Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 Contents

PART ONE: MAIN REPORT

1. Introduction 1

2. Review of National and Regional Policy 4

3. Review of County and District Wide Plans, Strategies and Consultations 8

4. Settlement Strategies of Other Local Planning Authorities 22

5. Profile and Assessment 26

5a Population Profile 27 5b Environmental Profile 29 5c Assessment of Local Facilities & Services 31 5d Profile of Village Accessibility 33 5e Economic Profile and Assessment of Economic Vitality 35 5f Assessment of Housing and Community Needs 39

6. Conclusions 41

Housing 41

Scale of Development in Rural Villages Village Housing Distribution Options Timing of Housing Development Development Boundaries

Business and Industrial Floorspace 53 Local Shops 53 Community Facilities and Open Space 53 Infrastructure and Utilities 53

Highways Water & Sewerage Companies Fire & Rescue Service Education Authority

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 The following are contained in separate volumes;

PART TWO: VILLAGE APPRAISALS

Ashburnham & Penhurst Ewhurst Level Bachelors’ Bump Fairlight Beckley Fairlight Cove Brede Four Oaks Stonegate Green Three Oaks Broad Oak Hurst Green Burwash Common Iden Westfield Burwash Johns Cross Westfield Lane Cackle Street Mountfield Camber Netherfield Normans Bay Woods Corner Crowhurst Other Villages & Hamlets Dallington Peasmarsh Pett & Friars Hill

APPENDICES & MAPS

Appendix 1: Alternative Methods Appendix 2: Service Level Indicators Appendix 3: Accessibility Level Indicators Appendix 4: Relationship between Settlements Appendix 5: Economic Indicators Appendix 6: Rural Industrial Estates Appendix 7: Housing Indicators Appendix 8: Environmental Factors Appendix 9: Sustainability Appraisal of Spatial Development Options Map 1: Environmental Designations Map 2: Flood Risk Areas Map 3: Roads Map 4: Public Transport

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008

village residents or have an impact on village life. 1. Introduction

Criteria for Settlement Inclusion

Context 1.6 This Rural Settlements Study (RSS)

Background Paper has investigated and 1.1 This document is to be used as a appraised over 40 Villages across the background paper and as part of the District, including all of those with Local evidence base to inform Rother District Plan defined development boundaries as Council’s Core Strategy Development well as a number of others. Plan Document.

1.7 The definition of settlements may be Scope controversial, but the general threshold for inclusion for in-depth study as part of Geography of the Study this strategy is a population of at least 100. 1.2 Rother is a predominantly rural district. Bexhill is the only settlement of 1.8 There are a handful of villages with a significant size, whilst Battle and Rye are population of less than 100 that have best described as small market towns of been included for more in-depth historic interest. This Rural Settlements appraisal due to the presence of a key Study focuses on Rother’s other service (i.e. primary school, community settlements – predominantly consisting hall or post office respectively). Villages of the rural villages that are scattered with less than 100 population that have across the remainder of the district. It been included for more in-depth also encompasses a handful of investigation are; settlements that would arguably be better • Dallington (population 86) and described as urban fringe or ribbon Johns Cross (population 50), development on the outskirts of which have primary schools. , which nonetheless fall within • Woods Corner (population 80) the jurisdiction of Rother District. which has a post office,

Brightling (population 86) which 1.3 It is important to make the distinction at • has a community hall. the outset between ‘settlements, which

are the focus of this study, and 1.9 A section at the end of Part 2 ‘Village ‘Parishes’. The term ‘settlements’ in this Appraisals’ entitled ‘Other Villages and context is defined as a contiguous or Hamlets’ discusses some of the smaller coherent area of housing and services, villages that have not been included for not fragmented by large expanses of more in-depth appraisal due to their intervening countryside. small scale.

1.4 In contrast, Parishes may contain any 1.10 A number of settlements have defined number of villages, in addition to large ‘development boundaries’ (as identified areas of countryside containing in Local Plan Policy DS3). All settlements dispersed dwellings. with an existing development boundary

are included for in depth appraisal in this 1.5 However, whilst this study is concerned Rural Settlements Study. In addition, a with settlements, much of the statistical number of villages without a Local Plan information utilised to inform the study is defined development boundary have also only available on a wider parish basis. been included on the basis set out Such statistics have been used as a above. proxy indication as to the likely socio-

economic conditions within settlements, 1.11 Villages are assessed in this study as but nonetheless have to be treated with part of the planning process. This care. It is also important to note that in assessment aims to shape places and to ‘Part 2 – Village Appraisals’ information respond to local needs. For this purpose on businesses, facilities and services it is necessary to include all villages of that are outside the villages may often be any significant scale. However, the referred to where they are used by inclusion of a village for more in-depth

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 1

appraisal in this strategy does not appropriate selection of settlements for necessarily indicate that it has a need, or growth. is a suitable location for development. Nor does its inclusion indicate that the 1.13 This selection will then be used to devise village does, should, or will in the future a spatial strategy for development that have a development boundary. will best meet the needs of the district, without harming the quality of the district The Aim of Place-Shaping for its residents, workers and visitors.

8.1 This study aims to contribute towards the 1.14 The Issues and Options Paper was ‘Place-Shaping’ of individual villages. It published in October 2006 under has helped inform the Core Strategy by regulation 25 of the Town and Country defining villages in terms of their service Planning (local Development) () role, and need/suitability for Regulations 2004. The responses to that development. document will also inform the strategy.

