Core Strategy Consultation on Strategy Directions 2008

Object

Representation ID: 19415

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

The 'Scope and issues' section gives very mixed messages. 'How to maximise accessibility to jobs, shops and services is identified as being 'the main issue' (13.1) which suggests that a 'travel to work area focus' on forming strategy would be appropriate. In contrast however, paragraphs 13.2 - 13.4 move us quickly on to a discussion on big regional infrastructure. There is a lack of coherence. Access by buses is singled out as a specific issue , but that is only one of many issues around modes that have to be addressed. It is misleading to begin a debate on modes of transport at the objectives setting phase of a draft strategic document.

Object

Representation ID: 19416

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

In 13.2 an assertion is made that 'Rother generally is disadvantaged, at least in economic terms, by the journey time involved in travelling to London/Brighton/Ashford and the South East.' There is no evidence to support this.

The negative view of infrastructure - often characterised in terms of, for example, 'long journey times to London', ignores geography. Comparisons are often made with Brighton and its 'under one hour' train journey times to London. This is largely irrelevant: Brighton is considerably closer to London than Bexhill/Hastings, and unlike the Brighton line, the Charing Cross line has to traverse the hilly High Weald, often on tight curves. To reduce rail journey times, a completely new line would have to be built.

Object

Representation ID: 19417

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

The word 'peripherality' is frequently used to give a negative impression of Rother, with the need of big new roads to bring it 'closer' to London. Rother District is where it is, and infrastructure investment of the sort that is often suggested, is unaffordable, would hugely damage local economies and wreck the natural assets that are a significant part of those economies. It would also undermine efforts to build on the considerable strengths of the area - outstanding countryside, unique natural environments and cherished heitage.

It is important to reflect that geography is less of a consideration in a context of the growth in 'home-working' possibilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 19418

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

The aim/objectives seem broadly acceptable, provided that the starting point is an examination of the potential for improving access within travel to work areas (TTWAs) by sustainable modes. Such new links, as well as improved links, as are needed with the rest of the region should mesh with the improved 'sustainable linkages' within the TTWAs and should themselves lead to increased opportunities for travel by sustainable modes.

Comment

Representation ID: 19419

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

For us, it clearly follows that if links and opportunities to use sustainable modes within TTWAs are expanded and of high quality, then there would be far greater clarity about the need, scale and nature of linkages with the wider region. Thus, there need be no conflict or competition for funding between the 'local' and the 'regional'. Then there would be no need to characterise big and expensive infrastructure as 'strategic'. In this scenario, the conundrum described in para 13.6 ceases to exist.

Object

Representation ID: 19420

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

Para 13.11 strongly makes the point that 2/3rds of people travel to work by car, but fails to make the point that this presents a positive challenge and opportunity to tackle the problem it represents, as if preparing us for failure to deliver mode shift. Paras 13.12/13 make some sense (they are after all official policy).

Object

Representation ID: 19421

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

We strongly believe that the Link Road, if built, (a (i) would undermine opportunities to move significantly towards 'rebalancing transport away from the car and towards non-car modes'. It is also acknowledged by the promoters to have major negative environmental impacts. If built, it would be a disaster and undermine, not support regeneration.

Object

Representation ID: 19422

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

The preferred strategy for the Economy and the aims and objectives for the Environment offer two conflicting policy aims. In the document as a whole, 'the environment' loses as no attempt has been made to reconcile 'economy' with 'environment', or to understand their interdependence.

A (ii) and (iii) are likely in our view (confirmed by the SACTRA Report) to result in damage to local economies which will suffer through expansion of links north. We also believe car borne commuting will expand.

Object

Representation ID: 19423

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

A ( Strategic accessibility)(ii) and (iii) are likely to (confirmed by the SACTRA Report) result in damage to local economies which will suffer through expansion to links north. Car-borne commuting will expand.

Comment

Representation ID: 19424

Received: 30/01/2009

Respondent: Transport Futures East Sussex

At iv - we support this so long as services to Three Oaks, Doleham and Winchelsea are restored and explicitly mentioned in 'b' (Local Accessibility and Sustainable Travel Patterns).