SA Scoping Report Re-Affirms the SA Framework Which Informs the First Stage of Consultation on the Development & Site Allocations Plan (Regulation 25)

August 2016

Rother Development and Site Allocations Plan

Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report

Rother District Council Town Hall Bexhill-on-Sea East Sussex TN39 3JX www.rother.gov.uk

Contents Context ...... 7 1.1 Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment . 7 1.2 The SA Stages and Process...... 8 1.3 Requirements of the Scoping Stage ...... 10 1.4 The Scoping Stage in Rother...... 11 1.5 Rother‟s Development and Site Allocations Plan (DASA) ...... 12 1.6 Application to Neighbourhood Plans within Rother District Area .... 13 Task A1 Identifying the Relevant Policies, Plans and Sustainability Objectives ...... 17 Task A2 Collecting Baseline Information ...... 22 Task A3 Identifying Sustainability Issues ...... 23 Environment ...... 23 Social ...... 30 Economic ...... 33 Task A4 Developing the Sustainability Appraisal Framework ...... 35 Task A5 Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal ...... 41 Appendix 1: Baseline Information: Sustainability Appraisal Profile for Rother District ...... 43

Context

1.1 Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment

1.1.1 Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is a requirement of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, with Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) deriving from the European Union Directive 2001/42/EC. It is common practice in the UK to combine the two processes into one, which is referred to as Sustainability Appraisal (SA). This process incorporates the requirements of the SEA Directive.

1.1.2 SA is a tool used to ensure that the principles of sustainable development are fully taken into account when preparing development plans (in this case the Rother District Local Plan 2011-28). The overall aims of the SA are as follows:

 Make the DPD as sustainable as possible by integrating sustainable development into the strategy making process, influencing all stages of plan development.

 Provide a high level of environmental protection and balance environmental, economic and social considerations in the plan‟s preparation.

 Consult on the SA process at various stages to allow the public and stakeholders to input into its production.

 Provide an environmental, social and economic audit.

1.1.3 The Council is required by law to produce a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) (incorporating Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for all of its Local Plan (2011-2028) documents except for the Statement of Community Involvement, the Annual Monitoring Report, Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) and the Local Development Scheme. So far, several SA

7 reports have been produced supporting Part One of the Rother District Local Plan (2011-28) – the Core Strategy. The documents in question can be found here http://www.rother.gov.uk/sa.

1.1.4 This SA is being undertaken to inform Part Two of the Local Plan (2011-28) - the Rother District Development and Site Allocations Plan (DASA). There are a number of stages to the SA, the first stage is the Scoping Report (this document) which sets out the framework for the SA.

1.2 The SA Stages and Process

1.2.1 The SA/SEA is an on-going and iterative process that feeds into and informs plan-making. This SA Scoping Report re-affirms the SA Framework which informs the first stage of consultation on the Development & Site Allocations Plan (Regulation 25).

1.2.3 The process of SA is set out in the national Planning Practice Guidance, as in the figure below. SA Stage A results in the production of the SA Scoping Report. Hence Tasks A1 through to A5 are all elaborated upon in more detail later in this document.

Figure 1: Sustainability Appraisal Process for Local Plans

1.2.4 This report, along with the existing LDF Core Strategy SA Scoping Report and the scoping elements in the Proposed Submission Core Strategy SA (August 2011) represents Stage A shown above. The SA Framework needs to be set within the context of existing plans and policies and an understanding of the current baseline situation is essential to help predict effects and identify key sustainability issues.

1.2.5 During the forthcoming Stage B, where sites are being assessed it will be necessary to establish initially which use(s) a site is considered a reasonable option for. In some cases it may be appropriate to assess the effects of more than one use for an individual site.

1.3 Requirements of the Scoping Stage

1.3.1 As set out in the national „Planning Practice Guidance‟, the scoping stage (Stage A) must identify the scope and level of detail of the information to be included in the sustainability appraisal report. It should set out the context, objectives and approach of the assessment; and identify relevant environmental, economic and social issues and objectives.

1.3.2 Although the scoping stage is a requirement of the process, a formal scoping report is not required by law but is a useful way of presenting information at the scoping stage. A key aim of the scoping procedure is to help ensure the sustainability appraisal process is proportionate and relevant to the Local Plan being assessed.

1.3.3 When deciding on the scope and level of detail of the information that must be included in the report, the plan-maker must consult the consultation bodies. Where a consultation body decides to respond, it should do so within five weeks of receipt of the request. (See regulation 12(5) and 12(6) of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004.)

1.4 The Scoping Stage in Rother

1.4.1 The scope of the Local Plan (2011-28) SA was first defined in the first SA Scoping Report, which underwent statutory consultation in August 2006. This set out the context and objectives for the SA, collected baseline data and identified key issues / problems for the District and devised a Sustainability Appraisal Framework against which options and strategies can be tested. An updated revision of the Scoping Report was issued to the statutory consultees in December 2007 and this was approved in February 2008, and published in June 2008.

1.4.2 In addition, it should be noted that the Proposed Submission Core Strategy SA (August 2011) updated many of the elements of the Scoping Report, including:  Reviewing list of Relevant Policies, Plans, Strategies and Programmes (See Section 3 and Appendix 7 of August 2011 PSCS SA)  Updated Baseline Information (Appendix 1)  A revised SA Framework (Appendix 2)  Spatial Portrait (Section 3)

1.4.3 All the above SA work was effectively done alongside the production of Part 1 of the Local Plan (2011-28) – the „Core Strategy‟.

SA Scoping alongside the Development and Site Allocations Plan

1.4.4 The Council is now in the process of preparing Part 2 of the Local Plan (2011-28) – the „Development and Site Allocations Plan (DASA)‟. As a consequence it is considered a useful opportunity to update some of the above scoping information. In particular the SA Framework needs to be updated to reflect the site specific nature of Part 2 of the Local Plan. This builds on and elaborates upon earlier SA Scoping information published to inform the Core Strategy (as set out in the preceding section above).

1.4.5 As part of the process, this scoping report will assess whether the previous SA Framework is fit for purpose for the DASA in order to assess sustainability. This includes considering how the SA of the DASA relates to other plans, policies and programmes, outlining the “baseline” social, environmental and economic information on which the SA will be based, identifying key sustainability issues in the area and developing the framework which will be used to assess the sustainability of the DPD.

1.4.6 This scoping report has been developed in an iterative consultative manner via public consultation and liaison with the statutory environmental bodies (SEBs) - Historic England, Environment Agency and Natural England. An initial consultation (which was also open to the public) closed on Wednesday 5 November 2014, having received three responses from the three SEBs. A second consultation (on a version which incorporated SEB comments) was also open to the public and closed on 5:00pm, 16 February 2015, once again only having received input from the three SEBs. This led to publication of the DASA SA Scoping Report in March 2015.

Reasons for this October 2015 review of the Scoping Report are set out under „Task A5 Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal‟.

1.5 Rother’s Development and Site Allocations Plan (DASA)

Role and Context

1.5.1 This document will form Part 2 of the Council's new Local Plan, and will develop the spatial strategies and core policies set out in the 'Core Strategy', which represents Part 1 of the Local Plan. It will do this by reviewing existing site allocations and development boundaries, and by allocating specific areas of land for particular uses in line with the development provisions of the Core Strategy. It will also set out more detailed policies where these are needed to provide guidance for the effective management of development in relation to key issues, such as affordable housing.

Programme and Consultation

1.5.2 The Council is currently working to produce initial proposals for consultation. The programme will be set out in the forthcoming review of the Council's Local Development Scheme (LDS).

Process

1.5.3 Rother District Council is responsible for the 'Development and Site Allocations Plan'. The preparation process is set out in Regulations. The Council will engage with key stakeholders at an early stage and will ensure that there are ample opportunities for the public and other interested parties to contribute to shaping the Plan.

1.6 Application to Neighbourhood Plans within Rother District Area

1.6.1 The Framework is developed as a basis for consideration of sites in the Rother District area. Therefore, in addition to being relevant to the RDC Development & Site Allocations Plan, it is also considered applicable to Neighbourhood Plans produced within the District.

1.6.2 However, there is an important distinction between the SA/SEA process as applied to Neighbourhood Plans distinct from the application to Local Plans. This is linked to the distinction between the SEA process (as derived from the European Union Directive 2001/42/EC) and the SA process (as derived from the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). There is no legal requirement for a neighbourhood plan to have a sustainability appraisal (as set out in section 19 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). However, a qualifying body must demonstrate how its plan or order will contribute to achieving sustainable development. So whilst a sustainability appraisal is not legally required, neighbourhood planning authorities may find that the sustainability appraisal approach is a useful way forward.

1.6.3 Regarding SEA, the PPG stipulates that in some limited circumstances, where a neighbourhood plan is likely to have significant environmental effects, it may require a strategic environmental assessment.

1.6.4 In this light, draft neighbourhood plan proposals should be „screened’ to determine whether the plan is likely to have significant environmental effects. The requirements are set out in regulation 9 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. The PPG cites examples of where SEA may be required for Neighbourhood Plans, including:

 Where a neighbourhood plan allocates sites for development

 Where the neighbourhood area contains sensitive natural or heritage assets that may be affected by the proposals in the plan.

 Where the neighbourhood plan is likely to have significant environmental effects that have not already been considered and dealt with through a sustainability appraisal of the Local Plan.

1.6.5 If likely significant environmental effects are identified, an environmental report must be prepared in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3) of regulation 12 of those Regulations. One of the basic conditions that will be tested by the independent examiner is whether the making of the neighbourhood plan is compatible with European Union obligations (including under the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).

1.6.6 Where it is determined that a neighbourhood plan is likely to have significant effects on the environment and that a strategic environmental assessment must be carried out, work on this should start at the earliest opportunity. This is so that the processes for gathering evidence for the environmental report and for producing the draft neighbourhood plan can be integrated, and to allow the assessment process to inform the choices being made in the plan.

1.6.7 The key stages of neighbourhood plan preparation and their relationship with the strategic environmental assessment process can be seen in Figure 2:

Figure 2: Strategic Environmental Assessment process for Neighbourhood Plans

1.6.8 Regarding Stage B for Neighbourhood Plans (as set out in Figure 2 above), the framework within this DASA SA Scoping Report may usefully set the SEA Framework for the Neighbourhood Plan. This will provide the benefit of consistency across the District and the County (since the SA objectives were originally agreed at a County level).

1.6.9 The SA process is generally considered to incorporate more social and economic considerations, compared to the SEA which has a more environmental focus. Nonetheless the EU Directive 2001/42/EC, from which SEA derives, stipulates coverage of a wide range of topics including „population‟, „human health‟ and „cultural heritage‟. Indeed, all the SA objectives identified in this report‟s Task A4 Framework can be traced back to one or more SEA Directive topics, so to some extent all objectives can be said to have potential environmental effects, albeit some more indirectly than others. Therefore, in the event of a Neighbourhood Plan being „screened in‟ for SEA purposes, Rother District Council (as the responsible authority) will advise, on a case by case basis, which objectives from the Framework it considers to „screen in‟ appropriate to the circumstances of the Neighbourhood Plan and it‟s area in question. This screening assessment will be mindful of cumulative and synergistic effects and the extent that any significant environmental effects may have already been considered through sustainability appraisal of the Local Plan. In practice it may also be the case that some objectives that may traditionally be considered to be more environmentally focused (e.g.; Objective 16 relating to waste) may still be screened out on the basis that they are unlikely to lead to significant environmental effects at the neighbourhood plan scale.

Task A1 Identifying the Relevant Policies, Plans and Sustainability Objectives

A1.1 Rother District Council has reviewed the relevant policies, plans, programmes, strategies and initiatives for the Sustainability Appraisal. This updates the versions previously published in June 2008 (in the previous SA Scoping Report) and in August 2011 (in Appendix 7 of the Proposed Submission Core Strategy SA).

Table of Relevant policies, plans, strategies, programmes and sustainability objectives Title Date

International Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1997 United Nations. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), 2002 Johannesburg – Commitments arising from Johannesburg Summit. International Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 & 2010 2010 Millennium Development Goals (UN). Goal 7 – Ensure Environmental On-going Sustainability:  Target 1: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources.  Target 2: Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving by 2010 a significant reduction in the rate of loss. UNESCO World Heritage Convention 1972 European Union

European Spatial Development Perspective 1999 European Landscape Convention 2004 European Strategy on Sustainable Development 2001 and 2009 Update EU Seventh Environmental Action Plan to 2020 2013 European Communities Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds. Directive 2009 2009/147/EC (this is the codified version of Directive 79/409/EEC as amended) EC Council Directive on the Conservation of Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora 1992 92/43/EEC The Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) 1999 EU Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution 1991 caused by nitrates from agricultural sources EU COM (2002) 581 final: Proposal for a Directive concerning the quality of bathing 2002 water EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) 2000 European Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection 2006 2006

The Directive on Waste. Directive 2008/98/EC 2008 Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive 2002/96/EC 2002 EU Directive 2002/49/EC relating to the assessment and management of 2002

Title Date environmental noise EU COM (06) 848: Renewable Energy Road Map 2006 Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/ec 2009 EU Air Quality Directive - Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe 2008 2008/50/EC EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 2011 European Site Conservation Objectives for Pevensey Levels SCI (UK0030367) 2014 National

National „Planning Practice Guidance‟ (PPG) 2012 National Planning Policy Framework CLG Mar-12 2012 Local Planning Regulations CLG Jul-11 2011 National Infrastructure Plan Treasury Oct-10 2010 CLG Localism Act 2011 Water Act 2003 HM Treasury and Dept. of Business, Innovation & Skills Policy Statement „Planning 2011 for Growth‟ Department of Health „White Paper - Healthy Lives, Healthy People‟ 2010 Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 DEFRA Marine Policy Statement 2011

The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (Chapter 8 covers 2010 Land Use Plans) Waste Regulations 2011 (England and Wales) 2011 DEFRA National Policy Statement for Waste Water 2012 National Waste Strategy 2007 DECC. National Policy Statement 1 – Overarching National Policy Statement for 2011 Energy

DECC. National Policy Statement 3 for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3) 2011 DECC. National Policy Statement 2 for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating 2011 Infrastructure (EN-2) DECC. National Policy Statement for Gas Supply Infrastructure and Gas and Oil 2011 Pipelines (EN-4) DECC. National Policy Statement for Electricity Networks Infrastructure (EN-5) 2011 DECC. National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power Generation (EN-6) 2011 Dept. of Business, Innovation & Skills „Local growth white paper‟ 2010 CLG, DEFRA, DTI, DfT White Paper „Planning for a Sustainable Future‟ 2007 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 1990 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Acts 2004 and 2008 2004 & 2008 DEFRA Sustainable Development Strategy „Foundations of our Future‟ 2002 DFT „Towards a Sustainable Transport System: Supporting economic Growth in a 2007 Low Carbon Economy‟ Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 White Paper Heritage Protection for the 21st Century 2007 DCMS „The Historic Environment: a Force for Our Future‟ 2001 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 DEFRA „Future Water: The Government‟s Water Strategy for England 2008 ODPM „The Planning response to Climate Change: advice on better practice‟ 2004 DEFRA „Climate Change Act‟ 2008

