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

Object

Representation ID: 29787

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Support reducing the unrealistic Government “Standard Method” figure of 900+ homes per year, which is disconnected from real need and impossible given that 90% of Rother is protected landscape or habitat. However, even the lower proposed target remains undeliverable and inconsistent with the Plan’s ambitions on sustainability, climate, landscape protection, and infrastructure capacity. Historic delivery of around 215 homes per year demonstrates the gap between targets and reality. Once unsustainable allocations are removed, the housing target must be reassessed and reduced.

Object

Representation ID: 29788

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Support the Plan’s stated objectives, including focusing growth only in sustainable locations, improving connectivity, supporting healthy communities, and making all development “Green to the Core” and “Live Well Locally.” However, many proposed allocations contradict these principles, and the Plan’s housing target cannot be justified until unsustainable sites are removed. The objectives emphasise climate, biodiversity, landscape protection and compact neighbourhoods, but the allocations do not consistently reflect these priorities. The strategy must align site choices with these core aims.

Object

Representation ID: 29789

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

FA1 is unsuitable due to flooding problems, remote access and longstanding constraints. It has repeatedly proven problematic and cannot be considered sustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29790

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Object to GU4, GU5 and GU6. These are low‑sustainability locations and represent unjustified encroachment into countryside. GU6 harms nearby ancient woodland, includes public paths and ponds, and affects the National Landscape. All three sites are unsustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29791

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Object to GU4, GU5 and GU6. These are low‑sustainability locations and represent unjustified encroachment into countryside. GU6 harms nearby ancient woodland, includes public paths and ponds, and affects the National Landscape. All three sites are unsustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29793

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Object to GU4, GU5 and GU6. These are low‑sustainability locations and represent unjustified encroachment into countryside. GU6 harms nearby ancient woodland, includes public paths and ponds, and affects the National Landscape. All three sites are unsustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29794

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

Object to GU4, GU5 and GU6. These are low‑sustainability locations and represent unjustified encroachment into countryside. GU6 harms nearby ancient woodland, includes public paths and ponds, and affects the National Landscape. All three sites are unsustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29795

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

CT2 and CT3 exceed what Catsfield can sustainably support. CT3 previously failed due to flooding and landscape impact on the High Weald National Landscape. Both sites conflict with sustainability objectives.

Object

Representation ID: 29796

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

BC3 is ribbon development extending the settlement westwards inappropriately. It lacks justification and is unsustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 29797

Received: 19/03/2026

Respondent: CPRE Sussex

Agent: CPRE Sussex

BWC1 and BWC2 lie far (3km) from Burwash and have no Neighbourhood Plan allocation. These isolated, remote sites lack services and are unsustainable.