Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Object

Representation ID: 19553

Received: 25/02/2009

Respondent: Trustees of the Glyndebourne 1991 L & P Trust

Agent: Mr. Dale Mayhew

Core Strategy obliged to be in broad conformity with the emerging SE Plan, as it represents a higher tier part of Development Plan. This sets out a requirement at Policy H4, that LDFs should set targets for the provision of affordable housing, having regard to the overall regional target that 25% of all new housing should be social rented accommodation and 10% other forms of AH. The existing LP exceeds this target, and relies on justification of the disparity of average income to average house price.
Nonetheless, a further increase within the rural parishes to 50% would represent a significant departure from draft Policy H4, placing the policy in conflict with a higher tier Development Plan policy.
Any increase above existing LP level is likely to jeopardise the viability of delivering local market housing, due to the increased burden of providing high numbers of affordable housing units. A lack of viability could stem the
flow of new housing, resulting in the failure of the District to meet its annualised housing target figures. This would likely worsen the affordability gap that increase in the percentage seeks to address. Would therefore be counterproductive.
This concern particularly acute on mixed use sites as residential element may be required as the mechanism to enable the viability of mixed use schemes. Given this, there should be no increase in the rural area percentage beyond current Local Plan policy.
Furthermore, the Council acknowledges that it has a Rural Exception Sites Project, which is specifically designed to tackle the problem of the lack of affordable rural housing. This concept is specifically provided for in PPS3 as the
mechanism for delivering requisite affordable housing in rural communities. Should the district consider that it needs a greater delivery of affordable housing in rural areas, it should utilities a Rural Exceptions Policy to increase delivery.

Comment

Representation ID: 19554

Received: 25/02/2009

Respondent: Trustees of the Glyndebourne 1991 L & P Trust

Agent: Mr. Dale Mayhew

PPS25 seeks to ensure that flood risk is taken into account in the planning system, to avoid inappropriate development, and where development is exceptionally necessary in such areas, the policy is then to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and possibly reducing flood risk overall.
It is therefore important that the preferred strategy for flood risk within the Document acknowledges that within an overall context of minimising flood risk, some development in areas at risk of flooding may be acceptable, having regard to wider sustainability benefits, and through application of the sequential test and exception test.
The strategy should also indicate that regard will be had to areas for development which benefit
from the provision of flood defences, which can provide a high level of protection.

Comment

Representation ID: 19555

Received: 25/02/2009

Respondent: Trustees of the Glyndebourne 1991 L & P Trust

Agent: Mr. Dale Mayhew

With reference to aims of Box 35(b). The subsequent text should acknowledge that this can best be achieved by recognising the merits of supporting development in locations that are in close proximity to existing public transport nodes and corridors. Not only will this encourage sustainable travel patterns by users of the subsequent development, but it will increase the likelihood of securing the long term viability of such public transport.
It should therefore be acknowledged that significant weight will be given to supporting development within walking distance of bus stops and railway stations, with good interconnecting services to other settlements and urban areas.

Support

Representation ID: 19556

Received: 25/02/2009

Respondent: Trustees of the Glyndebourne 1991 L & P Trust

Agent: Mr. Dale Mayhew

PPS7 makes clear that within rural areas, Planning Authorities should focus most new
development in or near to Local Service Centres and that these should be identified in
Development Plan Documents as the preferred location for development.
The Rother District Council Rural Settlements Study identifies Robertsbridge as a Rural Service
Centre, having regard to its extensive services and level of accessibility by non-car modes of
transport.
Having regard to both these factors, strong support is given to the Council's identification of the
settlement of Robertsbridge as benefiting from "development potential" as identified on the
District Key Diagram to accompany the Core Strategy Document.