Title Date

The Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and 2002 Amendment 2000 & 2002 DEFRA „Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and NI‟ 2011 DEFRA „Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food‟ 2004 DfT „Delivering a Sustainable Transport System‟ 2008 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) 1981 Biodiversity: UK Action Plan 2007 The Government‟s Strategy for Combined Heat and Power to 2010 2002 DTI „Energy White Paper, Meeting the Energy Challenge‟ 2007 DTI Energy Review „The Energy Challenge‟ 2006 DEFRA Securing the future: delivering UK sustainable development strategy 2005 UK Climate Change Programme 2006 Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CROW) 2000 Working with the Grain of Nature – A Biodiversity Strategy for England 2002 Making space for water Taking forward a new Government strategy for flood and 2005 coastal erosion risk management in England Safeguarding our soils: A Strategy for England Defra 2009 The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 HMSO 2010 The Pitt Review: Learning Lessons from the 2007 Floods Independent Report to 2008 Government Soil Action Plan for England 2004-2006 Defra 2004 Environment Agency „Water for people and the environment: Water Resources 2009 Strategy for England and Wales „ DEFRA Making space for water: Taking forward a new Government strategy for 2005 flood and coastal erosion risk management in England. Future water: the Government's water strategy for England 2008 DEFRA Feb-08 Water for Life (White Paper) DEFRA Dec 2011 2011 Government Review of Waste Policy in England Defra 2011 2011 DfT White Paper: Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon 2011 Department for Transport Guidance on Accessibility Planning in Local Transport 2004 Plans Department for Transport Delivering a Sustainable Transport System 2008 Department for Transport Active Travel Strategy 2010 DEFRA Noise Policy Statement for England 2010 DoH White Paper – Healthy Lives, Healthy People 2010 DECC „Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 (HMSO)‟ 2013 Energy Act 2008 DECC UK Renewable Energy Strategy 2009 DECC Microgeneration Strategy 2011 CLG & DfT „Manual for Streets 1 & 2‟ 2007 English Heritage „Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance‟ 2008 National Parks & Countryside Act 1949 Environmental Protection Act 1990 DEFRA Marine Policy Statement 2011 Ministry of State for Environment and Agri-Environment „Nottingham Declaration 2000 on Climate Change‟ DECC Beyond Copenhagen: The UK Government‟s International Climate Change 2010

Title Date

Action Plan Climate Change Act 2008 Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 2010 DEFRA Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England‟s Wildlife and Ecosystem 2011 Services (2011) Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 DEFRA Natural Environment White Paper Defra 2011 The Environment Act 1995 Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland: Working 2011 Together for Clean Air CLG „Code for Sustainable Homes‟: Setting the Sustainability Standards for New 2008 & 2010 Homes and accompanying Technical Guidance - November 2010 RTPI/Planning & Climate Change Coalition „planning for climate change – 2010 guidance and model policies for local authorities English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation „Delivering Quality Places, 2009 Urban Design Compendium 2‟ Environment Agency „Groundwater Protection: Policy and Protection‟ 2013 Regional

South East England Biodiversity Forum „South East Biodiversity Forum‟ 2009 Forestry Commission „Seeing the Woods for the Trees – Regional Forestry 2004 Framework‟ English Heritage „Heritage Counts 2013: The State of the South East‟s Historic 2013 Environment „ English Heritage „Streets for All – South East‟ – a regional English Heritage guide 2006 to the management of streets and public open spaces Sub Regional / County

Pride of Place – a Community Strategy for East Sussex 2003 ESCC, SDNPA and B&HCC „Waste and Minerals Local Plan for East Sussex‟ 2013 East Sussex and B&Hove Waste Local Plan (Saved Polices only) 2006 East Sussex and B&Hove Minerals Local Plan (Saved Polices only) 1999 Southern Water „Water Resource Management Plan 2015-2040‟ 2014 South East Water „Water Resource Management Plan 2015-2040‟ 2014 NHS East Sussex Downs & Weald „Investing in Life‟ 2009 East Sussex Downs & Weald PCT, Hastings & Rother PCT „Reducing Health 2010 Inequalities in East Sussex‟ East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Construction & Demolition Waste SPD 2006 Sussex Biodiversity Partnership From Rio to Sussex Action for Biodiversity: a 1998 Biodiversity Action Plan for Sussex Sussex Biodiversity Opportunity Areas 2009 South Foreland to Beachy Head Shoreline Management Plan 2006 Environment Agency Catchment Flood Management Plan: Rother and Romney 2009 Rother Catchment Abstraction Licensing Strategy 2013

ESCC „Strategic Open Space Study‟ 2011 East Sussex „Green Infrastructure Study‟ 2014 East Sussex Environment Strategy Group „East Sussex Environment Strategy‟ 2011

Title Date

ESCC „Climate Change Strategy‟ 2009 ESCC „East Sussex Local Transport Plan 3‟ 2011-2026 (LTP3) 2011 High Weald AONB Joint Advisory Committee „The High Weald AONB Management 2014 Plan (2014-19)‟ Environment Agency „ River Basin Management Plan South East River Basin 2009 District South East Coastal Group „Beachy Head to Selsey Bill Shoreline Management 2006 Plan First Review Final Report‟ East Sussex Landscape Character Assessment 2010 East Sussex Energy Partnership On-going East Sussex Joint Waste Strategy 2014 to 2025 2014 Natural England „Site Improvement Plan for the Pevensey Levels‟ (SIP171) 2014 Local / District

Rother District Local Plan 2006 Rother District Core Strategy 2011 Rother District Core Strategy „Equalities Impact Assessment‟ 2011 Neighbourhood Plans various Rother Community Plan 2004 Rother Corporate Plan Draft 2014-2021 2014 Rother Economic Regeneration Strategy 2010 – 2015 2010 Rother Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy 2005-2008 2005 Rother Cultural and Leisure Strategy 2006 Rother District Council Housing Strategy 2009-2013 2009 Rye Conservation Area Appraisal 2006 Battle Conservation Area Appraisal 2006 Bexhill Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal 2004 Sedlescombe Conservation Area Appraisal 2004 Robertsbridge Conservation Area Appraisal 2009 Rother District Council Local Plan Background Evidence Studies. Various Various including: Rother Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study, Green Infrastructure Study, Landscape Assessments, Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, Low Carbon & Renewable Energy Potential Study, Housing Studies & Papers, Transport Studies & Papers, Economic & Commercial Studies & Papers, Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Procedural Papers, Consultation Statements and Spatial Area Studies. Neighbouring Authority Local Plans Various Parish Local Action Plans Various

Task A2 Collecting Baseline Information

A2.1 The term „baseline information‟ refers to the existing environmental, economic and social characteristics of the area likely to be affected by the Local Plan, and their likely evolution without implementation of new policies.

A2.2 Baseline information provides the basis against which to assess the likely effects of alternative proposals in the plan.

A2.3 Baseline information for Rother‟s SA has previously been published within the Scoping Report of June 2008 and in the Updated Baseline Information (Appendix 1) of the Proposed Submission Core Strategy SA (August 2011).

A2.4 Further updated Baseline information is published alongside this report and can be seen in Appendix 1. This now incorporates a wide variety of contextual maps.

Task A3 Identifying Sustainability Issues

A3.1 Regulation 12 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 sets out the formal requirements of an „environmental report‟, which should form an integral part of the sustainability appraisal report and is a core output of any strategic environmental assessment.

A3.2 The PPG confirms it is the role of the Scoping Report to „set out the context, objectives and approach of the assessment; and identify relevant environmental, economic and social issues and objectives‟.

A3.3 The identification of sustainability issues in Rother will be an on-going process rather than a single „event‟. Views and information on the key issues for the District will be further informed through the Local Plan process.

A3.4 For the purposes of this Scoping Report, sustainability issues have been identified based upon:

 Key messages from the review of relevant Policies, Plans and Sustainability Objectives  The baseline position as revealed in stage A2  Knowledge gained through the preparation of the Rother District Local Plan

A3.5 The identified issues are reflected in the objectives set out in the Sustainability Appraisal Framework in the next section (Task A4).

ENVIRONMENT

Waste & Recycling (Sustainability Appraisal Framework (SAF) Objectives 9, 16)

A3.7 The East Sussex Joint Waste Strategy 2014 to 2025 reveals that since 2006, the County has doubled the amount of waste that is reused, recycled and composted and reduced waste sent to landfill by over 90%. By 2012/13

23 the County recycled, composted, reused or recovered energy from 94% of household waste and only 5.5% went to landfill (5.6% in Rother). These figures are borne out in the Baseline information in Appendix 1 (SA Objective 16). Pebsham Landfill Site between Bexhill and St Leonards was the last active site in the County. The last section of this site closed in November 2013 and is currently undergoing restoration as part of proposals to incorporate the site into the Combe Valley Countryside Park. There are no plans for any future landfill or land raise sites in East Sussex. Small quantities of waste are currently sent to landfill in West Sussex. The Waste Authority is working with neighbouring authorities and contractors to reduce this further still.

A3.8 Rother recycles 18.5% of total household waste, below the East Sussex level of 20%. However, Rother composts 26.5% of total household waste, well above the East Sussex figure of 18.6%.

A3.9 Despite a lot of good progress, the average East Sussex household still creates almost a tonne of waste and recycling each year, that‟s some 238,000 tonnes of waste in total. The cost of dealing with this is around £155 per household per year. On top of that, the average UK household throws away £480 worth of food and drink annually that could have been consumed. Businesses also spend some 4% of their turnover on dealing with their waste. The recycling targets set out in the Joint Waste Strategy are 50% by 2020 and 60% by 2025.

A3.10 The household waste per head (kg) is low in Rother (385kg per annum) when compared to the East Sussex figure of 448kg per annum. However, although it has fluctuated, the Rother figure has risen slightly over the last 5 years, whilst the East Sussex figure has exhibited a continual downward trend.

Landscape Quality (SAF Objective 15)

A3.9 The High Weald AONB Management Plan, County Landscape Assessments and the Council‟s Green Infrastructure Study all highlight the key issue of ensuring the District‟s high landscape quality is maintained as well as enabling and encouraging people to value and enjoy the natural environment as a whole.

A3.10 Over 83% of Rother District falls within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty reflecting its national landscape importance. The High Weald AONB Management Plan identifies the key characteristics of the designation area (see Map 25) as well as objectives to maintain and enhance the area.

A3.11 There are three national landscape character areas in the District (see Map 22). The High Weald can be sub-divided further into local landscape character areas (see Map 23) which are largely defined by river valleys. The County Council„s Landscape Character Assessments identify problems and pressures for each character area, formulate a vision and provide landscape action priorities.

Biodiversity (SAF Objective 14)

A3.12 Biodiversity is, in short, the variety of life. The Biodiversity Action Plan for Sussex notes that the County has a wide range of habitats including flower-rich meadows, ancient wooded valleys, coastal sand dunes and shingle. Many of these habitats have declined in area and quality over the past 100 years. In Sussex, 508 Biodiversity Action Plan priority species have been recorded (that‟s more than 44% of the UK total). Species are listed as a result of being globally threatened and/or in rapid decline in the UK.

A3.13 Within Rother, some 5 % of the land area is classed as sites of international significance for nature conservation. These are at Pevensey Levels (Ramsar site and Special Area of Conservation) and in the Dungeness, Rye and Pett Level area (various sections designated Special

Protection Area, Special Area of Conservation and Ramsar), as visible on Maps 16 and 17 in the Appendix. In addition there are nationally important Sites of Special Scientific Interest, principally around wetland areas near the coast and a number of more locally significant Sites of Nature Conservation Importance. A key issue in national and local policy is how overall biodiversity can be protected and enhanced.

A3.14 Some 16% of the District is covered by ancient woodland (see Map 20). with another 8% coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. There are approximately 20 other BAP or Special to Sussex habitats (see Maps 18 and 19), which are individually less significant in coverage. Collectively, BAP habitats are widespread across the District and their preservation and enhancement is key.

Built Environment (SAF Objective 15)

A3.15 Rother benefits from a high quality built environment. The District has over 2,100 listed buildings, 10 Conservation Areas, 53 Scheduled monuments and 7 registered parks and gardens.

A3.16 Key considerations are, how such historic quality can be conserved and enhanced, and how good quality design including the efficient use of resources, can be incorporated into the design of future buildings and public spaces. 8 listed buildings and 7 ancient monuments in Rother are classed by English Heritage as being „at risk‟.

Climate Change (SAF Objectives 11, 12)

A3.17 As outlined in the Environment Strategy for East Sussex, climate change is likely to lead to more extreme weather such more heat waves, storms and flash flooding, with significant implications for the costs of maintaining our infrastructure. By 2050 we could have over a quarter less summer rainfall than we have now. Flooding in Lewes, Uckfield and

Robertsbridge in October 2000 caused around £130 million of damage. The 10 day heat wave in August 2003 caused an estimated 30 premature deaths in East Sussex. Areas at risk of flooding in Rother are focussed upon the coastal marshlands and river valleys.

A3.18 In Rother each person creates an average of 6.6 tonnes of CO2 per year, including the emissions created from the goods and services we buy. This is above the East Sussex average of 5.4 tonnes, but below the national average of 7 tonnes. Our sustainable world fair share will be only two tonnes per person by 2050.

A3.19 Further key issues stem from development on floodplains and how this affects our ability to adapt to the predicted impacts of climate change, as well as the need to reduce the use of natural resources, energy consumption and carbon emissions, improve energy efficiency and source more of the county‟s energy from our local renewable sources.

Water Quality (SAF Objective 13)

A3.20 At the moment, rivers in Rother District require biological and morphological work to enhance them and aquatic pollution, particularly rural drainage pollution, needs to be addressed so that the chemical quality of controlled waters in Rother improves.

A3.21 Information from the Environment Agency (Water Framework Directive - River Basin Management Plans) indicates that a significant number of the District‟s water-courses are „at risk‟, although predominantly of moderate or good quality. There are 24 water bodies within Rother District. Of these, based on 2013 Cycle 2 classifications, 8 are at good status, 12 is at moderate status and 4 are at poor status. As moderate and poor status constitutes a failure in the Water Framework Directive (WFD), only 33% of the water bodies in Rother District pass WFD criteria; two thirds fail WFD criteria.

A3.22 The European Union‟s Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC) came into force in December 2000 and became part of UK law in December 2003. The WFD requires the water-bodies (both surface and groundwater) of all European Union member states to achieve „good ecological status‟ or „good ecological potential‟ by 2027. The Directive also requires that no water-bodies experience deterioration in status. Good status means good ecological status and good chemical status, as defined by a number of quantifiable quality elements.

A3.23 Regarding bathing water, recent results from water quality assessment under the Bathing Water Directive indicate that from 2009-2013 Bexhill had the „minimum‟ annual compliance result, which in June 2014 improved to a „higher‟ rating. Camber has achieved the „Higher‟ rating on four of the last six years, including the last two years.

Air Quality (SAF Objective 10)

A3.24 The East Sussex Environment Strategy noted that ‘Road traffic continues to have impacts on the environment and local communities through air pollution, noise, and the emission of greenhouse gases; this means that environmental and health costs (and the associated health inequalities) continue to affect the county’

A3.25 The wider environmental costs of air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and noise from UK transport are estimated to be between £8.7bn and £19.3bn per year.

A3.26 In their comments on the SA, Natural England highlight that traffic growth on roads within 200m of sensitive designated habitats has the potential for development to impact on the natural environment (in particular designated habitats).

A3.27 An Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) does not need to be designated in Rother at present however, the review and assessment process for air quality will continue.

Prudent use of natural resources (SA Objective 9)

A3.28 East Sussex has proportionally less Grade 1 and 2 classified agricultural land and this resource should be protected along with Grade 3a as this constitutes the best and most versatile agricultural land. In Rother, the majority of agricultural land is grade 3-4, although there is some higher quality grade 2 across the East Guldeford levels.

A3.29 Largely because there is no recent industrial legacy, Rother District does not have a high stock of surplus brownfield land, as evidenced by the comparative lack of brownfield opportunities identified in the Council‟s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) process.

SOCIAL

Community Safety (SAF Objective 3)

A3.29 Although Rother has generally low rates of criminal offences compared with the South East and England & Wales, the Ipsos Mori, Place Survey (see Appendix 1 baseline information) shows a comparatively high fear of crime, particularly after dark. However, the same survey showed very high levels of satisfaction with Rother as a place to live.

A3.30 IMD Crime deprivation mapping indicates particular issues in the east of the District and to a lesser extent in central Bexhill.

