Proposed Submission Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan
Search representations
Results for The River Cafe search
New searchObject
Proposed Submission Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan
Policy DIM2: Development Boundaries
Representation ID: 24336
Received: 06/12/2018
Respondent: The River Cafe
Agent: Town and Country Planning Solutions
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The DaSA is seriously flawed as it does not make it clear that Development Boundaries are removed from around some settlements.
The fact that the Council has not made any reference to the proposed removal of the development boundary at Pett Level and to seek therefore, to this achieve this by default, is grossly unfair and unreasonable and could be missed by those who might otherwise wish to also submit objections to this proposed change.
The Development Boundary as a planning tool provides a clear planning purpose in making it clear where development and redevelopment will be permitted in principle and where it will not be permitted. Moreover, there remain opportunities for infill and redevelopment schemes within the existing Development Boundary and there is no sound reason why such proposals should reasonably be judged against countryside restraint policies.
The DaSA provides no justification for deleting the Development Boundary around Pett Level and this should therefore, be reinstated.
In addition, the Development Boundary should also be extended to include the whole of the developed curtilage at the property known as 'Clonette' at the north eastern end of Pett Level Road as shown attached: www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=31138.
The DaSA is seriously flawed as it does not make it clear that the Council seems to remove Development Boundaries from around some existing settlements provided for in the current Rother District Local Plan - adopted in July 2006
Through a process of deduction (as it is not stated in either Chapter 7 or Chapter 12 of the DaSA), the Council's intention to remove the current Development Boundary currently drawn around Pett Level as shown on Inset Map 29 of the adopted Local Plan. In producing Figure 14 on Page 104 and in producing Chapter 12, the Council had a clear opportunity to make it clear which settlement (other than those covered by or to be covered by Neighbourhood Plans) would have their Development Boundaries removed at the time the DaSA is adopted.
The fact that the Council has not made any reference to this proposed change in the DaSA and to seek therefore, to this achieve this by default, is grossly unfair and unreasonable and could well be missed by those who might otherwise wish to also submit objections to this proposed change.
The Development Boundary as a planning tool provides a clear planning purpose in making it clear where development and redevelopment will be permitted in principle and where it will not be permitted. Moreover, there remain opportunities for infill and redevelopment schemes within the existing Development Boundary and there is no sound reason why such proposals should reasonably be judged against countryside restraint policies, as would be the case if the Development Boundary were to be removed.
The DaSA provides no justification for deleting the Development Boundary around Pett Level and this should therefore, be reinstated in the DaSA and both Figure 14 and Chapter 12 should be modified accordingly with an appropriate Inset Map provided.
In addition, the Development Boundary should not only be reinstated, but should also be extended to include the whole of the developed curtilage at the property known as 'Clonette' at the north eastern end of Pett Level Road (the subject of current planning application no. RR/2018/2484/P) as shown attached.
(map attached: www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=31138)
