to identified shortfall of open space in region of Pebsham. There is a further evidence base for this in the Strategic Open Spaces Study, East Sussex County Council,
• The limits to potential development on Hastings fringes and North West of Bexhill would need to be established in the context of landscape character and capacity and the need to define adequate countryside gaps between settlements.
• The allocation area at Upper Wilting has only limited areas where there is a moderate to low landscape capacity for development.
Development of the upper levels need more detailed assessment to judge, their acceptability in landscape terms.

Comment

Representation ID: 19808

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Battle

The area east of Powdermill Lane is very sensitive and part of the strategic gap in the local plan; this needs careful consideration and further detailed study. It is within the AONB and close to the registered battle ground. Similarly the area to the north east of Battle would require further study as the topography and visual sensitivity of these areas will be a constraint to development in the AONB.

Comment

Representation ID: 19809

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Rye

Any proposals for expansion to the north of the town would need more detailed landscape capacity study. Long views to this raised area from the levels to the east would be a particular consideration.
Similarly, the area to the west of the town is open to long views across the levels and from the raised cliff to the north.

The Strategic Open Spaces Study, East Sussex County Council, (which establishes a modification of ANGst) identifies the need for open space at Rye Harbour. The summary has been to Scrutiny and the final version will be published by March 2009 with a view to seeking adoption by districts and boroughs.

Comment

Representation ID: 19810

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Villages and Rural Areas

No adverse comment is made on the distribution of development in the rural areas. However, it is evident that further technical studies are required to assess the impacts of growth at these locations. The County Council welcomes the opportunity to work with the District council on this.

Comment

Representation ID: 19811

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

The term 'organic growth' requires definition in the glossary of terms.

Comment

Representation ID: 19812

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: East Sussex County Council

Whilst the 'plan B' options do not detract from the necessity of the introduction of the BHLR, the preferred strategy does take account of the eventuality of the BHLR either slipping in timescale or not being built.


The timing for the completion of the BHLR is incorrect in the various references throughout the document which should be amended to reflect and align with dates referenced within the BHLR Major Scheme Business Case and supportive documentation. The current anticipated completion date is December 2012. (It is noted that the table found in 13.9 also gives a completion date of 2103)