Children & Young People (SAF Objectives 3, 5, 7)

A3.31 In respect of child poverty specifically, parts of Bexhill and an area of Rye fall within the top 20% most deprived areas in the country. As of 2013, 16.9% of Rother‟s children were living in poverty which is a high figure compared to East Sussex and the wider South-east region.

Culture & Leisure (SAF Objective 8)

A3.32 Cultural and leisure opportunities can have a role in improving the quality of people‟s lives by promoting healthy lifestyles, supporting community cohesion, reducing crime and anti-social behaviour, supporting the economy and regeneration and contributing to environmental protection. The Hastings & Rother Leisure Facilities Strategy mapped access to leisure facilities, which not surprisingly showed Bexhill to benefit from better access in comparison to rural areas of the District.

A3.33 Leisure centre visits have increased in Rother, as have visitors to the De La Warr Pavilion in Bexhill.

A3.34 However, levels of participation in sport are low in Rother compared to other areas, possibly as a consequence of having a comparatively older

30 population. Although Rother exhibits a low proportion of the population who are within 20 minutes travel time of sports facilities.

A3.35 There are some quantity and access deficits of open space in the District, notably of larger green-spaces (100ha +) particularly around Bexhill.

Health (SAF Objective 2)

A3.36 Rother has a high proportion of people with long-term health problems or disabilities (23.9%), compared to England & Wales (17.9%) and the South- East region (15.7%). Long-term health and disabilities problems are particularly apparent in Central Bexhill and Sidley. Living Environment issues, which may be a factor in poor health, are also apparent in Central Bexhill, as well as the east of the District and the remote rural west of the District.

A3.37 The Community Plan recognises that an overall improvement in the health of Rother‟s residents and a reduction in health inequalities are important objectives. The Community Strategy for East Sussex highlights the importance of supporting older people to live independently for as long as possible.

A3.38 The Community Strategy for East Sussex (2012 Update) identified the following as a strategic priority by 2026: ‘Reduced health and care inequalities within and between communities and an improvement in overall health and wellbeing’

Housing (SAF Objective 1)

A3.39 Over recent years increases in average household incomes in Rother have not kept pace with house price rises, with the consequence that houses are becoming less and less affordable for local people, particularly in rural areas.

A3.40 The affordability ratio is now almost 13 in Rother, compared to just over 9 in England & Wales and just over 10 in the south-east. Rother has 1,351

31 households on the housing register. These facts alone demonstrate the housing need in District.

Transport & Accessibility (SAF Objectives 7, 10)

A3.41 The Community Strategy for East Sussex (2012 Update) identified the following as a strategic priority by 2026: ‘To improve sustainable transport choices and access to services and facilities within and between communities in the county.’

A3.42 Access to services in rural parts of the District is particularly constrained whilst public transport services are generally limited. The 2011 Census revealed that more than 64% of journeys to work in Rother are by car whereas less than 9% are by bus or train. The District shows a greater degree of car dependency in comparison to national, regional and county-wide figures.

A3.43 Local Transport Plan 3 identified several key priorities for Battle, Rye and Rural, including improvements to transport and improving access to key services in the area. Similarly at the county level it is recognised that access to services is constrained, in part, by the overall lack of broadband facilities across East Sussex.

Deprivation (SAF Objective 4)

A3.44 The 2013 Indices of Multiple Deprivation rank Rother as the 148th most deprived local authority area out of the 354 in England. This had fallen from 132nd in 2010, thereby showing an improving situation... There are pockets of more severe deprivation in parts of Bexhill and in the eastern wards of the District.

A3.45 Almost 9% of Rother households are classed as being in fuel poverty, which is low compared to England & Wales, but high compared to the wider county and region.

ECONOMIC

Education & Skills (SAF Objectives 5, 6)

A3.46 Educational attainment at GCSE level in Rother is relatively low at 56%, compared to 58% for East Sussex, and has declined in recent years. Furthermore, a high proportion of residents have no qualifications and a low proportion have the highest level of qualifications. Education skills and training deprivation is focused in Bexhill and the east of the District

Jobs (SAF Objective 6)

A3.47 Unemployment rates, as well as long-term unemployment and proportions who have never worked, are all higher in Rother compared to East Sussex and in South East England. Employment deprivation is not evenly spread in the District, but is particularly focused in Bexhill and on the east of the District

A3.48 The Employment Strategy and Land Review identifies a need for some 100,000 sq.m. of employment floor-space for the District and this is reflected in Core Strategy policy. The Community Strategy for East Sussex also identified that rural employment opportunities need to be strengthened to help ensure a sustainable future for local rural communities.

Local Economy & Regeneration (SAF Objective 6)

A3.49 East Sussex exhibits generally low wage rates, significant levels of employment in lower paid sectors and a county GDP which is less than two thirds of the national average. Firms in Rother are generally quite small compared to the wider County and region, although business survival rates are quite high compared to county and national figures. Approximately 13% of businesses across the High Weald are classed as „land-based‟ (compared to 3% nationally).

A3.50 The relative peripherality of the District, compounded by constrained strategic transport links, serves to affect Rother‟s economic fortunes.

„Securing economic improvement‟ has been identified as the number one strategic development issue in Rother‟s Core Strategy, which states ‘Both enterprise and levels of earnings locally are very low, which impacts on prosperity and hence on standards of living. It also impacts on the capacity of the economy to support a wide range of job opportunities, especially for younger people looking to develop careers. Economic improvement is handicapped by relatively low skill levels, a weak commercial market and poor communications. Regeneration is a particular priority for the coastal areas of the district and adjoining Hastings. The current economic climate further compounds these issues in a relative weak local economy.’

A3.51 The Community Strategy for East Sussex (2012 Update) identified the following as a strategic priority by 2026: ‘To narrow the gap within and between communities in the county, and between the county and the region, in order to develop a thriving, diverse and sustainable economy where everyone can prosper.

Task A4 Developing the Sustainability Appraisal Framework

A4.1 The production of an SA Framework is a key element of an SA Scoping Report. An initial version of the SA Framework was published in June 2008, accompanying Rother‟s Local Plan. It was then updated in the Proposed Submission Core Strategy SA (August 2011).

A4.2 It is appropriate to periodically update the SA Framework which needs to be set within the context of existing plans and policies. Furthermore, an understanding of the current baseline situation is essential to help predict effects and identify key sustainability issues. The Council is now in the process of preparing Part 2 of the Local Plan (2011-28) – the „Development & Site Allocations Plan‟. As a consequence it is considered a useful opportunity to update the SA Framework to reflect current plans and policies, current baseline and also the site specific nature of Part 2 of the Local Plan.

A4.3 The Framework is developed as a basis for consideration of sites in the Rother District area. Therefore it is also considered relevant and applicable to Neighbourhood Plans produced within the District, as well as the Development & Site Allocations Plan.

A4.4 The data for indicators is monitored and published in a variety of sources including the ESCC East Sussex in Figures (ESiF) website, the ESCC Research & Information team, the Council‟s Annual Monitoring Report (AMR), the Council‟s Corporate Performance monitoring, the Council‟s Community & Economy Division, the Council‟s Waste Services, the Council‟s Annual Performance Plan (APP), as well as from third party organisations.

A4.5 The objectives have been sub-divided into environmental, economic and social issues. For sites that are considered to be less reasonable options, this enables a more streamlined assessment based upon these three broad criteria.

SA Framework for Development and Site Allocations Plan

SA Objective Decision-Aiding Questions Indicators SEA Directive topics: Population, Human Health 1 Ensure that Does the option/policy? · Average property price : everyone has the · Deliver affordable, sustainable housing in both urban and rural areas earnings ratio opportunity to live · Deliver development that is in keeping with local character · Delivery of affordable units in a decent · Deliver development to meet local housing need · Number of completions sustainably · Support sympathetic accommodation of housing growth in sustainable locations · Number households on constructed and · Provide for an appropriate mix and range of housing where it is needed housing register affordable home · Appear likely to be viable, particularly in order to ensure the required proportion of · Total homeless in priority affordable housing is achievable. need · Ensure new development is designed so as to make good quality place for people · Population growth to live. · Population projections · Provide an opportunity for sustainable building. · Household projections · Incorporate an appropriate housing mix (i.e. meeting identified need for 1&2 bed · IMD Score (Barriers to properties in rural areas) Housing & Services) · Meet any identified needs for specialist (e.g. older persons) housing · Result in the loss of land to another use that is currently, previously or could potentially have been valuable for residential purposes? SEA Directive topics: Human Health 2 Improve the Does the option/policy? · Death rates health and well- · Provide good access to health care and facilities (GP surgeries, dentist, hospitals) · Life expectancy being of the · Protect and, where appropriate, increase provision of, and access to, leisure, · Percentage of people with population and natural green space and green/blue infrastructure, cultural activities, open space limiting long term illness reduce and recreation facilities · Residents within 20 minutes inequalities in · Promote physical activity and vibrant neighbourhoods travel time of different sports health Have scope and potential to increase accessibility to recreation facilities, open facilities space and accessible natural & semi-natural green space via on-site provision to · Provision of, and access to, support healthy lifestyles. natural or semi-natural green · Have scope and potential for on-site provision of health facilities (where space and green/blue appropriate) infrastructure (Application of · Have scope and potential to create or enhance walking and cycling routes, both green space standards, as on-site and off-site, to enhance healthy lifestyles outlined in RDC CS Policy · Access the PROW network CO3 and RDC GI Study) · Add to or improve PRoW network · IMD Score (Health & · Avoid adverse impacts of noise pollution, especially at night Disability) · Avoid proximity to landfill, contamination, industrial, and other polluting · IMD Score (Living neighbours Environment) · Promote sites in proportion to the scale of the settlement, facilitating integration of ·Participants in local sport new residents.

3 Reduce crime Does the option/policy? · Recorded crime rates(by and fear of crime · Reduce actual levels of crime type) in Rother · Reduce fear of crime · IMD score (crime) · Ensure sites are designed in such a way as to reduce crime and fear of crime · Incorporate a degree of informal surveillance/overlooking · Have a reasonable proximity to a police station SEA Directive topics: Population, Human Health 4 Reduce Does the option/policy? · % households in fuel poverty deprivation and · Reduce poverty and social exclusion in those areas most affected · % working population social exclusion · Reduce the number of children living in poverty claiming · Reduce the number of households in fuel poverty benefits · Promote development with good proximity to facilities, services and schools. · Indices of multiple · Promote effective integration with existing communities and external deprivation development. · % population in deprived · Provide for affordable housing. areas · Provide for an appropriate housing mix · Average gross annual earnings · Households with an internet connection · IMD Score (Income) 5 Raise educational Does the option/policy? · Levels of educational achievement · Increase the numbers of school-leavers achieving GCSE passes attainment (achievements key levels and · Increase numbers undertaking further and higher education stage 2 level 4 or above) develop the · Enhance opportunities for adult education · Levels of educational opportunities for · Have good accessibility to schools, colleges, universities, lifelong learning, and attainment % attaining 5+ lifelong learning libraries. GCSEs · IMD score (Education skills & training).

6 Sustain economic Does the option/policy? · % unemployed for more growth and · Stimulate economic growth, particularly in priority regeneration areas than 1yr competitiveness · Provide a diverse range of jobs that meets local needs · Unemployment as % of and encourage · Support the rural economy population innovation in · Ensure the correct mix of skills to meet the current and future needs of local · GVA per person higher value, employers · Business survival rates lower impact · Increase provision of better quality jobs / skilled employment · Local business units activities · Support increased employment in low impact sectors · Number of VAT registered · Provide on-site employment opportunities business · Develop with good access to existing and planned employment opportunities · Amount of land for · Support economically active, especially high skilled, residents to stay or move employment locally · Loss of employment land to · Promote a sustainable and buoyant tourism sector, including by fostering heritage retail based tourism/regeneration and or eco-tourism where appropriate (subject to · Permissions for B class uses requirements of Objective 14) · Tourism business turnover · Avoid negative impact upon economic, tourist or heritage assets · Tourism visitor numbers · Result in the loss of land to another use that is currently, previously or could · Broadband speeds potentially have been valuable employment/business uses? · IMD Score (Employment)

SEA Directive Topics: Population, Material Assets, Air, Climate Factors 7 Improve Does the option/policy? · Distance to key services accessibility to · Have good access to shops, services, educational and medical facilities, pubs, · % households within 30 services and community hall, play areas, sports pitches, places of worship, library, nursery, minutes public transport of: facilities for all petrol filling station. - GP ages across the · Have scope to facilitate the above via on or off-site provision. - Hospital District · Improve accessibility, particularly in the rural areas of the District - Primary & secondary · Support delivery of quality public transport school · Enhance the PRoW and cycle network - Employment · Support the timely delivery of infrastructure needs associated with new - Major retail centre development · % completed retail, office & · Encourage the provision of services and facilities in accessible locations leisure development in · Help support the continued viability of services, particularly in rural areas. centres

SEA Directive topics: Human Health, Cultural Heritage 8 Encourage and Does the option/policy? · % of residents visiting facilitate · Improve accessibility to cultural and leisure activities museums increased · Afford good access to community facilities, such as community hall, play areas, · Total leisure centres visits engagement in sports pitches, places of worship, library, theatres, cinemas, galleries, etc. · Visitors to De La Warr cultural and · Have scope to facilitate the above via on or off-site provision. Pavilion leisure activities · Increase the number of cultural enterprises / organisations in the District. · Participants in local sport · Result in the loss of land to another use that is currently, previously or could · Access to natural and semi- potentially have been valuable cultural and leisure uses? natural green space - Application of Open Space Standards SEA Directive topics: Material Assets, Air, Climatic Factors, Biodiversity, Soil 9 Improve efficiency Does the option policy? · % additional homes on in land use and · Use land in sustainable locations that has been previously developed in previously developed land encourage the preference to greenfield sites · Agricultural land prudent use of · Re-use buildings and materials classification natural resources · Protect and enhance the best and most versatile agricultural land · Maximise potential for providing facilities, i.e. from larger sites · Apply suitable density standards to ensure the best use of developable land in appropriate locations · Have potential to layout site to maximise energy efficiency (e.g. solar gain) · Have availability of utility services on site (water, electricity, sewerage, etc)

SEA Directive topics: Material Assets, Air, Climatic Factors, Human Health, Biodiversity 10 Reduce road Does the option/policy? · Background levels of air congestion and · Improve travel choice pollutants pollution levels · Reduce the need for travel by car / lorry · Number of AQMAs and ensure air · Reduce the need to travel for commuting · Commuting patterns in/out quality continues · Have access to public transport (buses, train services) and non-car modes to District to improve by access services. · Mode of travel to work increasing travel · Have access to pedestrian & cycle routes for localised leisure opportunities · Licenced vehicles by vehicle choice and · Have highway capacity. type reducing car · Avoid impact on and from AQMA. usage · Improve air quality . Not worsen or, where practicable, mitigate traffic congestion

SEA Directive Topics: Climatic Factors, Material Assets

11 Reduce Does the option/policy? · Emissions of greenhouse emissions of · Reduce emissions through reduced travel, energy consumption gases Greenhouse · Promote renewable energy generation · Consumption of gas and gases · Promote community involvement, understanding & action on climate change electricity · Help reduce greenhouse gas emissions through reducing car travel. · Traffic levels on key routes . Have potentially negative air quality impact upon the natural environment by increasing traffic on roads (in particular within 200m of sensitive designated habitats). · Have scope and potential to create or enhance walking and cycling routes, both on-site and off-site, to provide alternatives to car travel · Promote reduced energy use in new development (waste management and reduce energy demand from non-renewable resources). · Have potential for energy generation from renewable resources, including microgeneration as part of the energy requirements of new development · Have potential to maximise passive solar gain · Net Loss / Gain of Trees

SEA Directive Topics: Climatic Factors, Material Assets, Water, Human Health 12 Minimise the risk Does the option/policy? · Properties at risk from of flooding and · Reduce the proportion of properties at risk of flooding in the District flooding resulting · Avoid locations within flood zones, including EA Flood zones, EA defined areas of · Planning permissions detriment to surface water risk and Local Surface Water Management Plans/SFRA identified granted contrary to EA advice people and issues of localised flooding. on flood defence grounds property · Ensure that appropriate flood risk protection measures are in place to protect well-being. · Avoid exacerbating flood risk off-site by increasing run-off · Provide scope for, and promotion /adoption of SuDS.

