Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Search representations
Results for Sedlescombe Parish Council search
New searchObject
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy HF1: The Hastings Fringes
Representation ID: 20601
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
(iii) It is not justified to exclude the gap between the Hastings fringes and Sedlescombe from this policy. Sedlescombe Village settlement is situated just to the east of the A21 and is 3 miles from Rother's boundary with Hastings. Sedlescombe's separate identity and local distinctive character ought to be protected by retaining the countryside gap. The countryside area between Hastings and Sedlescombe includes Beauport Park (in the parish of Westfield) which is an important historic Roman site.
(iii) It is not justified to exclude the gap between the Hastings fringes and Sedlescombe from this policy. Sedlescombe Village settlement is situated just to the east of the A21 and is 3 miles from Rother's boundary with Hastings. Sedlescombe's separate identity and local distinctive character ought to be protected by retaining the countryside gap. The countryside area between Hastings and Sedlescombe includes Beauport Park (in the parish of Westfield) which is an important historic Roman site.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy HF1: The Hastings Fringes
Representation ID: 20602
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The inclusion of bus improvements in the policy to improve access to the A21 at Baldlsow would be neither effective not justified as bus improvements would not improve access to the A21.
The inclusion of bus improvements in the policy to improve access to the A21 at Baldlsow would be neither effective not justified as bus improvements would not improve access to the A21.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy HF1: The Hastings Fringes
Representation ID: 20603
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
(vi) The need to build up to an additional 80 dwellings on the Hastings fringes has not been fully justified because there is a lack of available development land in the Rother District on the Hastings fringes.
(vi) The need to build up to an additional 80 dwellings on the Hastings fringes has not been fully justified because there is a lack of available development land in the Rother District on the Hastings fringes.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy RA4: Traditional Historic Farm Buildings
Representation ID: 20604
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
It is not justified to support the conversion of historic farm buildings for affordable housing at the same time as including Policy RA1(vi) which speaks about new development being sited in close proximity to key facilities and in locations accessible via a range of transport options. Farm buildings are usually remote from key facilities and public transport.
It is not justified to support the conversion of historic farm buildings for affordable housing at the same time as including Policy RA1(vi) which speaks about new development being sited in close proximity to key facilities and in locations accessible via a range of transport options. Farm buildings are usually remote from key facilities and public transport.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy CO3: Improving Sports and Recreation Provision
Representation ID: 20605
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Whilst increasing access to the countryside by promoting improvements to the rights of way network is supported, it is not justified to include the words "especially around urban areas, particularly in reference to Pebsham Countryside Park". To be consistent, all rights of way should be afforded the same protection otherwise some paths receive considerably more attention to the detriment of more rural paths.
Whilst increasing access to the countryside by promoting improvements to the rights of way network is supported, it is not justified to include the words "especially around urban areas, particularly in reference to Pebsham Countryside Park". To be consistent, all rights of way should be afforded the same protection otherwise some paths receive considerably more attention to the detriment of more rural paths.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy CO4: Supporting Young People
Representation ID: 20606
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
It is not justified to speak about providing various housing options suited to the needs of young people, especially in Bexhill and the rural areas whilst missing out Battle and Rye.
It is not justified to speak about providing various housing options suited to the needs of young people, especially in Bexhill and the rural areas whilst missing out Battle and Rye.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy CO4: Supporting Young People
Representation ID: 20607
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
It is not justified to omit employment as one of the key services.
It is not justified to omit employment as one of the key services.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy LHN1: Achieving Mixed and Balanced Communities
Representation ID: 20608
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The inclusion of Policy LHN1(i) cannot be justified because the current and projected housing needs of Sedlescombe parish are unknown as the figures are so outdated having been gathered in 2001, ie 10 years ago.
The inclusion of Policy LHN1(i) cannot be justified because the current and projected housing needs of Sedlescombe parish are unknown as the figures are so outdated having been gathered in 2001, ie 10 years ago.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy LHN1: Achieving Mixed and Balanced Communities
Representation ID: 20609
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The proposal to include at least 30% one or two bedroom dwellings is not justified as "The Affordable Housing" background paper states that the majority of affordable housing stock in the district already comprises of smaller dwellings. More larger family homes, it suggests, are needed.
The proposal to include at least 30% one or two bedroom dwellings is not justified as "The Affordable Housing" background paper states that the majority of affordable housing stock in the district already comprises of smaller dwellings. More larger family homes, it suggests, are needed.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy LHN1: Achieving Mixed and Balanced Communities
Representation ID: 20610
Received: 21/09/2011
Respondent: Sedlescombe Parish Council
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
In Policy LHN1(vi), the term "where practical" is unclear.
In Policy LHN1(vi), the term "where practical" is unclear.
