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

Object

Representation ID: 30432

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

"7. Focus growth in sustainable locations across the district, or places that can be made sustainable, through the timely delivery of strategic and other supporting infrastructure and community facilities."
These objectives rely on behaviour and budgets of other organisations e.g. infrastructure improvements such as better transport rely on East Sussex County Council.
It is contradictory on issues that it does have control over. For example, National Landscapes policies (previously AoNB).
In relation to house building, the Environment Agency refer to flooding in association with rivers and sea but do not include surface water flooding in their consultations. The risk of future flooding in Peasmarsh can be seen on this Friends of the Earth website: https://mapst.ac/foe/flood-risk#13.07/50.96793/0.70126 This clearly shows the social impact flooding has on vulnerable residents in Peasmarsh, more so than in other areas of Rother.
And in other Environment Agency maps.
https://mapst.ac/foe/flood-risk#13.07/50.96793/0.70126
The information and sources used by RDC to make decisions about sustainability do not seem to be enough to make decisions about building a large number of houses in this area.

Object

Representation ID: 30433

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

• Transport and movement – Bus services are still too infrequent, unreliable and miss connections to allow new residents to proposed developments to choose public transport over owning a car. Recently ESCC has said that they are withdrawing its evening and Sunday service of the 313 between Northiam and Rye Harbour due to lack of funding.
Trains to London and other commuter areas are infrequent and there are only a few minutes to meet connecting services to Ashford. Making it a difficult choice for those with limited fitness, disability or those with buggies. Many have to travel to Ashford station to get quicker and more frequent services to London.
Cycling – it is difficult for RDC to promote healthy, environmental transport options when the road between Peasmarsh and Rye and Peasmarsh and Beckley is unsafe for cycling with no designated cycle path and no speed limit between Peasmarsh and Playden causing dangerous conditions. The A268 is very narrow for an A road and poorly maintained with many potholes.

• Education – Peasmarsh primary school is small and has limited potential for expansion. Any expansion would involve taking back two classrooms which are currently used by the pre-school nursery which rents the space separately from the school. This would risk the closure of this nursery with no other pre-school provision available in the village. Peasmarsh, Beckley and Playden primary schools are already federated to be able to share resources and an increase in population would add pressure to this. Rural schools are already subject to closure if undersubscribed, with residents likely re-directed to nearer larger schools like Rye Primary School. This would involve an increase in the need to drive rather than walk to school.
Secondary school provision in Peasmarsh and Sussex is limited with many parents opting to send their children to secondary schools in Kent such as Homewood School and Sixth Form Centre in Tenterden and other Ashford schools. Rye and Robertsbridge Colleges do not have Sixth Form facilities, therefore to continue in education as is legally required to 18 years old, students need to travel to Bexhill, Hastings or Plumpton Colleges. These involve lengthy journeys by bus or train with all the issues highlighted in the Transport paragraph above.

• Health and social care – Northiam GPs are not taking on new patients from Peasmarsh. Therefore, the nearest GP, Rye Medical Centre will have an additional burden when they already serve Peasmarsh, Playden, Rye and Camber amongst other local villages (with additional pressure during the summer months due to tourism).
Local care home Peasmarsh Place is a residential care home and not a nursing home. Also acute services such as Cardiology and Stroke Services have been transferred from Hastings Conquest Hospital to Eastbourne District General Hospital impacting on Peasmarsh residents with the associated travel issues.
The Church grounds are subject to flooding (even though they are at the highest point of the village), therefore there is a lack of provision to bury the dead.

• Green and blue infrastructure, and flood defence – As highlighted in the Parish Council’s objection to the Kitewood planning application (RR/2025/1499/P), the capacity of the existing sewerage system is already at its limits and in 2024 Southern Water released sewerage into the River Rother 50 times for a duration of 435 hours and so far in 2026 there have already been 27 dumps of sewerage for a duration of 283 hours. (Source: Top of the Poops - https://top-of-the-poops.org/
In the Appendix to the Peasmarsh Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP) A3.4-8 the Parish Council illustrates the issue with flooding and sewerage with many photographs supplied by residents.

• Utility and energy – The Appendix to the PNDP also highlights the issues related to electricity and gas supply as well as telecommunications and broadband. In February 2026, there was a broadband outage for circa one week. A resident also reported receiving 7 alerts from South East Water related to a water outage or low water pressure.