SEA Directive Topics: Water, Human Health, Material Assets, Climatic Factors 13 Maintain, improve Does the option/policy? · Water consumption per and manage · Protect & improve water quality (groundwater and surface water) household water resources · Require the use of water efficiency measures · Quality of river water in a sustainable · Minimise the risk of pollution to water sources · Rivers of High or Good way · Avoid locations within groundwater source protection zones/aquifer. chemical and biological water · Avoid risk of pollution run-off into adjacent or nearby river network (including quality (passing Water ordinary watercourses) Framework Directive criteria). · For locations within the Pevensey Levels hydrological catchment: Recognise and · Bathing quality at beaches appropriately respond to issues identified in the HRA, regarding both run-off and the promotion of water efficiency measures. · Ensure new development has sufficient sewerage and waste water treatment capacity to avoid harm to water quality · Implement SuDS where appropriate to avoid run-off of polluted water to water courses or aquifers · Ensure any SuDS includes scope to enhance and enrich habitats and amenity value. SEA Directive topics: Biodiversity, Flora, Fauna

14 Conserve and Does the option/policy? · Number & area designated enhance · Avoid harm to protected areas and designated sites (international, national, local), sites biodiversity and with protection appropriate to their status. · Condition of designated geodiversity · Address potential adverse impacts identified within the HRA process, (including sites including SSSI in potential adverse impacts from recreational pressure upon the integrity of the favourable, unfavourable Dungeness complex of international sites; and upon water quality in the Pevensey recovering, unfavourable Levels) declining and unfavourable. · Provide green space, green or blue infrastructure which has added value via · Number and area of Local reducing pressure on international sites. Sites · Protect and avoid harm to Priority BAP Habitats. - Proportion of local sites that · Have scope to enhance and extend designated and locally valued habitats are in beneficial (including Priority BAP habitats) and species management. · Have scope to prevent and, where appropriate, reverse habitat fragmentation. · Area (ha) of designated sites · Ensure the location and design of sites does not cause the further fragmentation and reserves infringed by of habitats and protects and enhances network routes for flora and fauna Planning applications movement (including corridor and stepping stone features such as hedges, ditches · % of designation / reserve in and ponds) Rother infringed by planning · Have scope to establish or maintain a network of protected areas to maintain both applications the distribution and abundance of threatened species and habitats · Area of ancient semi-natural · Avoid harm to Ancient Woodland. Woodland. · Acknowledge and protect important trees, particularly mature specimens and · No further losses of ancient TPOs. woodland from 2004 baseline · Acknowledge proximity to Biodiversity Opportunity Areas and scope to develop · Area of Biodiversity Action opportunities. Plan habitat – gains or losses · Avoid net loss of biodiversity over time · Avoiding damaging impacts to geo-diversity · Loss of hedgerows · Support landscaping that enhances native biodiversity - Number of Tree · Have a positive nature conservation plan. Preservation Orders (TPOs) in place - Traffic levels on key routes within 200m of designated sites SEA Directive Topics: Landscape, Cultural Heritage, Soils 15 Protect and Does the option/policy? · Number of Conservation enhance the · Ensure protection and enhancement of the AONB and respect the key features Areas high quality and characteristics of the High Weald AONB and its setting. · Number of Listed Buildings natural and built · Protect, enhance and avoid negative impacts upon sites & features of historical, · Number of Registered Parks environment archaeological, or cultural interest (including conservation areas, listed buildings, and Gardens registered parks and gardens and scheduled ancient monuments, registered · Listed Buildings of Grade I battlefields, archeologically sensitive areas (ASAs)) and II* at risk · Minimise adverse visual impact on landscape setting of towns and rural · Scheduled Ancient settlements Monuments at Risk · Respect the historical settlement context. · % of Listed Buildings at risk · Promote development in character with the area · % of SAMs at risk · Seek to ensure that development is in keeping with the landscape character, · % of Registered Parks and including National and Local Landscape Character Areas. Gardens at risk · Avoid negative impacts on coastal and marine environment including seascapes, · % of Conservation Areas at protected marine areas and undeveloped coast. risk · Protect of gaps and avoid the coalescence of settlements. · % of Conservation Areas · Promote development that is in scale and proportionate to host settlement with an up-to-date character · Ensure building design, arrangement and materials used complement and add to appraisal character of area. · Landscape character · Promote sites that are well planned or soft landscaped in such a way as to assessment positively enhance the environment. - % of businesses within the - Ensure that development is not at risk from land instability High Weald that are land- based (in comparison to the wider south-east). SEA Directive Topics: Material Assets 16 Reduce waste Does the option/policy? · Tonnage & % of recycled generation and · Help reduce waste and facilitate recycling in construction and operation. household waste disposal, and · Encourage composting. · Waste collected per person achieve the · Encourage development self-sufficient in waste management. (kg) sustainable · Support recovery of energy from waste. · % change in household management of · Have good proximity to a household waste facility. waste waste · Have good proximity to a 'bring' recycling point. collected per year · % household waste composted · % household waste landfilled

Development Management Policies: Concluding Section

Potential Mitigation Potential to mitigate negative effects and enhance positive effects.

Cumulative and Synergistic Above factors may interact in a synergistic way and may increase cumulative affects either Affects positively or negatively. SA Conclusions Derived from above factors

Sites Policies: Concluding Section

Site Commentary, Likely Significant Effects, Potential Completed per individual site. Commentary drawing on assessment to Mitigation and Conclusions draw out likely significant effects, potential mitigation and overall conclusion. Cumulative Effects and Overall Settlement Commentary Section completed on settlement basis, with text applying to all sites within the settlement. Includes consideration of cumulative effects.

Task A5 Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal

The Role of the Statutory Environmental Bodies (SEBs)

A5.1 Regulation 4 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 defines certain organisations with environmental responsibilities as consultation bodies. In England the consultation bodies or „SEBs‟ (Statutory Environmental Bodies) are  Historic England1,  Natural England and  the Environment Agency.

A5.2 Although not required by the Act (2004), in order to ensure the approach taken to the SA is most appropriate for the DASA, versions of this report have been produced as a consultation document for the statutory agencies with environmental responsibilities in England, although comments have also been welcomed from any persons or organisations wishing to participate.

First and Second Consultations

A.5.3 An initial version of this report was therefore published on the Council‟s website in September 2014 for a consultation period of 6 weeks2, and then a slightly amended version was published for a further 6 week period ending in February 2015. Comments were invited from interested persons or organisations. At the same time, the consultation bodies were specifically notified and invited to comment3.

A5.4 In response to the first two previous consultation stages, all three of the SEBS made comments, most of which resulted in amendments to this Scoping report. For example, Heritage England requested a greater range of indicators in relation to SEA objective 15, whilst Natural England requested more contextual mapping and the addition of statistical information to the Baseline Information report (Appendix 1), such as figures relating to habitats and species impacted by planning applications. The Environment Agency

1 Title from 01/04/15, formerly known as English Heritage. 2 From Wednesday 10th October 2014 until 5pm on Wednesday 15th October 2014. 3 As highlighted in the Planning Practice Guidance „Where a consultation body decides to respond, it should do so within five weeks of receipt of the request. (See regulation 12(5) and 12(6) of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004.)‟ 41 requested the addition of further contextual information towards the section „Task A3 Identifying Sustainability Issues‟ particularly in relation to SA Objective 13 „Water Quality‟.

Final Consultation

A5.4 In December 2015, Rother District Council further consulted with the SEBs regarding further proposed amendments to the Scoping Report, including: Update of the baseline information (Task A2), update of the sustainability issues (Task A3), refinement of the SA Framework (Task A4), incorporation of contextual mapping (Appendix 2) and further contextual information and clarification regarding the SEA process for Neighbourhood Plans and the Council‟s role in „screening‟ and in supporting the process. The final consultation with the SEBs closed on the 5th February 2016. The Council received comments from Natural England and the Environment Agency in response to this consultation and their comments were incorporated into this Final published DASA SA Scoping Report February 2016.

Consulting on the Main SA

A5.5 The above sets out who should be consulted on the Scoping Report. With regard the forthcoming main SA assessment of the DASA, the local planning authority must consult the consultation bodies and other parties who, in its opinion, are affected or likely to be affected by, or have an interest in, the decisions involved in the assessment and adoption or making of the plan. Further details on consultation procedures are set out in regulation 13 of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. The PPG sets out that the local planning authority may also want to consult those they are inviting representations from, as part of the development of the Local Plan itself. The sustainability appraisal report, including the non-technical summary, must be published alongside the draft Local Plan for a minimum of six weeks.

Appendix 1: Baseline Information: Sustainability Appraisal Profile for Rother District

Map 1 District Location

This area profile provides selected indicators of the sustainability appraisal for local planning.

Map 2: Settlement Boundaries4 and Neighbouring Authorities

4 The mapped settlement boundaries derive from the 2006 Local Plan and may be subject to amendment alongside the Development & Site Allocations Plan. 44

Map 3 Aerial View of Rother

SA OBJECTIVE 1

Ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live in a decent, sustainably constructed and affordable home.

House price to earnings ratio, 2010-2014 This dataset shows the house price/earnings ratios, which gives a measure of housing affordability comparing average full-time male earnings with the average price of a semi-detached house.

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Geography

England and Wales 9.01 8.92 8.52 8.81 9.17

South East 9.89 9.80 9.23 9.68 10.05

East Sussex 10.12 9.73 9.90 10.19 10.55

Rother 11.31 11.38 10.95 11.51 12.94

Source: HM Land Registry and ONS.

Affordable housing completions, 2010-2015 This dataset shows the number of affordable houses built over time.

Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Geography

East Sussex 417 450 251 241 364

Rother 40 62 0 58 33

Source: ESCC residential monitoring database.

Proportion of homes built that are affordable 2010 - 2015

This dataset shows the percentage of affordable houses built over time

Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Geography

East Sussex 32.03 30.93 19.34 19.95 28.50

Rother 18.02 35.03 0.00 36.94 34.02

Source: ESCC residential monitoring database.

Additional homes built, 2010-2015 This dataset shows the number of additional dwellings completed over time.

Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Geography

East Sussex 1,302 1,455 1,298 1,208 1,277

Rother 222 177 98 157 97

Source: ESCC residential monitoring database.

Households on the waiting list, 2010-2014 This dataset shows the number and percentage of households on the local authority housing register, also known as the waiting list, as at 1st April each year. Some regional and national data are not available in the last two years 2012 and 2013.

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Measure No. of % of No. of % of No. of % of No. of % of No. of % of househol social househol social househol social househol social househol social ds on the housing ds on the housing ds on the housing ds on the housing ds on the housing Geograp waiting dwellin waiting dwellin waiting dwellin waiting dwellin waiting dwellin hy list gs list gs list gs list gs list gs

1,740,99 1,824,83 1,851,42 1,685,80 1,368,31 England 43.5 45.4 45.7 41.5 32.9 7 0 6 4 2

South 215,373 43.8 225,250 45.5 ------East

East 10,781 42.0 10,854 41.9 13,058 49.5 13,361 50.8 8,559 32.5 Sussex

Rother 1,933 44.3 1,793 40.9 1,973 44.1 1,568 35.9 1,351 30.9

Source: Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Homeless households accepted in priority need each year, 2009-2014 This dataset shows the number of additional households who have been accepted by the local authority as homeless and in priority need for accommodation.

Years 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Geography

England 40,020 44,160 50,290 53,770 52,250

South East 3,870 4,520 5,320 5,858 5,891

East Sussex 255 272 330 302 308

Rother 23 37 42 42 40

Source: Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Population growth, 2004-2014 This dataset shows the total population in 2004 and 2014 together with the population growth in the 10-year period.

Year 2004 2014 Population growth 2004-2014 – (%)

Geography

England and Wales 53,152,022 57,408,654 8.0

South East 8,133,100 8,873,818 9.1

East Sussex 505,007 539,766 6.9

Rother 87,183 92,130 5.7

Source: ONS, 2004 and 2014-mid-year Population Estimates.

Population projections, 2012-2027 This dataset shows the 2012 policy-based population projections for the period 2012 to 2027. These projections are based on the revised 2002-2010 mid-year population estimates and the 2011 mid-year population estimates rolled forward from the 2011 Census. They have also been re-based on the 2012 mid- year estimates. These projections are calculated by East Sussex County Council using the POPGROUP model.

Year 2012 2027 Population growth 2012-2027 – (%)

Geography

East Sussex 531,201 553,278 4.2

Rother 91,088 96,128 5.5

Source: East Sussex County Council, Research and Information Team, July 2013.

Household projections, 2012-2027 This dataset shows the 2012 policy-based household projections for the period 2012 to 2027. These projections are based on the revised 2002-2010 mid-year population estimates and the 2011 mid-year population estimates rolled forward from the 2011 Census. They have also been re-based on the 2012 mid- year estimates. These projections are calculated by East Sussex County Council using the POPGROUP model.

Year 2012 2016 2020 2024 2027

Geography

East Sussex 234,389 239,494 244,636 249,771 253,622

Rother 41,159 41,928 42,832 43,733 44,408

Source: East Sussex County Council, Research and Information Team, July 2013.

Map 4 Barriers to housing and services deprivation 2015

The Barriers to Housing and Services Domain measures the physical and financial accessibility of housing and local services. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: „geographical barriers‟, which relate to the physical proximity of local services, and „wider barriers‟ which includes issues relating to access to housing such as affordability and homelessness.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Barriers to Housing and Services domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 2

Improve the health and well-being of the population and reduce inequalities in health.

Life expectancy at birth in years, 2007-2013 This dataset shows the average number of years a newborn baby would survive if he/she experienced the particular area's age-specific mortality rates for that time period throughout his or her life.

Year 2007-2009 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013

Gender Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females

Geography

England and 78.1 82.2 78.4 82.4 78.8 82.8 79.1 82.9 79.3 83.0 Wales

South East 79.4 83.2 79.7 83.5 80.0 83.8 80.3 83.8 80.4 83.9

East Sussex 79.4 83.4 79.4 83.4 79.5 83.7 79.8 83.6 80.0 83.9

Rother 79.6 83.5 79.7 83.8 79.9 83.6 80.1 83.9 80.0 83.9

Source: ONS.

Standardised Mortality Rates, 2009-2014 This dataset shows the Standardised Mortality Ratio (SMR) which is defined as observed deaths as a percentage of expected deaths. Expected deaths are the number that would occur if the population of the area experienced the sex/age mortality rates of England and Wales. Thus the SMR for England and Wales is always 100.

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Geography

England and Wales 100 100 100 100 100

South East 93 93 93 93 93

East Sussex 95 93 92 93 91

Rother 93 91 93 94 93

Source: ONS.

Residents with limiting long-term illness

This table shows the numbers of people with a long-term health problem or disability for the 2011 Census for East Sussex. This is a long-term health problem or disability that limits a person's day-to-day activities, and has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months.

Percentage

Geography People with long- Day-to-day Day-to-day People without long- All term health problem activities activities limited term health problem

people or disability limited a lot a little or disability England and Wales 100 17.9 8.5 9.4 82.1 South East 100 15.7 6.9 8.8 84.3 East Sussex 100 20.3 9.2 11.2 79.7 Rother 100 23.4 10.7 12.8 76.6 Source: 2011 Census.

Residents within 20 minutes travel time of different sports facilities, 2006-2007 This dataset shows the percentage of the population that are within 20 minutes travel time of a range of three different sports facility types of which one has achieved a quality assured standard. The travel time is defined as a 20 minute walk time in urban areas or a 20 minute drive time in rural areas, based on the Office for National Statistics classification for urban and rural areas.

