Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Search representations
Results for Rother and Hastings CPRE search
New searchObject
Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy
MOD 16.1
Representation ID: 21573
Received: 27/09/2013
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The new wording would permit mixed use by which presumably is meant residential as well, to be obtained too easily. 'Need' : by whom ? The developer to make more money? This would also apply to live work units which have been used elsewhere as a device to promote housing over a site which should remain in employment use.
The new wording would permit mixed use by which presumably is meant residential as well, to be obtained too easily. 'Need' : by whom ? The developer to make more money? This would also apply to live work units which have been used elsewhere as a device to promote housing over a site which should remain in employment use.
Object
Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy
MOD 16.2
Representation ID: 21574
Received: 27/09/2013
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Whilst we broadly support the aim of this change, as with Mod 16.1, mixed use creeps in here without any restraint all. Mixed use development has to be a last resort after all alternatives have been explored. It would be helpful also to have a definition of what is meant by strategic since what was a proto definition in the previous version has been removed in this latest one.
If particularly a village is to be sustainable and to remain so, there needs always to be economic activity and that demands sites. Otherwise a village will no longer be sustainable.
Whilst we broadly support the aim of this change, as with Mod 16.1, mixed use creeps in here without any restraint all. Mixed use development has to be a last resort after all alternatives have been explored. It would be helpful also to have a definition of what is meant by strategic since what was a proto definition in the previous version has been removed in this latest one.
If particularly a village is to be sustainable and to remain so, there needs always to be economic activity and that demands sites. Otherwise a village will atrophy and no longer be sustainable.
Object
Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy
MOD 16.3
Representation ID: 21575
Received: 27/09/2013
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
EC6 (vii) could be improved by reinstating the deleted words after 'policies' and inserting also 'including in particular capability'.
This is to emphasise the importance of the consideration of public transport for sustainability reasons, and cycle ways and footpaths for leisure and health reasons. Bridleways should also be referred to for the same reason.
EC6 (vii) could be improved by reinstating the deleted words after 'policies' and inserting also 'including in particular capability'.
This is to emphasise the importance of the consideration of public transport for sustainability reasons, and cycle ways and footpaths for leisure and health reasons. Bridleways should also be referred to for the same reason.
Object
Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy
MOD 18.1
Representation ID: 21576
Received: 27/09/2013
Respondent: Rother and Hastings CPRE
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We believe that for sustainability reasons as well as public policy reasons the proposal to put a station at Glyne Gap should be in then plan. Even with the BHLR there will be substantial traffic around the Glyne Gap area and a positive proposal to use and enhance existing public transport facilities should be grasped. Previous studies have shown pollution levels on De La Warr Road are high. Post BHLR they will still be high, enhanced by increased traffic to the revamped shopping area. So public transport access is absolutely needed.
We believe that for sustainability reasons as well as public policy reasons the proposal to put a station at Glyne Gap should be in then plan. Even with the BHLR there will be substantial traffic around the Glyne Gap area and a positive proposal to use and enhance existing public transport facilities should be grasped. Previous studies have shown pollution levels on De La Warr Road are high. Post BHLR they will still be high, enhanced by increased traffic to the revamped shopping area. So public transport access is absolutely needed.