Object

Representation ID: 30475

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

The PC is concerned that if the developments go ahead as listed in the Site Allocations, the strategic gap between Peasmarsh and Rye Foreign will disappear as it will lead to village sprawl.

Object

Representation ID: 30477

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

"6.76. The parish is within the High Weald National Landscape and the only suitable sites for development are within or adjacent to the village itself. Four sites have been allocated in the parish; the existing services indicate that it is a sustainable location for development."

The PC think that undue weight has been placed on the existing services of Jempsons. Jempsons does have a post office, petrol station, post office and supermarket but it is shut on a Sunday and it may not be economically viable in the future as well as being an expensive option for a large part of the local demographic.
4 out of the 5 sites are to be built on green fields which does not seem to support sustainable development. Developers appear to under report the amount of wildlife in the area – see photo below.

Object

Representation ID: 30479

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

There does not seem to be a Vision for the Countryside as the strength of being in a National Landscape area (AoNB as it was called) has now been downgraded in new planning legislation.
The PC is also concerned about the impact on the night skies with 143 new houses being proposed in Peasmarsh, a rural village. Especially with development on higher land, this will inevitably increase light pollution. Peasmarsh will not feel like it is located in the countryside anymore.

Object

Representation ID: 30481

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

PE1 – Kitewood
The PC has previously objected to this site in a planning objection which can be found on RDC’s planning website under the application – RR/2025/1499/P – some of the reasons, amongst others are; accessing the site, a lack of infrastructure in the village, poor drainage, flooding, traffic management, housing numbers, affordable housing and the protection of local views.

Object

Representation ID: 30482

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

PE2 – Pippins
The PC has previously objected to this site in a planning objection which can be found on RDC’s planning website under the application – RR/2023/1707/P. The site was approved for development by the RDC Planning Committee in July 2024 but it has yet to agree the Section 106 terms and conditions with the developer. RDC has already allowed the developer to rescind their agreement to provide 40% affordable housing, so this information in the supporting text needs to be removed as it is no longer true. What is to say the same clause will be removed from other housing developments such as PE1? If the Developer can’t afford to fulfil this obligation (as requested in the PNDP) what other obligations will they be allowed to avoid?
A lot of weight is given to the SuDS system that could deal with surface water drainage, but this area is already flooded in winter without the additional pressure of more houses being built on this land.

Object

Representation ID: 30483

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

PE3 – Tanyard
Previous proposed developments on this site have been for many more houses than 15. The PC feels that this is a Trojan Horse for further development in the future, as it is unlikely that a development of 15 affordable houses would be financially viable for a developer. Especially considering the Pippins developer could not fulfil their affordable housing quota.

In the policy text (viii) it states that the site must “Protect the residential amenity of the occupiers of adjoining dwellings”. This feels like a claim that can’t be fulfilled as occupants of properties that back onto this site have already experience regular flooding including the Pub (The Horse and Cart) which requires the water companies to pump out their drains. This site is already full of natural springs and most of the houses have French drains fitted at the rear of their properties to try to deal with the level of run off from the fields behind them.

Object

Representation ID: 30484

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

PE4 – Orchard Way
In the supporting text it states that “It is allocated for 7 dwellings in the Peasmarsh Neighbourhood Plan”. This is incorrect – Pg 71 of the PNDP states that it should be allocated for up to 5 dwellings.
This site is accessed via a privately owned road with access width for one car. Any access for plant machinery would need to involve overhead cables being moved. There is no mains drainage and therefore any new properties would require a private sewerage system. There has been surface water flooding in the lane as well as the area to be built on. This is acknowledged in the supporting text as follows:- “…surface water flooding is a risk in the southern half of the site and there is a pond located in the southeast corner”.

Object

Representation ID: 30485

Received: 20/03/2026

Respondent: Peasmarsh Parish Council

PE5 – Malthouse Business Park
The PC is concerned about the disruption to the existing tenants of the business units whilst this build goes ahead. How will this impact the lease agreements they have? It is hard to find affordable business units in the area and work opportunities in the village. This area is already busy with access to the Maltings development and the Old Hop Garden. The parking spaces at the front of the business units are used regularly by those using the Recreation Ground/Play area, including local football teams. The loss of these spaces will just increase the parking issues already experienced in this area. The PC is looking into options as to how to make the Recreation Ground more accessible to disabled users and the loss of the car park next to it will make this very difficult.