Years December 2006 June 2007 November 2007

Geography

England 32.2 33.6 38.2

South East 28.0 28.8 31.5

East Sussex 30.9 34.4 34.6

Eastbourne 0.0 0.0 0.0

Hastings 8.0 29.7 30.1

Lewes 68.8 68.8 69.7

Rother 27.3 25.7 27.6

Wealden 42.0 42.0 41.8

Source: Sport England, Choice and opportunity scores.

Access to natural and semi-natural green space

Cross-reference should be made to Maps 12a to 12d on page 86 and discussed under SA Objective 8.

Application of Open Space Standards

Open space standards, in terms of access, quantity and quality were established by Core Strategy Policy C03 and cross-reference should be made to maps in the supporting Rother District Council Green Infrastructure Study.

Map 5 Health and Disability Deprivation 2015

The Health Deprivation and Disability Domain measures the risk of premature death and the impairment of quality of life through poor physical or mental health. The domain measures morbidity, disability and premature mortality but not aspects of behaviour or environment that may be predictive of future health deprivation.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Health and Disability domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

Map 6 Living Environment Deprivation 2015

This focuses on deprivation with respect to the characteristics of the living environment. It comprises two sub- domains: the „indoors‟ living environment which measures the quality of housing and the „outdoors‟ living environment which contains two measures about air quality and road traffic accidents.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Living Environment domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 3

Reduce crime and the fear of crime.

Police recorded crimes, 2009-2014 This dataset shows the rate of total recorded offences per 1,000 people living in the area.

Crime Offences per 1,000 population

Year 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Geography

England 77.4 74.8 73.3 66.1 62.7

South East 62.0 66.3 61.8 55.1 53.1

East Sussex 44.7 53.5 51.4 46.7 43.0

Rother 35.3 44.6 42.1 38.6 36.5

Source: Home Office.

Recorded crime by key offences, Year, 2013/14 Rate per 1,000 population

This dataset shows the rate of total recorded offences by key offences per 1,000 people living in the area.

Crime

Geography

Theft offences Theft Violenceagainst person the Criminal damage and arson offences Drug order Public offences Sexualoffences Robbery Miscellaneous crimesagainst society Possession of weapons offences Fraudoffences

England 32.9 11.4 9.1 3.5 2.3 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.0

South 27.5 10.2 8.3 2.8 1.9 1.0 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.0 East

East 21.2 8.3 7.9 2.3 1.3 1.0 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.0 Sussex

Rother 20.0 5.9 6.3 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0

1Fraud offences data for 2013/14 are not yet completed Source: Home Office, Police Recorded Crime (PRC).

Satisfaction with the local area as a place to live, 2006-2009 This dataset shows the percentage of respondents who are satisfied with the local area according to two resident surveys, the Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI) General User Survey conducted in 2006/07 and the Place Survey conducted in 2008/09. This data is no longer recorded.

Level of satisfaction Percent of respondents who are very and fairly satisfied

Year 2006/07 2008/09

Geography

East Sussex 80.6 84.1

Eastbourne 78.5 84.8

Hastings 70.4 75.0

Lewes 69.5 84.3

Rother 83.4 86.3

Wealden 83.3 87.4

Source: Ipsos Mori, BVPI and Place Survey

Feel very or fairly safe outside, 2008/09 This dataset shows the percentage of respondents who feel very or fairly safe outside during the day and after dark according to the resident survey, Place Survey conducted in 2008/09.

Level of safe Percent of respondents who feel very or fairly safe outside

Time After dark During the day

Geography

East Sussex 55.5 90.8

Eastbourne 48.6 87.1

Hastings 38.5 85.0

Lewes 61.6 93.5

Rother 59.0 92.0

Wealden 63.8 94.1

Source: Ipsos Mori, Place Survey 57

Map 7 Crime Deprivation 2013

The Crime Domain measures the risk of personal and material victimisation at local level.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2013 (ID 2013) for the Crime domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 4

Reduce deprivation and social exclusion.

Households in fuel poverty in 2012 and 2013 (new definition) This dataset shows the estimated number and percentage of households living in fuel poverty by the new fuel poverty definition, the Low Income High Cost (LIHC) indicator introduced in 2012. Under this definition a household is considered to be fuel poor where: they have required fuel costs that are above average (the national median level); and were they to spend that amount, they would be left with a residual income below the official poverty line.

Measure Percentage of fuel poor Number of fuel poor Total number of households households households

Year 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013

Geography

England 10.4 10.4 2,282,579 2,346,715 21,935,239 22,582,745

South East 7.8 8.1 276,860 297,153 3,552,475 3,659,355

East 8.4 8.7 19,519 20,816 231,725 238,579 Sussex

Rother 8.8 8.9 3,603 3,749 40,848 42,051

Source: Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

Working age population claiming out-of-work benefits, 2010-2015 This dataset shows the percentage of working age people (aged 16-64) who are claiming out-of-work benefits.

Measure Percentage of all working age population

Date Feb-10 Feb-11 Feb-12 Feb-13 Feb-14 Feb-15

Geography

Great Britain 12.7 12.1 12.3 11.7 10.6 9.8

South East 9.0 8.5 8.7 8.2 7.4 6.9

East Sussex 11.7 11.0 11.4 10.7 10.1 9.4

Rother 11.3 10.8 11.2 10.5 9.8 9.1

Source: NOMIS, ONS.

Population of working age claiming benefits including out-of-work benefits Feb-15

Benefit type Any Out-of-work Job ESA and incapacity Lone Other out-of-work Carers benefits benefits seeker benefits parents benefits Geography

Great 12.6 9.8 2.0 6.4 1.1 0.3 1.51 Britain

South East 9.2 6.9 1.2 4.5 0.9 0.3 1.11

East 12.2 9.4 1.6 6.4 1.0 0.4 1.41 Sussex

Rother 12.2 9.1 1.4 6.4 1.0 0.3 1.61 1Carers may be treated as in- or out-of- work. Source: NOMIS, ONS.

Working age population claiming any benefits, 2010-2015 This dataset shows the percentage of working age people (aged 16-64) who are claiming any benefits.

Measure Percentage of all working age population

Date Feb-10 Feb-11 Feb-12 Feb-13 Feb-14 Feb-15

Geography

Great Britain 14.9 14.5 14.8 14.3 13.3 12.6

South East 10.8 10.5 10.7 10.4 9.7 9.2

East Sussex 13.9 13.4 13.8 13.4 12.8 12.2

Rother 13.7 13.5 13.9 13.4 12.8 12.2

Source: NOMIS, ONS.

Average household income in 2015 This dataset shows estimates of mean and median average household incomes.

Average Median income Mean income

Geography

England 29,164 36,954

South East 34,186 42,238

East Sussex 28,572 35,991

Rother 26,963 33,973

Source: CACI.

Internet connection in 2014 This dataset shows the number and percentage of households with an internet connection at home. These data are from the LifestylesUK database of all adults in the UK with scores for different lifestyle characteristics, which is prepared by CACI using information derived by questionnaires, share registrations, Census data and CACI's Consumer register.

Measure Percentage of households with Number of households with Total number of internet access internet access households Geography

Great 83.2 21,951,800 26,378,446 Britain

South East 85.9 3,141,403 3,657,910

East 84.3 200,356 237,742 Sussex

Rother 84.0 35,170 41,865

Source: CACI.

Indices of Multiple Deprivation in 2015 This dataset shows the average rank of 326 local authority districts in England according to the results from the Indices of Deprivation (ID 2010), where a rank of 1 indicates the most deprived area. No single summary measure is the „best‟ measure. Each highlights different aspects of deprivation, and each leads to a different ranking of areas. Comparison of the different measures is needed to give a fuller description of deprivation in a large area. In addition, it is important to remember that the higher-area measures are summaries; the Lower-layer Super Output Area level data provides more detail than is available through the summaries. In summary, Rother's position seems to have improved since 2010 relative to the other 327 local authorities, as set out in the table (remembering that rank 1 is most deprived, so a fall down the ranking is a positive trend).

Rank of Rank of Rank of Local Rank of Average Rank Average Score Concentration Extent (1 is most deprived (1 is most deprived (1 is most deprived (1 is most deprived 326 is least deprived) 326 is least deprived) 326 is least deprived) 326 is least deprived)

2010 132 139 155 153

2015 148 155 162 171

Change 2010 - 2015 16 16 7 18

Headline Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement

Source: Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Map 8: Deprivation - Areas Classed as within the 20% Most Deprived Nationally

Combining information from the seven IMD domains produces an overall relative measure of deprivation, the Index of Multiple Deprivation. This map shows the results from the Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

Map 9: Income Deprivation 2013

The Income Deprivation Domain measures the proportion of the population experiencing deprivation relating to low income. The definition of low income used includes both those people that are out-of-work, and those that are in work but who have low earnings (and who satisfy the respective means tests).

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Income domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 5

Raise education achievement levels and develop the opportunities for lifelong learning.

Pupils achieving Level 4+ at Key Stage 2 by gender in 2011/12 – schools

This dataset provides details of the educational attainment levels achieved by pupils who attend schools maintained by East Sussex County Council.

The information is presented according to where pupils go to school. Pupils may not go to school in the same area as where they live and some pupils attending East Sussex schools live outside the county. Schools have been categorised into districts based on the location of the school. There are no overall figures for districts, as overall figures for districts elsewhere in ESIF are based on where pupils live, not where they attend school.

Data is provided on the number and percentage of pupils working at Level 4 or above, according to the statutory Key Stage 2 tests. These tests are carried out at the end of Year 6 in primary or junior schools, and a typical 11 year-old will normally be working at Level 4.

Gender All Pupils Males Females

Geography

East Sussex 3,810 1,912 1,898

Eastbourne 686 345 341

Hastings 636 311 325

Lewes 700 365 335

Rother 650 299 351

Wealden 1,138 592 546

Source: ESIF.

Learners by type, 2013 - districts

This dataset shows the number of people participating in Further Education and skills learning by type of learning in 2013.

Leaner Type Education & Training Apprentices Workplace Community Learning Learning Geography

East Sussex 23,270 6,560 1,820 5,290

Eastbourne 5,050 1,470 410 750

Hastings 5,670 1,310 450 1,160

Lewes 4,640 1,170 310 980

Rother 3,840 890 250 860

Wealden 4,070 1,720 400 1,540

Source: ESIF.

Qualifications in 2011 This dataset shows the percentage of all people aged 16 to 64 by highest level of qualification held from the 2011 Census.

Qualifications None Level Level Apprenticeship Level Level 4 and Other 1 2 3 above qualifications Geography

England and 15.0 15.2 17.2 3.1 14.5 29.7 5.5 Wales

South East 11.7 15.4 17.6 3.1 15.0 32.3 4.9

East Sussex 13.4 16.9 19.4 3.1 14.9 28.3 4.1

Rother 14.3 17.1 19.5 3.4 14.5 27.6 3.6

Source: ONS, 2011 Census.

Pupils achieving 5+ GCSEs in 2011/12

This dataset shows the percentage of pupils achieving 5 or more passes at grades A* - C (including Maths and English) in schools maintained by East Sussex County Council. The information is presented according to where pupils live. Pupils may not live in the same area as where they go to school and some pupils attending East Sussex schools live outside the county.

Gender All pupils Males Females

Geography

All areas 57.5 52.2 63.3

East Sussex 57.8 52.8 63.2

Rother 55.8 51.3 61.2

Source: Children's Services Department, ESCC.

Map 10: Education Skills and Training Deprivation 2015

The Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain measure the lack of attainment and skills in the local population. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: one relating to children and young people and one relating to adult skills.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Education Skills and Training domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 6

Sustain economic growth and competitiveness and encourage innovation in higher value, lower impact activities.

Unemployment, 2001-11 - super output areas

This dataset shows the number and percentage of the economically active population, aged 16-74, who were unemployed in 2001 and 2011 by gender, certain age groups, whether or not they have ever worked and length of unemployment.

Unemployment All usual All Ages 16 to 24 Aged 50 to Who are Who have category residents aged unemployed 74 long-term never worked 16 to 74 people ages unemployed Geography 16 to 74

England and 100.0 4.4 1.2 0.8 1.7 0.7 Wales

South East 100.0 3.4 0.9 0.7 1.3 0.4

East Sussex 100.0 3.6 1.0 0.8 1.5 0.4

Eastbourne 100.0 4.1 1.1 0.9 1.7 0.4

Hastings 100.0 5.5 1.6 1.0 2.4 0.8

Lewes 100.0 3.3 1.0 0.8 1.3 0.4

Rother 100.0 2.5 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.3

Wealden 4,070 1,720 400 1,540

Source: ESIF.

JSA claimant count by duration (Sep 2015)

This dataset shows numbers of claimants claiming Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) with percentage split by main duration.

Duration Up to 6 months 6 months to 1 year 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years Over 3 years

England 55.5 16.9 11.0 5.0 11.6

South East 61.8 16.5 9.6 4.0 8.2

East Sussex 51.0 19.6 13.3 6.0 10.0

Rother 54.0 20.0 12.0 6.0 8.0 Source: Office for National Statistics/NOMIS

Unemployment rate, 2010-2014 This dataset shows the unemployment rate which is the proportion of all economically active people who are unemployed, using the International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition. District level figures are taken from ONS modelled unemployment estimates.

Jan 2010-Dec Jan 2011-Dec Jan 2012-Dec Jan 2013-Dec Jan 2014-Dec Time period 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

England 7.6 8.0 7.9 7.5 6.2

South East 6.0 5.9 6.0 5.7 4.8

East 6.6 5.1 7.3 5.5 5.0 Sussex

Rother 6.9 8.0 7.3 6.4 5.2

Source: ONS, Annual Population Survey.

Employment rate in 2011 This dataset shows the employment rate of the working age population, calculated using data from 2011 Census. The employment rate is the proportion of all working age people who are in employment. Working age population includes people aged 16-64.

Economic activity category Employment rate

Geography

England and Wales 71.0

South East 74.7

East Sussex 72.3

Rother 70.1

Source: ONS, 2011 Census. 69

Gross value added (GVA), 1997-2013 – county

This dataset shows Gross Value Added for East Sussex, with regional and national comparisons. Gross Value Added (GVA) is a measure of the goods and services produced in the economy, minus bought in materials and services. It measures the contributions made to the economy of each producer, industry or sector.

Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Geography

United 21,222 21,904 22,332 22,797 23,394 Kingdom

South East 23,026 24,135 24,455 25,324 25,843

East 14,422 15,120 15,245 15,897 15,703 Sussex

Source: ESIF.

Business survival rates, 2007-2012 – districts

This dataset shows enterprise births, deaths and survival rates for a five year period to 2012.

Years of survival Births 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 year 5 year Year of birth of Geography units Great Britain 2008 100 92.2 74.2 58.2 49.1 41.4 2009 100 90.9 73.9 59.7 48.9 - 2010 100 86.7 72.5 57.1 - - 2011 100 93.1 75.6 - - - 2012 100 91.2 - - - - East Sussex 2008 100 94 77.8 61.8 52.2 44.2 2009 100 91.5 73.6 58.5 48.8 - 2010 100 87.6 72.8 57.4 - - 2011 100 95 78.4 - - - 2012 100 92.3 - - - - Rother 2008 100 95.7 78.3 62.3 49.3 43.5 2009 100 93.3 76.7 66.7 53.3 - 2010 100 86.6 74.6 59.7 - - 2011 100 95.8 79.2 - - - 2012 100 92.6 - - - -

Source: ESIF.

Local business units, 2010-2014 This dataset shows the number of local business units. A local unit is an individual site that is part of an enterprise (e.g. a workshop, factory, warehouse, mine or depot) situated in a geographically identified place. At least one person works at or from this location for the same enterprise. This can also be referred to as 'site' level.

