Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Comment

Representation ID: 19460

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Coastal Erosion / Landslip / Unstable Land
This appears not to be mentioned in the main text. Flood Risk is dealt with at Para 12.38. Erosion etc should receive equal prominence. Rother District Council has had responsibilities in this matter as the Coast Protection Authority.
Although erosion etc affects fewer people than flood the consequences are usually more drastic, resulting in the total loss of properties without compensation. Fairlight has been affected by the loss of properties in Rockmead Road and, earlier, in Sea Road.

Comment

Representation ID: 19461

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Para 5.97 sets out the criteria "... drawn from Government and regional planning policies, as the basis for site identification in the Site sets out Allocations DPD." There is no reference to coastal erosion etc. Para 5.97 (d) refers to "Physical and infrastructure constraints, including flood risk, access;" We ask for erosion etc to be added. There is Government Planning Guidance on unstable land, PPG14 Development on Unstable Land, and it would be appropriate to mention it here.

Comment

Representation ID: 19463

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Para 5.99(h) refers to "Safety, including flood risk and contamination". Erosion etc and also land drainage should be mentioned. Fairlight suffers from poorly drained soil, water logging and the underground passage of water which has been one of the causes of the Rockmead Road landslip.

Comment

Representation ID: 19464

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Box 3 (e) Hastings Outskirts development.
It should be clarified that this does not refer to the Fairlight (east) side of Hastings, perhaps by a cross reference Box 11a(iii)

Comment

Representation ID: 19465

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Paras 6.40 to 6.54 Hastings Fringes.
Para 6.41 provides - "It is also important to retain effective countryside gaps between Hastings ... and the nearby villages." Box 11(a)(iii) page 47 specifically refers to "...long term and effective countryside gaps between Hastings and ... Fairlight"
Map 2 inset shows the Hastings / Fairlight gap at a rather small scale. We support the gap in principle, but would like clarification of its precise extent and would welcome an opportunity to comment further.

Comment

Representation ID: 19466

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Para 5.79 (and elsewhere) Hastings/Bexhill Link Road
The Link Road is clearly essential to the Strategy. If it is not built then one of the options to achieve the South east Plan target is to "Allocate additional sites in other towns or in villages to be brought forward if necessary to maintain development levels" - para 5.86(2). We agree that option should be ruled out - para 5.88. Possibly villages should be referred to in the reasoning at para 5.87, the villages being unable to make up the deficit.

Comment

Representation ID: 19469

Received: 24/02/2009

Respondent: Fairlight Parish Council

Rother should introduce a policy to encourage small businesses within villages.