Rother Local Plan 2025-2042 – Development Strategy and Site Allocations

Object

Representation ID: 31230

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

The policy should include the requirement that the sites should not be on protected landscapes. Currently the allocation of gypsy sides is being abused. The site at Pashley Road in Ticehurst is a clear example.

Object

Representation ID: 31231

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

The policy should include the requirement that the sites should not be on protected landscapes. Currently the allocation of gypsy sides is being abused. The site at Pashley Road in Ticehurst is a clear example.

Support

Representation ID: 31232

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

It is well drafted.

Object

Representation ID: 31233

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

The A21 corridor policy will encourage poor development in the wrong area. It is appreciated that the idea has come from central government. However, that source does not necessarily mean it's a suitable policy.

The Strategic gap option does not affect Burwash.

A section on reviewing development boundaries does not contain a new policy. There could be no objection to certain development boundaries being reviewed, but the principle of development boundaries has served the district well in the past. It should not be undermined in the dash for houses.

Object

Representation ID: 31234

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

See attachment "2026 Local Plan submission" for full representation.

The group notes the density change from HELAA 2024 to HELAA 2026 and the Draft Local Plan.
• The Denton Homes site, BW1, has increased from 30 to 35 dwellings.
• The 44-49 Shrub Lane field site, BW3, has increased from 10 to 15 dwellings.
• The 84-89 Shrub Lane field site, BW4 has increased from 6 to 8 dwellings.
• The Clover Leys site, BC 1 has increased from 6 to 7 dwellings.
• The Old Orchard Nursery site, BC2, was not in the HELAA part 1.

The Draft Local Plan para 5.19 states the densities have increased to ‘optimise housing delivery.’ The group considers the densities should be determined on a site by site basis. A housing target which was to last two decades should not be determine by inappropriate density figures because the housing targets may cause the wrong type of house to be built.

Support

Representation ID: 31235

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

It is noted however that medium and high densities will deter the building of executive homes for people who don't live in the local community and also lower the number of sites required.

Object

Representation ID: 31236

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

See attachment "2026 Local Plan submission" for full representation.

The only principle that applies to Burwash parish is, ‘sensitive development in other rural settlements of the district’. The group thinks this test is appropriate as long as sensitive means one which will not damage the High Weald National Landscape. It might have been better if that had been specifically added to the test, namely the degree of damage the development would inflict on the High Weald National Landscape.

The Draft Local Plan at para 67.4 lists the Vision for Northern Rother section which includes Burwash. This vision includes a strong emphasis on protecting the landscape character and scenic beauty of the High Weald National Landscape. This statement is welcome. However, looking at the sites selected for Burwash and Burwash Common it appears that the strong emphasis was not strong enough to resist the demand for more houses.

Object

Representation ID: 31237

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

One can see quite a lot of works gone into this but the problem is it is only a guess. Unfortunately, it will have no impact on employment at all. The effort put into this section would have been better placed in having policies to encourage growth, like Wi-Fi and infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 31310

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

See attachment "2026 Local Plan submission" for full representation concerning sites BW1, BW3 and BW4.

BW1: objection due to no achievable access, harm to HWNL, multiple ownership issues, and harm to the environment.

BW3: objections due to harm to HWNL, sustainability, lack of pedestrian access, ribbon development, and development in a green gap.

BW4: objections due to harm to HWNL, sustainability, lack of pedestrian access, ribbon development, and development in a green gap.

Support

Representation ID: 31311

Received: 23/03/2026

Respondent: Burwash: Save our Fields

BW2: This is worthy of consideration. Factors that point to the site being suitable.
a) There would be minimal damage to the National Landscape.
b) The development would be using an existing residential area rather than ribbon development.
Other factors:
There is no footpath and it is 0.80 miles from the village centre (Londis/entrance to car park).
On the information that is available, the site should be considered for an allocated site.

One or more members of the group have visited all the HELAA 2024 and HELAA 2026 sites. The exercise which took a considerable amount of time confirmed the view that Rother District Council had taken about the other sites.