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Geography

Great Britain 2,489,960 2,464,265 2,527,640 2,543,115 2,639,340

South East 394,505 390,460 399,755 400,690 413,530

East Sussex 23,255 22,695 22,885 22,800 23,475

Rother 4,190 4,085 4,160 4,165 4,355

Source: ONS. UK Business counts.

All VAT based enterprises, 2004

This dataset shows the number of businesses registered for VAT in 2004

Measure Number of VAT based enterprises

Geography

South East 252,975

East Sussex 15,015

Eastbourne 1,860

Hastings 1,670

Lewes 2,780

Rother 2,835

Wealden 5,870 Source: Neighbourhood Statistics

Small businesses showing employment growth, 2003-2008 This dataset shows the percentage of small businesses, with less than 50 employees, in an area showing employment growth.

Year 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Geography

Great Britain 10.3 11.6 14.7 14.4 14.4

South East 9.7 10.8 13.6 13.5 13.6

East Sussex 9.6 10.4 13.3 13.3 13.4

Rother 9.0 9.9 12.9 13.3 12.6

Source: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).

Loss of employment land to retail (2014/15)

Floorspace Site Application No. Use Class Scheme (sq. m)

10 Village Mews, Change of use of offices to RR/2011/443/P -31 B1a Bexhill shop

14 Tower Street – Change of use of warehouse RR/2012/1589/P -30 B1c Building Adj to light industrial and retail

Total -61

Sites identified for business uses as at 1st April 2015

Net Gross Floorspa Floorspace ce (sq. (sq. m) m)

RR/2012/1978/P Land north of Barnhorn Outline Permission Road, Bexhill 3,500 3,500 Outline Permission RR/2013/2166/P Glovers Farm, Bexhill 11,742 11,742 RR/2014/2733/P Bexhill Innovation Centre, Outline Permission Bexhill 7,000 7,000 Outline Permission RR/2013/1538/P The Saltings, Icklesham 13440 12810 Outline Permission RR/2013/2380/P (subject to S106) Culverwells, Salehurst 1,300 1,300 RR/2011/2636/P Wheel Farm Business Outline Permission Park, Westfield 1,100 1,100 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/2258/P Timber Yard, Permission Ashburnham 84 84 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/2588/P Permission Foster Motors, Battle 162 96 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/2930/P Beckley Resprays, Permission Beckley 335 133 Outstanding Planning RR/2012/813/P Tollgate Cottage – Land Permission adj to, Beckley 170 17 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/370/P Permission Whitefield Shaw, Beckley 186 186 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/158/P Permission 1A Reginald Road, Bexhill 59 10 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/591/P Permission 20 Windsor Road, Bexhill 0 -270 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/1011/P 3 Wellington Place, Permission Bexhill 73 41 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2006/P Permission 47 London Road, Bexhill 900 -190 Outstanding Planning RR/2012/1225/P Caritas Cottage – Permission Woodland adj to, Bexhill 584 584 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2399/P Permission Jalna, Bexhill 0 -109 Outstanding Planning RR/2012/2163/P Marpall Engineering, Permission Brede 36 36 Outstanding Planning RR/2012/974/P Coldharbour Farm Estate, Permission Brightling 230 0 Outstanding Planning RR/2011/901/P Permission Warren Yard, Catsfield 1709 691 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2377/P Permission Sharpes Farm, Catsfield 121 121 Outstanding Planning RR/2011/325/P Collyers Farm, East Permission Guldeford 32 32 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/2139/P New House Farm, Permission Etchingham 128 128 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2549/P Staplecross Shrub 175 87

Permission Centre, Ewhurst Outstanding Planning RR/2013/1998/P Permission Barn House, Fairlight 247 247 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/331/P Doleham Cottages – Land Permission to West, Guestling 0 -84 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2471/P Caravan Tech Services, Permission Hurst Green 135 135 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/934/P 1 & 2 Colemans Way, Permission Hurst Green 0 -207 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/1545/P 51 London Road, Hurst Permission Green 0 -80 Outstanding Planning RR/2011/2655/P Permission Elms Farm, Icklesham 284 284 Outstanding Planning RR/2012/277/P Atlas Business Park, Permission Harbour Road, Icklesham 332 162 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/296/P Atlas Business Park, Permission Harbour Road, Icklesham 488 148 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/2576/P Permission Rye Wharf, Icklesham 120 120 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/1381/P Sherbourne Valley Farm, Permission Northiam 210 80 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/356/P 14 Tower Street – Permission Building adjacent to, Rye 0 -116 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/455/P Permission Russet Farm, Salehurst 140 140 RR/2009/1151/P Marley Lane Business Outstanding Planning Park – Block C, Permission Sedlescombe 2400 2400 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/1568/C Permission Felon Field, Sedlescombe 1253 1253 RR/2013/1112/P The Dairy Sheds, Outstanding Planning Bowlings Corner, Permission Sedlescombe 417 417 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/962/P Permission 4 London Road, Ticehurst 0 -55 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/1400/P Permission Stone Place, Ticehurst 225 225 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/2533/P Permission Bantham Farm, Ticehurst 117 117 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/810/P Permission Boundary Farm, Ticehurst 131 131 Outstanding Planning RR/2014/1089/P Flimwell Bird Park, Permission Ticehurst 914 914 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/37/P Carr Taylor Vineyards, Permission Westfield 1591 844 Outstanding Planning RR/2013/1591/P Aldershaw Tiles, Permission Westfield 0 -51

Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/88 36 Mount Street, Battle 0 -100 Development (Prior approval not 6/PN3 required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/24 22 Station Road, Bexhill 0 -54 Development (Prior approval not 40/PN3 required)

Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/61 65 Devonshire Road, Bexhill 0 -150 Development 3/PN3 (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/11 Brantwood House, Bodiam 0 -1150 Development 30/PN3 (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/24 Bracon House, Etchingham 0 -1110 Development 83/PN3 (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/11 Coleman Way – Unit 3, 0 -100 Development 8/PN3 Hurst Green (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2013/23 Marcomm, Rye 0 -414 Development 45/PN3 (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2014/25 Stonegate Business Park – 0 -72 Development 33/PN3 Unit 3, Ticehurst (Prior approval not required) Outstanding Permitted RR/2013/15 Hoads Farm, Westfield 476 476 Development (Prior approval not 43/PN3 required)

RR/2007/11 Site under construction Beechdown Sawmills, Battle 25/P 988 988 RR/2009/26 Site under construction 16 Eversley Road, Bexhill 52/P 0 -153 RR/2011/25 Site under construction 13 Sackville Road, Bexhill 65/P 0 -108 RR/2014/41 Glovers Farm – Phase 1, Site under construction 4/P Bexhill 3258 3258 RR/2013/18 Herons View, Normans Bay, Site under construction 66/P Bexhill 0 -90 RR/2014/12 Shrub Lane – Land at, Site under construction 93/P Burwash 0 -600 RR/2009/14 Site under Construction Forge Farm, Ewhurst 63/P 4735 649 RR/2011/12 Lidham Hill Studio, Site under Construction 9/P Guestling 315 315 RR/2013/38 Upper Lidham Hill Farm, Site under Construction 3/P Guestling 264 264 RR/2014/53 Orchard Farm Shop, Hurst Site under Construction 1/P Green 214 214 RR/2006/25 Old Mears Site, Rye Site under Construction 8/P Harbour, Icklesham 1620 1620 RR/2012/25 Site under Construction Rye Wharf, Icklesham 1/P 648 648 RR/2009/19 Site under Construction Advartex, Ticehurst 49/P 119 119 RR/2012/25 Woodland Enterprise Centre Site under Construction 31/P – Units 1 & 2, Ticehurst 180 180 108,671 94,567

Tourism business turnover (2014)

Year 2014 Rother Turnover for Local Businesses £291,800,000 Total spent by all visitors £238,400,000 Source: Tourism South East

Tourism Visitor Numbers (2014)

Domestic Overseas Rother Total Visitors. Visitors Visitors

Number of staying trips spent in the 489,000 431,000 58,000a District

Number of tourism day trips made to the District (lasting 5,822,000 - - more than 3 hours and taken on an irregular basis) Source: Tourism South East

Average (median) earnings workplace-based, 2010-2014

This dataset shows the median gross weekly earnings of all employees working in the area. Median pay is determined by ranking all wages in descending order. The median is the mid point of this ranking with 50% of employees earning below this figure and 50% earning above. These earnings data relate to gross pay before tax, National Insurance or other deductions, and generally excludes payments in kind.

Type of employee All employees

Gender All people

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Geography

Great Britain 405 402 408 417 419

South East 418 421 430 426 434

East Sussex 340 342 342 341 344

Rother 327 326 308 293 314 Source: ONS. Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings.

Map 11: Employment Deprivation 2013

The Employment Deprivation Domain measures the proportion of the working age population in an area involuntarily excluded from the labour market. This includes people who would like to work but are unable to do so due to unemployment, sickness or disability, or caring responsibilities.

This map shows the results from Indices of Deprivation 2015 (ID 2015) for the Employment domain for lower layer super output areas (LSOAs) in Rother and the results are mapped by National Rank Decile (where 1 is the most deprived decile nationally, and 10 is the least deprived).

SA OBJECTIVE 7

Improve accessibility to services and facilities for all ages across the District.

Retail, office & leisure developments completed for ‘Town Centre Uses’ at 01/04/2013 Within Floorspace Use Site Town Scheme Description (Sq.m) Class Centre

Bexhill Alterations And Erection of 2 Storey Rear 18 Western Road, 15 A1 Town Extension To Enlarge Shop And Form Bexhill Centre Additional 1 Bedroom Maisonette

Battle Change of Use of First Floor Currently 63A High Street, -109 A1 Town Used As Part of Shop Premises To A Self Battle Centre Contained Flat Bexhill 51A/B Western -55 A2 Town Change of Use from Offices to Residential Road, Bexhill Centre Not in Ox Lodge Farm Change of Use of Converted Farm Building -72 B1a Town Buildings, Brightling From Office Use To Holiday Let Unit Centre Autumn Cottage, Not in High Street, 41 B1a Town Office/Occasional Consultancy Room Ticehurst Centre Not in 44 Sidley Street, Conversion of Veterinary Surgery Into Self- -50 D1 Town Bexhill Contained Flat Centre Not in Change Of Use From Day Care Centre and 53 Turkey Road, -157 D1 Town Family Support Services To Private Bexhill Centre Dwelling. Source: AMR.

Sites completed for ‘Town Centre Uses’ (2014/2015)

Floorspace Site Application No. Use Class Scheme (sq. m)

10 Village Mews, Change of use of offices to RR/2011/443/P 31 A1 Bexhill shop

14 Tower Street – Change of use of warehouse RR/2012/1589/P 30 A1 Building Adj to light industrial and retail

Total 61

Source: AMR

Working age people with access to employment centres, 2007-2013 This dataset shows the percentage of the working age population, aged 16-74, who have access to employment centres by walking/public transport and cycling. Data is not available for 2012.

Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013

Geography

East Sussex 78.5 80.1 79.8 79.9 82.4 82.0

Rother 76.0 75.5 75.0 76.8 79.4 78.3

Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators.

Households within 30 minutes access by public transport/walking to a town centre in 2013 This dataset shows the number and percentage of households who have access to a town centre by public transport or walking, within 30 minutes.

Mode of transport Public transport/walk

Measure Number Percentage of all households

Geography

East Sussex 139,853 59.4

Rother 23,335 56.0

Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators.

Households within 30 minutes access by public transport/walking to a GP in 2013

This dataset shows the number and percentage of households who have access to a GP by public transport or walking, within 30 minutes.

Mode of transport Public transport/walk

Measure Percentage of all households Number

Geography

East Sussex 99.2 233,817

Rother 100.0 41,678

Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators.

Households within 30 minutes access by public transport/walking to a Hospital

This dataset shows the number and percentage of households who have access to a Hospital by public transport or walking, within 30 minutes in 2013.

Mode of transport Public transport/walk

Measure Percentage Number

Geography

East Sussex 60.4 142,194

Rother 64.0 26,682 Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators.

Children within 30 minutes access by public transport/walking to a Primary School

This dataset shows the number and percentage of children of primary school age who have access to a Primary School by public transport or walking, within 30 minutes.

Mode of transport Public transport/walk

Measure Percentage Number

Geography

East Sussex 100.0 30,337

Rother 100.0 4,568 Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators

Children within 30 minutes access by public transport/walking to a Secondary School

This dataset shows the number and percentage of children of secondary school age who have access to a Secondary School by public transport or walking, within 40 minutes.

Mode of transport Public transport/walk

Measure Percentage Number

Geography

East Sussex 99.0 26,008

Rother 100.0 4,253 Source: Department for Transport, Accessibility Indicators

SA OBJECTIVE 8

Encourage and facilitate increased engagement in cultural and leisure activities.

Satisfaction with sports & leisure facilities

Residents were surveyed between September 2006 and February 2007. They answered questions on how they felt about various cultural and leisure facilities in Rother.

Sports & Satisfaction with sports & Dissatisfaction with sports & Use of facilities in the last Leisure leisure facilities (%) leisure facilities (%) 12 months (%)

Geography

Rother 58 11 49

Source: RDC APP.

Total leisure centres visits (2011 - 2015)

Rother 2011/12. 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Total leisure centre 380,714 390,496 427,199 469,300 visits

Source: Rother District Council

Satisfaction with theatres & galleries

Rother had 6 registered museums and art galleries in Battle, Bexhill, Rye and Winchelsea at the time of the survey, all of which were supported by Rother District Council. Residents were surveyed between September 2006 and February 2007.

Theatres & Satisfaction with museums Satisfaction with Residents visiting museums in the Galleries and galleries (%) theatres (%) last 12 months (%)

Geography

Rother 47 40 40

Source: RDC APP.

Visits to museums in Rother per 1000 population

Use of Almost At About Within Within Longer Never Don't Total museums and every least once a the last 6 the last ago used know/NA galleries day once a month months year week

Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Frequency 0 1 6 14 12 13 15 11 72

% of all 0.0 1.4 8.3 19.4 16.7 18.1 20.8 15.3 100.0

% of valid 0.0 1.4 8.3 19.4 16.7 18.1 20.8 15.3 100.0

No update since 2008/09 Place Survey

Satisfaction with Libraries

Residents were surveyed between September 2006 and February 2007. They answered questions on how they felt about various cultural and leisure facilities in Rother.

Libraries Satisfaction with Dissatisfaction with Residents visiting libraries in the last 12 libraries (%) libraries (%) months (%) Geography

Rother 67 9 53

Source: RDC APP.

Visitors to the De La Warr Pavilion

This table shows the number of visitors to the De La Warr Pavilion from 2012/13 – 2014/15

Year 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Number of Visitors 300,000 350,000 390,000

Source: De La Warr Pavilion/RDC

Participants in local sport

The table and graph below show the percentage of the population aged 16+ who participate in sport at least once a week from 2005/06 to 2014/15 in Rother, the South East and England.

Maps 12a to 12d: Access to natural and semi-natural green space

The maps below show the access to natural and semi-natural green space in Rother district. Reference can also be made to Quantity Access and Quality Standards in the Open Spaces, Sport and Recreation Study which is apply on a more locally specific basis.

Application of Open Space Standards

SA OBJECTIVE 9

Improve efficiency in land use and encourage the prudent use of natural resources.

Additional homes built on previously developed land, 2007-2013 This dataset shows the number of dwellings completed on previously developed land (PDL, also known as brownfield).

Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Geography

East Sussex 1,524 1,099 790 981 857 712

Rother 390 165 78 211 70 61

Source: ESCC Residential Monitoring Database.

Additional homes built on previously developed land, 2007-2013

This dataset shows the percentage of dwellings completed on previously developed land (PDL, also known as brownfield).

Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Geography

East Sussex 85.3 77.1 80.2 75.3 58.9 54.9 65.9 65.0

Rother 91.8 82.9 82.1 95.0 39.5 62.2 78.3 90.7

Source: ESCC Residential Monitoring Database

Previously developed land (PDL) in 2009 This dataset shows details about previously developed land, whether vacant, derelict or in a local plan or with planning permission.

Previously Total previously developed PDL in a local plan or with PDL all vacant and developed land types land - area in hectares planning permission - percent derelict land - percent

Geography

England 61,920 27.9 53.9

South East 10,000 49.9 32.9

East Sussex 287 29.9 65.1

Eastbourne 26 16.4 77.0

Hastings 33 17.6 62.5

Lewes 54 55.1 39.4

Rother 88 14.8 85.2

Wealden 87 38.2 58.2

Source: National Land Use Database.

Number of Private Sector Dwellings Empty for 6 months or more (2014/15)

Private Sector Dwellings 2014/15 Empty for 6 months or more

Geography

Bexhill 230

Battle 24

Rye 35

Rural parishes 227

Rother total 516

Map 13: Agricultural Land Quality in Rother District

SA OBJECTIVE 10

Reduce road congestion and pollution levels and ensure air quality continues to improve by increasing travel choice and reducing car usage.

Concentrations of air pollutants, 2005 - middle layer super output areas This dataset shows details on the ambient air concentrations, which includes different air pollutants: benzene, nitrogen dioxide (NOx), particulate matter (PM10), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and ozone. The dataset provides scores of annual mean concentrations of air pollutants at background and roadside locations in the UK. The data are available from 2005, by middle layer super output areas (MSOA).

Ambient air concentration is the concentration of an air pollutant in outdoor air expressed as the mass of the pollutant per unit volume. Thus a lower level means less pollution.

Nitrogen Particulate Sulphur dioxide matter dioxide Pollutants Benzene (NO2) (PM10) (SO2) Ozone Location Background Roadside BG RS BG RS RG RS RG RS Geography Rother 001 1 - 2 - 5 - 1 - 7 - Rother 002 1 - 1 - 5 - 1 - 6 - Rother 003 1 - 1 - 5 - 1 - 7 - Rother 004 1 2 1 3 5 6 1 - 6 - Rother 005 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 7 - Rother 006 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 8 - Rother 007 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 8 - Rother 008 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 8 - Rother 009 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 8 - Rother 010 1 2 2 4 5 6 1 - 7 - Rother 011 1 2 2 3 5 6 1 - 7 -

Source: ESIF.

List of Local Authorities with AQMA’s

AQMA Name Pollutants Date Declared

Geography

Eastbourne - - -

Hastings Hastings Borough Council AQMA No.1 Particulate Matter PM10 08/12/2003

A259 Newhaven ring road and Town Centre Lewes No 1 Nitrogen dioxide NO2 16/07/2014 Lewes Town Centre AQMA

Rother - - -

Wealden - - -

Source: DEFRA.

Number of AQMAs

Year 2014

Geography

Eastbourne 0

Hastings 1

Lewes 1

Rother 0

Wealden 0

Source: DEFRA

Residents commuting flows in 2011 This dataset shows the number of people commuting into and out of East Sussex and each district, together with the net commuting flow. A negative number indicates more workers travelling out of the area to work than come into the area. Figures for East Sussex give the figures for those travelling out of the whole county, while district figures show numbers for those coming into and out of that district only.

Commuting flow Live and work in district Out-commuters In-commuters Net commuting

Geography

East Sussex 164,607 -50,450 19,641 -30,809

Rother 18,313 -15,077 9,593 -5,484

Source: ONS, 2011 Census.

Residents by mode of travel to work in 2001 and 2011 This dataset shows the percentage of all people aged 16-74 who are in employment by modes of transport used to get to work from the 2001 and 2011 Censuses. Data is available for individual modes of transport and grouped into general transport types: public transport, private vehicles and walking or cycling.

Year 2001 2011

Method of Work Private Public Walk Other Work Private Public Walk Other travel to mainly transport transport or method mainly transport transport or method work at or cycle of travel at or cycle of travel from to work from to work Geography home home

England and 9.2 63.1 14.5 12.8 0.5 10.3 60.7 15.9 12.6 0.5 Wales

South 9.9 66.4 10.2 13.0 0.5 11.8 63.2 11.7 12.7 0.5 East

East 11.6 65.9 9.4 12.6 0.5 13.9 62.7 11.0 12.0 0.5 Sussex

Rother 14.2 65.6 7.8 12.0 0.4 16.9 63.9 8.5 10.2 0.5

Source: ONS, 2001 and 2011 Census.

Residents by distance travelled to work in 2011 This dataset shows the percentage of all people aged 16-64 who are in employment by the distance travelled to get work from the 2011 Census. It includes those residents who work outside the area, but does not include those who work in the area but live outside the county.

Distance travelled Work mainly at or Less than 2- 5- 10km to less 30km and Other to work from home 2km 5km 10km than 30km over

Geography

England and 9.8 16.6 18.4 17.4 21.3 8.1 8.4 Wales

South East 11.2 16.6 16.2 14.3 21.0 11.8 8.9

East Sussex 13.1 17.9 15.6 10.8 20.2 12.0 10.4

Rother 15.9 15.3 9.9 14.5 19.5 13.3 11.6

Source: ONS, 2011 Census.

Licensed vehicles by vehicle type in 2009 This dataset shows the number and percentage of licensed vehicles in East Sussex and districts, by vehicle body type. This gives statistics on licensed vehicle stock which are produced from Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) licensing records, taken from the DVLA database at 31 December each year. It has been provided for East Sussex County Council by the Vehicle Statistics department at Department for Transport (DfT).

Vehicle body All Cars - Motorcycles Light Heavy Buses Taxi - Other - type licensed percent - percent goods - goods - and percent percent vehicles percent percent coaches - Geography percent

East 312,805 83.2 4.3 9.7 0.9 0.4 0.0 1.5 Sussex

Eastbourne 48,622 86.3 3.7 8.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.6

Hastings 42,351 83.8 5.7 9.1 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.5

Lewes 57,552 83.0 4.1 9.6 0.8 0.7 0.0 1.7

Rother 58,562 82.5 4.3 9.8 1.0 0.4 0.0 1.9

Wealden 105,564 82.1 4.0 10.5 1.1 0.3 0.0 1.9

Source: Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).

Map 14: Public Transport

SA OBJECTIVE 11

Reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Carbon Dioxide emissions, 2008-2012 This table shows the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in kilo tonnes (kt) and the CO2 emissions per capita in tonnes (t).

Measure Emissions in kt Emissions per capita (t)

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Geography

England 409,992 370,428 384,529 353,354 373,732 7.9 7.1 7.3 6.7 7.0

South East 63,689 58,229 60,632 55,339 58,072 7.6 6.9 7.1 6.4 6.7

East Sussex 3,109 2,857 2,986 2,740 2,895 6.0 5.5 5.7 5.2 5.4

Rother 652 592 624 573 598 7.2 6.6 6.9 6.3 6.6

Source: Department of Energy & Climate Change.

Industrial and commercial consumption of gas and electricity, 2006-2010 This dataset shows the gas and electricity annual average consumption in the industrial and commercial sector from 2006 to 2010. KWh stands for kilowatt hour.

Electricity Gas

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Geography

Great Britain 81,876 79,077 79,809 76,262 77,705 605,218 633,779 644,556 663,764 690,933

South East 73,069 71,499 71,984 70,434 71,429 422,413 443,648 459,966 450,448 506,949

East Sussex 39,699 38,142 38,044 37,506 38,172 362,944 369,149 355,834 351,743 374,729

Eastbourne 45,709 45,345 45,724 45,433 45,063 331,566 365,251 345,854 354,314 371,324

Hastings 42,281 39,196 39,300 39,572 40,908 284,043 277,611 282,514 299,544 292,781

Lewes 46,333 39,430 39,525 38,432 38,962 322,379 312,293 326,412 293,574 314,354

Rother 36,555 37,075 35,451 33,509 35,059 818,374 786,052 685,016 678,108 775,491

Wealden 31,951 32,272 32,719 32,843 33,306 197,100 199,720 220,417 212,105 222,352

Source: Department of Energy & Climate Change.

Domestic consumption of gas and electricity, 2006-2010 This dataset shows the gas and electricity annual average consumption in the domestic sector from 2006 to 2010. KWh stands for kilowatt hour.

Electricity Gas

Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Geography

Great Britain 4,457 4,392 4,198 4,152 4,148 18,241 17,614 16,906 15,383 15,156

South East 4,780 4,741 4,543 4,477 4,471 18,322 17,799 17,022 15,536 15,382

East Sussex 4,728 4,673 4,505 4,439 4,439 17,440 16,734 15,946 14,654 14,698

Eastbourne 3,970 3,930 3,807 3,761 3,761 15,577 14,827 14,050 12,928 13,025

Hastings 4,197 4,119 4,017 3,937 3,928 15,939 15,289 14,506 13,302 13,379

Lewes 4,767 4,694 4,503 4,405 4,427 17,508 16,708 15,948 14,643 14,637

Rother 4,978 4,905 4,738 4,677 4,694 18,863 18,150 17,265 15,843 15,953

Wealden 5,428 5,409 5,184 5,127 5,100 19,206 18,591 17,829 16,388 16,349

Source: Department of Energy & Climate Change.

Total (Commercial and Domestic) Gas and electricity consumption, 2006-2010

This dataset shows the total energy consumption in GWh, gigawatt hour. Energy Electricity Gas source

Consuming All consumers All consumers sector

Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Geography

Great 317,973 309,669 304,625 295,275 297,961 628,733 614,093 586,455 539,058 540,642 Britain

South East 41,673 40,787 40,456 39,747 39,997 78,790 77,573 74,526 67,478 69,415

East 2,093 2,060 1,998 1,967 1,979 4,274 4,123 3,900 3,576 3,640 Sussex

Eastbourne 405 404 395 390 386 845 831 782 729 740

Hastings 357 344 335 330 333 710 670 643 602 598

Lewes 386 358 349 341 345 749 717 689 624 637

Rother 390 393 374 362 370 957 925 831 749 778

Wealden 554 561 545 543 546 1,013 980 955 872 887

Source: Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC).

Total energy consumption in GWh, 2005-2009 This dataset shows the total energy consumption in GWh, gigawatt hour.

Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Geography

Great Britain 1,670,525 1,624,618 1,596,524 1,542,837 1,453,817

South East 230,122 222,197 219,437 210,774 201,020

East Sussex 10,742 10,521 10,314 9,970 9,436

Eastbourne 1,712 1,663 1,648 1,581 1,503

Hastings 1,503 1,463 1,403 1,354 1,292

Lewes 2,062 2,009 1,937 1,906 1,797

Rother 2,167 2,145 2,116 2,011 1,880

Wealden 3,298 3,240 3,209 3,117 2,964

Source: Department of Energy & Climate Change.

Traffic Levels on Key Routes

Source: Department of Transport (2014) and Rother District Council 98

Rother Estimated Annual Average Daily Flows (AADFs) – Major Roads

350000

345000 280000 340000 275000

335000 270000 265000 330000 260000 325000 All Motor Vehicles 255000 Cars/Taxis 320000 250000 315000 245000 310000 240000 235000 305000 230000 300000

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

60000 All counts 7am to 7pm (mixture of manual and automatic 50000 counts)

40000 Pedal Cycles Source: Department of Transport Motorcycles 30000 Buses / Coaches 20000 Light Goods Vehicles All HGVs 10000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

100

SA OBJECTIVE 12

Minimise the risk of flooding and resulting detriment to people and property.

Properties at risk from flooding

Properties at risk from Estimated No. flooding (EA)

Geography

Rother 5,553

Source: Environment Agency, National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) run, December 2014.

Planning permissions granted contrary to EA advice on flood defence grounds

Planning permissions granted contrary to EA advice on flood defence Year grounds

Rother

2014/15 0

Source: Environment Agency

101

Map 15: Flood Risk – Zones 2 and 3

102

SA OBJECTIVE 13

Maintain, improve and manage water resources in a sustainable way.

Daily domestic water use

Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Geography

England (all water 146 144 139 141 139 companies)

Southern Water 154 156 143 141 135

South East Water 172 167 159 156 157

Source: Water Company annual review data, returned to Environment Agency

River water assessed as of high and good quality in 2013 This dataset shows the kilometres of rivers and canals and the percentage of total river length assessed as of high and good quality.

Status Ecological Status Biological Status Physico-Chemical Status

Measure Km of rivers Percentage of Km of rivers Percentage of Km of rivers Percentage of and canals river length and canals river length and canals river length Geography

England 11,180.5 21.8 12,787.8 24.9 21,423.3 41.7

South 1,715.6 17.0 2,161.4 21.4 3,191.8 31.6 East

East 77.4 11.4 191.0 28.2 218.3 32.2 Sussex

Rother 49.6 19.8 101.2 40.5 122.6 49.0

Source: Environment Agency.

103

Bathing water quality by selected beaches, 2005-2012 – county

This dataset shows whether individual bathing waters in East Sussex, from Hove to Camber, comply with the Bathing Water Directive (76/160/EEC).

Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Previously developed land types Geography Bexhill 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Birling Gap 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Camber 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 Eastbourne 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 Hastings 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 Norman`s Bay 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1

Pevensey Bay 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 4 St Leonards 2 2 4 2 2 1 1 4 Winchelsea 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 (1=best, 5=fail)

Source: ESIF.

Spare Capacity of Water Treatment Works

This indicator was suggested by Natural England. A request to Southern Water for the information produced the following response:

‘I am writing to confirm Southern Water's view with regarding to using spare capacity at wastewater treatment works (WTW) as an indicator in the Sustainability Appraisal for Local Plan documents.

It goes without saying that good quality water is essential and fundamental to sustainable development, health and quality of life. Environmental bodies such as the Environment Agency and Natural England set and safeguard water quality objectives. The Environment Agency is the water industry's environmental regulator and define the environmental permits that water companies are required to meet. These permits are designed to protect the environment and ensure that water quality objectives are met. Southern Water operates its WTWs in accordance with environmental permits issued and enforced by the Environment Agency. The permits set the maximum volume of treated wastewater that the company is permitted to recycle to the environment (in terms of Dry Weather Flow, DWF). They also define the standards of treatment that must be met in order to protect water quality objectives.

If the future release of treated wastewater at a WTW is anticipated to exceed the maximum allowed by the environmental permit (as a result of new development), Southern Water could apply to the Environment Agency for a new or amended permit. This would increase the volumetric permit headroom above that which is currently available. The Environment Agency would normally permit increased flows provided the treatment standards are tightened so that the total load to the environment is not increased. This is in line with the "no deterioration" principle.

104

We are therefore unclear what value using existing spare wastewater treatment capacity as an indicator in the Sustainability Appraisal would add given that 1) capacity and compliance with the environmental permit is monitored by the Environment Agency at regular intervals so that water quality objectives are protected and 2) additional capacity beyond existing permits would be provided by Southern Water to serve new development. An amended permit might require investment at WTWs, but this is business-as-usual for Southern Water and not a "showstopper" to new development.

It is possible that future permit conditions become so tight that they cannot be achieved by conventional technology. This is likely to trigger the need for significant and expensive investment. The WTWs most likely to be affected in this way could be identified by looking at the sensitivity of the water bodies receiving treated wastewater and/or environmental designations such as Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).

Fundamentally wastewater treatment capacity is not a constraint to future new development even if investment requirements are significant. Southern Water has a statutory obligation to find solutions and provide infrastructure to serve new development. The planning period for Rother's adopted Core Strategy runs to 2028 and there are repeated opportunities through the water industry's five yearly price review process to investigate and implement solutions. Possible options where conventional technology could not achieve the required standards include:

a) Reducing infiltration into the sewerage system b) Reducing consumption of water by existing and future residents c) Transfer flow to an alternative discharge location (where the environmental capacity of the receiving water is sufficient to accommodate the discharge) d) Treat wastewater to a higher standard using non-conventional technology.

