Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
Search representations
Results for Mountfield Parish Council search
New searchComment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
63. What are your views on the distribution and opportunities for growth in settlements within the sub-area in figures 21, 22 & 23?
Representation ID: 27521
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mountfield Parish Council
MPC notes that no potential development sites have been identified in the Draft Housing Economic and Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) within the Parish of Mountfield. However, MPC is keen to seen affordable accommodation provided for younger parishioners and households and, consequently, should any potential exception sites become available it would be keen to help facilitate the provision of lower cost and (at least) carbon neutral units of accommodation, subject to them meeting local requirements for tenure, size and housing mix – and designs that complement (rather than harm) the High Weald National Landscape.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Mountfield Parish Council (MPC) is of the view that there is little of concern within the Draft Rother District Local Plan.
MPC notes that no potential development sites have been identified in the Draft Housing Economic and Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) within the Parish of Mountfield. However, MPC is keen to seen affordable accommodation provided for younger parishioners and households and, consequently, should any potential exception sites become available it would be keen to help facilitate the provision of lower cost and (at least) carbon neutral units of accommodation, subject to them meeting local requirements for tenure, size and housing mix – and designs that complement (rather than harm) the High Weald National Landscape.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Therefore, MPC would support a requirement that those applying for consent for developments above a certain number of units of accommodation should provide evidence of engagement with infrastructure providers. Adequate and accessible infrastructure should exist – or be put in place before, or shortly after, developments are completed.
Given that, because of high accommodation costs and poor public transport connectivity, younger parishioners are having to relocate to urban areas (notably Hastings/St Leonards), MPC has an interest in the provision of cheaper accommodation within neighbouring parishes/settlements.
The increasing tendency for developers to assert that 30% affordable housing is unachievable and, in fact, that even one unit of affordable accommodation would render a development unviable should be challenged regularly by Rother District Council (RDC) by way of commissioning independent viability assessments.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
69. What are your views on the distribution and opportunities for growth in settlements within the sub-area in figures 29, 30 & 31?
Representation ID: 27522
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mountfield Parish Council
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Mountfield Parish Council (MPC) is of the view that there is little of concern within the Draft Rother District Local Plan.
MPC notes that no potential development sites have been identified in the Draft Housing Economic and Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) within the Parish of Mountfield. However, MPC is keen to seen affordable accommodation provided for younger parishioners and households and, consequently, should any potential exception sites become available it would be keen to help facilitate the provision of lower cost and (at least) carbon neutral units of accommodation, subject to them meeting local requirements for tenure, size and housing mix – and designs that complement (rather than harm) the High Weald National Landscape.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Therefore, MPC would support a requirement that those applying for consent for developments above a certain number of units of accommodation should provide evidence of engagement with infrastructure providers. Adequate and accessible infrastructure should exist – or be put in place before, or shortly after, developments are completed.
Given that, because of high accommodation costs and poor public transport connectivity, younger parishioners are having to relocate to urban areas (notably Hastings/St Leonards), MPC has an interest in the provision of cheaper accommodation within neighbouring parishes/settlements.
The increasing tendency for developers to assert that 30% affordable housing is unachievable and, in fact, that even one unit of affordable accommodation would render a development unviable should be challenged regularly by Rother District Council (RDC) by way of commissioning independent viability assessments.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
109. What are your views on the Council's proposed policy on strategic infrastructure requirements?
Representation ID: 27523
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mountfield Parish Council
MPC would support a requirement that those applying for consent for developments above a certain number of units of accommodation should provide evidence of engagement with infrastructure providers. Adequate and accessible infrastructure should exist – or be put in place before, or shortly after, developments are completed.
Mountfield Parish Council (MPC) is of the view that there is little of concern within the Draft Rother District Local Plan.
MPC notes that no potential development sites have been identified in the Draft Housing Economic and Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) within the Parish of Mountfield. However, MPC is keen to seen affordable accommodation provided for younger parishioners and households and, consequently, should any potential exception sites become available it would be keen to help facilitate the provision of lower cost and (at least) carbon neutral units of accommodation, subject to them meeting local requirements for tenure, size and housing mix – and designs that complement (rather than harm) the High Weald National Landscape.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Therefore, MPC would support a requirement that those applying for consent for developments above a certain number of units of accommodation should provide evidence of engagement with infrastructure providers. Adequate and accessible infrastructure should exist – or be put in place before, or shortly after, developments are completed.
Given that, because of high accommodation costs and poor public transport connectivity, younger parishioners are having to relocate to urban areas (notably Hastings/St Leonards), MPC has an interest in the provision of cheaper accommodation within neighbouring parishes/settlements.
The increasing tendency for developers to assert that 30% affordable housing is unachievable and, in fact, that even one unit of affordable accommodation would render a development unviable should be challenged regularly by Rother District Council (RDC) by way of commissioning independent viability assessments.
Comment
Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)
116. What are your views on the Council's proposed policy on affordable housing?
Representation ID: 27524
Received: 23/07/2024
Respondent: Mountfield Parish Council
Given that, because of high accommodation costs and poor public transport connectivity, younger parishioners are having to relocate to urban areas (notably Hastings/St Leonards), MPC has an interest in the provision of cheaper accommodation within neighbouring parishes/settlements.
The increasing tendency for developers to assert that 30% affordable housing is unachievable and, in fact, that even one unit of affordable accommodation would render a development unviable should be challenged regularly by Rother District Council (RDC) by way of commissioning independent viability assessments.
Mountfield Parish Council (MPC) is of the view that there is little of concern within the Draft Rother District Local Plan.
MPC notes that no potential development sites have been identified in the Draft Housing Economic and Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) within the Parish of Mountfield. However, MPC is keen to seen affordable accommodation provided for younger parishioners and households and, consequently, should any potential exception sites become available it would be keen to help facilitate the provision of lower cost and (at least) carbon neutral units of accommodation, subject to them meeting local requirements for tenure, size and housing mix – and designs that complement (rather than harm) the High Weald National Landscape.
Notwithstanding the fact that there is little prospect of new build residential development within Mountfield in the foreseeable future, MPC does have a concern about such development in surrounding parishes – particularly the larger settlements of Battle (our market town) and Robertsbridge. Any infrastructure deficiencies – for example, if health and medical services cannot meet the demands of rising local populations – are likely to impact Mountfield parishioners adversely.
Therefore, MPC would support a requirement that those applying for consent for developments above a certain number of units of accommodation should provide evidence of engagement with infrastructure providers. Adequate and accessible infrastructure should exist – or be put in place before, or shortly after, developments are completed.
Given that, because of high accommodation costs and poor public transport connectivity, younger parishioners are having to relocate to urban areas (notably Hastings/St Leonards), MPC has an interest in the provision of cheaper accommodation within neighbouring parishes/settlements.
The increasing tendency for developers to assert that 30% affordable housing is unachievable and, in fact, that even one unit of affordable accommodation would render a development unviable should be challenged regularly by Rother District Council (RDC) by way of commissioning independent viability assessments.