The implementation of one or a combination of these options would mitigate the impact of increased volumes of wastewater arising from new development and population growth, so that it would not have an unacceptable adverse effect on water quality objectives and the integrity of protected sites such as SPAs, SACs and SSSIs.

I hope this adequately explains our position. Please feel free to share this correspondence as you consider appropriate. It might also be worth mentioning that my understanding is that none of the WTWs within Rother District discharge to or impact the Pevensey Levels.’

This information was also subsequently requested from the Environment Agency (March 2016). As of June 2016, no information has been received.

Quality of Discharged Water

This indicator was suggested by Natural England. A request to Southern Water for the information produced the following response:

‘Assuming this is in relation to wastewater treatment works (WTW), then our position would be that the quality of the discharged water would be in line with the environmental permits which are set by the Environment Agency to protect water quality objectives. We monitor performance at our WTWs and would take action if there is a risk of breeching the permit.

Monitoring is overseen by the Environment Agency who have powers to take sanctions against Southern Water should this be required (clearly we do everything we can to avoid this!).’

This information was also subsequently requested from the Environment Agency (March 2016). As of June 2016, no information has been received.

105

SA OBJECTIVE 14

Conserve and enhance biodiversity.

Rother Sites of Special Scientific Interest in 2010 – Condition Summary

SSSI Condition Summary % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area destroyed favourable unfavourable unfavourable no unfavourable / part destroyed Geography recovering change declining Ashburnham Park 15.60% 84.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Blackhorse Quarry 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Brede Pit And Cutting 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Combe Haven 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Dallington Forest 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Darwell Wood Dungeness, Romney 60.09% 39.12% 0.79% 0.00% 0.00% Marsh And Rye Bay 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Fore Wood Hastings Cliffs To Pett 76.69% 23.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Beach 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Hemingfold Meadow 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% High Woods 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Houghton Green Cliff 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Leasam Heronry Wood 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% Maplehurst Wood 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Marline Valley Woods 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Northiam 0.00% 99.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.50% Pevensey Levels 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% River Line 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% Rye Harbour 36.56% 63.44% 00.00% 0.00% 0.00% Willingford Meadows 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% Winchelsea Cutting

Source – SSSI Condition Natural England

106

Quality of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in 2013 This dataset shows area in hectares of the Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and the percentage of the different condition types.

Conditions Total Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed SSSIs - percent recovering - declining - no change - or part area in percent percent percent destroyed - Geography hectares percent

England 1,082,597 37.3 59.3 1.2 2.2 0.0

South 136,607 47.5 49.9 1.3 1.2 0.1 East

East 12,936 25.6 72.7 0.5 1.0 0.1 Sussex

Rother 2,053 27.2 71.6 0.0 0.3 0.9

Source: Natural England.

Area of ancient semi-natural woodland (2010)

Area % of ancient Ancient Semi- (hectares) woodland Natural Woodland area

Rother district 5,559 69

Source: RDC/ HE.

107

Proportion of local sites that are in beneficial management Site Name Area in positive Area of SNCI (ha) Proportion of site in management from positive management GIS analysis 2014 (%) Gillham Wood 3.4 3.4 99.7 Hole Farm 10.2 10.7 95.2 Burgh Wood Complex 76.5 94.9 80.6 Ashburnham Forge Meadow & Malthouse Wood 17.8 24.5 72.7 Hurst Green Meadows & Woodland 26.0 30.8 84.3 Shingle Beach at Normans Bay 0.0 13.7 0.0 Powermill Reservoir, Brede High Woods & Hurst Wood Complex 323.7 384.2 84.3 Cripps Corner Meadows 0.0 5.0 0.1 Burnt Chimney Farm Meadows 0.1 14.5 0.9 Battle Cemetery 0.0 2.9 0.0 South Park Pony Stud Meadows 23.2 30.4 76.4 Reed Wood 19.4 20.5 94.6 Rounden & Great Wood 86.4 110.7 78.0 Greyfriars 0.0 1.3 0.0 Fore Wood 57.9 58.1 99.6 Little Common 0.0 1.1 0.0 Camber Sands 0.0 9.9 0.0 Ten Acre Gill 5.9 5.9 100.0 Lankhurst Meadow 1.3 1.3 100.0 Darwell Reservoir Complex 246.0 339.0 72.6 Dabchick Cottage Meadow & Woodland 4.0 4.1 97.9 Blackbrooks 54.8 56.5 97.0 Bewl Water Reservoir 37.3 334.2 11.2 Mill Wood 50.9 52.6 96.8 Shoyswell Wood 12.1 12.3 98.2 HalfHouse Wood & Eight Acre & Hulls Wood Ghyll 9.1 9.6 95.1 Henhurst Farm Woodland & Meadows 33.6 36.7 91.6 Shingle Beach Dogs Hill 2.0 5.5 36.6 Morebread Wood 16.1 16.4 98.4 The Brede Valley 941.3 1126.2 83.6 Brickhurst Wood 17.1 17.1 100.0 Silverhill & Trough Woods 21.4 21.8 98.5

108

Designated Sites and Reserves – existing and infringed by planning applications

Area of designation % of designation / Number of planning Area of designation in % of Rother / reserve in Rother reserve in Rother applications within Rother (ha) infringed by infringed by or abutting Designated sites planning applications planning applications designation / reserve (ha)

Ramsar 486.5 0.9 0.1 0.02 2

Special Area of Conservation (SAC) 1023.0 2.0 0.1 0.01 3

Special Protection Area (SPA) 1117.4 2.2 0.1 0.01 4 International

National Nature Reserve (NNR) 6.9 0.0 0.02 0.3 1

Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 4599.7 8.9 0.5 0.01 23 National

Local Geologicial Site (LGS) 255.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 4

Local Nature Reserve (LNR) 326.8 0.6 0.2 0.1 2

Local Notable Road Verge 25.1 0.01 0.02 0.4 1

Local Wildlife Site (formerly SNCI) 3791.5 7.3 15.3 0.4 35

Environmental Stewardship Agreement 20273.8 39.1 22.8 0.1 88

RSPB Reserve 56.1 0.1 0 0 0

Sussex Wildlife Trust Reserve 362.2 0.7 0 0 3

Woodland Trust 319.2 0.6 0 0 0 Reserve / Property Reserve

Source: Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre

109

Areas of Biodiversity Action Plan Priority habitat – existing and infringed by planning applications

This table shows the area and percentage coverage of the habitats in East Sussex and Rother Area of habitat in Rother % of habitat in Number of planning Area of habitat in % of East Area of habitat in % of Rother infringed by Rother infringed by applications within

East Sussex (ha) Sussex Rother (ha) Planning applications (ha) Planning applications or abutting habitat

Ancient woodland 20906.7 12.1 8054.0 15.5 233.9 2.9 78

Coastal & floodplain grazing marsh 10220.8 5.9 4044.4 7.81 13.6 0.3 13

Coastal saltmarsh 48.3 0.03 35.9 0.1 0.01 0 1

Coastal sand dunes 63.5 0.04 63.5 0.1 0.03 0 4

Coastal vegetated shingle 412.7 0.2 362.2 0.7 0.1 0 4

Deciduous woodland 19248.1 11.2 6450.9 12.4 156.8 2.4 127

Ghyll woodland 6563.9 3.8 2775.7 5.4 63.3 2.3 37

Intertidal chalk 268.5 0.2 40.2 0.1 0 0 0

Intertidal mudflat 231.5 0.1 184.8 0.4 0 0 2

Lowland calcareous grassland 2100.9 1.2 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

Lowland fen 33.8 0.02 7.5 0.01 0 0 0

Lowland heathland 1463.4 0.8 66.2 0.1 0 0 1

Lowland meadow 159.9 0.1 68.9 0.1 0 0 0

Maritime cliff and slope 104.4 0.1 14.5 0.03 0 0 0

Reedbed 119.6 0.1 64.6 0.1 0 0 0

Saline lagoon 133.6 0.1 120.8 0.2 0 0 0

Traditional orchard 136.7 0.1 76.0 0.1 0 0.3 8

Wood‐pasture and parkland 4132.4 2.4 838.1 1.6 109.6 13.1 5 *Changes in habitat extent year on year may well be a reflection of improved datasets and should not be assumed to be habitat expansion or contraction. Many habitat datasets overlap with one another, e.g. lowland meadow may be classed as grazing marsh and recorded in both inventories. Source: Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre - November 2015

110

Area of land designated as Local Nature Reserves, 2006-2011 This dataset shows the area of land in hectares (ha) which has been designated as a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) in 2006, 2009 and 2011, together with details of hectares of LNR per 1,000 population.

Measure Area in hectares Area per 1,000 residents in hectares

Year 2006 2009 2011 2006 2009 2011

Geography

England 33,293 35,403 35,372 0.60 0.69 0.65

South East 8,976 9,858 9,939 1.10 1.18 1.18

East Sussex 1,412 1,413 1,398 2.80 2.77 2.73

Eastbourne 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00

Hastings 479 487 471 5.70 5.64 5.42

Lewes 348 337 354 3.70 3.54 3.67

Rother 326 326 325 3.80 3.67 3.65

Wealden 259 263 247 1.80 1.83 1.73

Source: Natural England.

Woodland Access

% population % population % population Minimum area of With current With access requiring new new planting Geography access If inaccessible woodland in order required to

Woods opened to meet standard enable standard

East Sussex 76.7 87.7 12.4 80ha

Rother 87.4 97.0 2.9 40ha Source: Adapted from The Woodland Trust (2010) Space for People: Targeting action for woodland access.

111

Loss of hedgerows

This table shows the number of Hedgerow Removal Notices in Rother District

Year 2013/14 2014/15

Number of Hedgerow Removal Notices in Rother District 0 0

Source: RDC

Number of Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) in place

This table shows the number of TPOs that are in place in Rother District Council

Year 2015

Number of tree preservation 346 orders in Rother District

Source: RDC Land Charges

Traffic Levels on Key Routes within 200m of Designated Sites

See indicator data under Objective 11.

112

Map 16: Natural Environment and Habitats – Designated sites

113

Map 17: Natural Environment and Habitats – Recently Extended International Designations (March 2016)

114

Map 18: Natural Environment and Habitats – Biodiversity Action Plan Priority habitats

115

Map 19: Natural Environment and Habitats – Special to Sussex habitats

116

Map 20: Natural Environment and Habitats – Ancient Woodland

117

Map 21: Natural Environment & Habitats – Biodiversity Opportunity Areas

118

SA OBJECTIVE 15

Protect and enhance the high quality natural and built environment.

Number of Conservation Areas

Conservation Areas No.

Geography

Rother 10

Conservation Areas Number of Area Appraisal Conservation Geography Areas

Battle 1 Yes

Bexhill Old Town 1 No

Bexhill Town Centre 1 Yes

Burwash 1 No

Northiam 1 No

Robertsbridge 1 Yes

Rye 1 Yes

Sedlescombe 1 Yes

Ticehurst 1 No

Winchelsea 1 Yes Rother Total 10 6

Source: RDC APP.

Number of Listed Buildings

Listed Buildings No.

Geography

Rother 2134

Source: English Heritage.

119

Heritage at Risk Registers 2015

Heritage assets included on the Register are risk assessed according to the nature of the site rather than the type of designation. Building or structure assessments are used for secular listed buildings and structural scheduled monuments, typically masonry remains. Archaeology assessments are used for scheduled earthworks and below-ground remains. Thus a scheduled monument may appear on the Register in either or both the building and structure and the archaeology sections depending upon what puts it at risk. Listed buildings that are in use as places of worship are assessed using the places of worship assessment. Registered parks and gardens, conservation areas, battlefields and protected wreck sites have their own assessments because they each have their own particular characteristics and factors that may put them at risk.

Grade Grade Registered I II* Grade II Scheduled Parks and Conservation Rother Listed Listed Listed Monument Gardens Areas Total Number 41 76 2017 53 7 10 Total At Risk 2 1 5 7 0 0 % At Risk 4.9 1.3 0.2 13.2 0.0 0.0 Source: English Heritage

Buildings of Grade I and II* at risk – by District Buildings of Grade I No. of Grade I No. of Grad II No. of Grad and II* at risk II*

Geography

Eastbourne 3 1

Hastings 2 2

Lewes 2 1

Rother 2 5 1

South Downs (NP) 1 1

Wealden 3 1 1

Source: Historic England.

120

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty in 2010 This dataset shows the total area in hectares and the percentage of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) in East Sussex and its districts in 2010. The Sussex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty has been de-designated as it was replaced by the South Downs National Park in April 2010.

Designations Total area in hectares High Weald AONB - hectares High Weald AONB - percent

Geography

East Sussex 171,936.6 87,981.0 51.2

Eastbourne 4,531.7 0.0 0.0

Hastings 3,015.6 543.0 18.0

Lewes 29,347.6 2.0 0.0

Rother 51,539.1 42,810.0 83.1

Wealden 83,502.5 44,626.0 53.4

Source: GIS system ESIF.

Area of AONB infringed by planning applications

Area of % of designation Number of Area of % of Rother designation / planning designation in / reserve in reserve in Rother applications Rother infringed by within Designated sites Rother (ha) infringed by planning or abutting planning applications designation / applications reserve (ha)

High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural 42,807.9 82.6 833.1 1.9 847 Beauty (HW AONB)

Percentage of Businesses that are land based

Land Based % of Businesses that Businesses are land based

Geography

High Weald 13%

South East 3%

Source: The High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan 2014-2019

121

Map 22: National Landscape Character Areas

122 123

124

122

Map 23: East Sussex County Council Landscape Assessment Character Areas

Note: Reference should also be made to the „Bexhill and Hastings Fringes Landscape Assessment‟ and the „Market Towns and Villages Landscape Assessment‟ for more locally specific landscape advice.

123

Map 24: Heritage and Historic Environment

124

Map 25: High Weald AONB Context

125

SA OBJECTIVE 16

Reduce waste generation and disposal, and achieve the sustainable management of waste.

Household waste being recycled or composted, 2009-2013 This dataset shows the amount of household waste that is recycled and composted in tonnes.

Years 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Geography

East Sussex 86,531 88,150 91,649 93,596 92,006

Rother 12,482 15,096 15,383 16,004 15,780

Source: Joint Waste Contract Team, ESIF.

Household waste disposal, 2013 This dataset shows the disposal method in percentage of total household waste

Waste types Recycled Composted Energy recovery Incineration Disposal to landfill

Geography

East Sussex 20.0 18.6 55.9 0.0 5.5

Eastbourne 16.8 16.0 65.9 0.0 1.3

Hastings 18.9 5.6 67.3 0.0 8.2

Lewes 21.7 0.6 77.4 0.0 0.3

Rother 18.5 26.5 49.4 0.0 5.6

Wealden 15.9 28.0 50.7 0.0 5.4 This dataset shows the percentage amount of household waste that is recycled and composted in tonnes.

Household waste collected per head in kg, 2009-2013 This dataset shows the total annual household waste per head in kg.

Years 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Geography

East Sussex 486 476 475 469 448

Rother 379 397 399 394 385

Source: Joint Waste Contract Team, ESIF.

126

Household waste going to landfill, 2009-2013 This dataset shows the percentage of household waste that goes to landfill in tonnes.

Years 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Geography

East Sussex 109,110 87,637 89,213 39,402 13,002

Rother 10,125 7,784 10,997 6,508 1,968

Source: Joint Waste Contract Team, ESIF.

Household waste in tonnes, 2009-2013 This dataset shows the total annual household waste in tonnes.

Years 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Geography

East Sussex 246,779 241,744 242,804 239,829 238,106

Rother 33,459 35,015 35,576 35,167 35,073

Source: Joint Waste Contract Team, ESIF.

127

Rother District Council Town Hall Bexhill-on-Sea East Sussex TN39 3JX www.rother.gov.uk

128