8.2 The concept of ‘place-shaping’ was Structure of Document strongly advocated in the May 2007 White Paper ‘Planning for a Sustainable 1.15 The Rural Settlements Study is Future’. The concept envisages a wider presented in three parts, this ‘part one’ role for local government as the voice of constitutes the ‘Main Document’, while a whole community, which includes: part two contains detailed ‘Village • building and shaping local identity Appraisals’. Both documents are • representing the community supplemented by a set of ‘Appendices • maintaining community and Maps’ contained in a separate third cohesiveness document. • working to make the local economy more successful 1.16 This main document starts with a review of relevant Government Guidance, • understanding local needs and national and regional planning policy preferences informing this strategy (section 2).

There follows a review of county and 6.2 The key vehicles for place-shaping will district wide strategies and consultations be the Sustainable Community Strategy (section 3) including the Local Plan, LDF and a single delivery plan – The Local Issues & Options as well as policies of Area Agreement, although the LDF also partners such as the Parish Councils and has a key role. High Weald AONB Forum. Section 4 of

part one reviews the other strategies 6.3 All the villages covered in this Rural adopted by other local planning Settlements Study are unique, with authorities. Section 5 contains a profile differing settlement patterns, social and assessment of Rother, including a history and economic legacies. These detailed analysis of the function of range from the ancient Cinque Port of settlements in relation to a set of topics. Winchelsea, to the historic ridge top Finally, Section 6 examines spatial villages of the High Weald and the beach development options for the rural areas. resort of Camber. This strategy aims to

understand the distinctive local 1.17 Subsequently in Part Two this will lead perspective on issues and emphasise into a commentary on each of the local priorities. This will help set an settlements with the information gleaned individual and distinctive agenda for each from the method. This will inform the village. strategy for individual villages.

Sources of Information 1.18 The appendices and maps at the rear of

the document contain more detailed 1.12 A selection of data studies, from the information that is cross-referred to 2001 census as well as various research throughout the document. Appendix 1 papers undertaken or commissioned by comprises a section on alternative Rother District Council, has been used to methods to conform to Government provide a methodology to make the most requirements that rejected alternatives

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 2

are always tabled at all stages of evidence gathering.

Relationship between ‘Part One: Main Report’ and ‘Part Two: Village Appraisals’

1.19 A spatial portrait of individual villages has started to emerge through Part One of this Rural Settlements Study, via; • population profiles • environmental profiles, • assessments of service role, • assessments of accessibility, • economic profiles • assessments of housing needs.

1.20 In Part Two, the appraisals of individual villages are developed further with more detailed reference to a number of sources, including the following: • Parish Action Plans, • Local responses to the Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation, and; • Local responses to the Parish Council event held in November 2007; • LDF Evidence Studies

1.21 Together this wealth of background information has informed the strategies for individual villages that have been developed more fully in Part Two. The strategies and appraisals for individual villages include an assessment of the likely level of development that would be appropriate in the light of local needs and environmental context. This local assessment has been produced in combination with the scale and spatial distribution options set out below.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 3

2. Review of National and Planning Policy Statement 12 (Creating strong safe and prosperous communities through Local Regional Policy Spatial Planning) June 2008

2.6 PPS12 expects all authorities to adopt a Planning for a Sustainable Future – White spatial planning approach to planning. paper (May 2007) This goes beyond land-use planning to bring together and integrate policies for 2.1 The White Paper sets out a vision for a the development and use of land with planning system that supports ‘vibrant, other policies and programmes which healthy, sustainable communities’ influence the nature of places and the (paragraph 1.3.) It is a response to the way they function. need to tackle climate change through reducing the need to travel, making 2.7 Policies should be focused on a thorough walking and cycling accessible, understanding of the nature of the area; supporting integrated public transport, its needs, opportunities and constraints. encouraging the use of renewable The evidence base is therefore critical to energy and ensuring appropriate design the preparation of Local Development and the provision of new development. Frameworks, particularly the Core The paper also outlines local authority’s Strategy. The evidence will be relied place-shaping role. upon to test the soundness of the Development Plan Document at 2.2 It confirms that the Local Development Examination in Public and should be kept Framework portfolio of Development under review. Plan Documents is intended to guide development to the most sustainable 2.8 The principle physical, economic, social locations to meet a set of local and environmental characteristics of the sustainable objectives. area, the size, composition and distribution of the population, 2.3 The White Paper proposes that communications and transport are all key development should be focused in factors. ‘suitable locations, making effective use of land and existing infrastructure such 2.9 PPS12 stresses that councils need to as road networks, and services such as develop a clear vision for their area, schools or hospitals. based on a local emphasis with the focus on deliverability. 2.4 This is the starting point for the Settlement Strategy and the vision for 2.10 The strength of the evidence base is Rother District. This Settlement Strategy critical to the robustness of the will set out, using the information Development Plan Document, and available, how to determine which Government recommends a broad range settlements are the most suitable for of data is used. However, local growth to meet the sustainability authorities need to be realistic about the objectives. information for evidence bases, and use that which largely already exists in Planning Policy Statements existing strategies.

2.5 The White Paper expects all local Planning Policy Statement 1 (Delivering authorities to take account of Planning Sustainable Development) 2005 Policy Statements, which represent national planning policy, in formulating 2.11 PPS1 sets out the Government’s Development Plan Documents. overarching planning policies on the Planning Policy Statement 12 is the delivery of sustainable development Government’s policy statement on the through the planning system. It explains preparation and testing of Development that sustainable development is the core Plan Documents. principle underpinning planning and highlights the Government’s four main aims for sustainable development as: • Social progress which recognises the needs of everyone;

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 4

• Effective protection of the wildlife habitats and natural resources environment; (paragraph 17). • The prudent use of natural resources; and, the maintenance 2.15 In applying the principles of sustainable of high and stable levels of development to development plans, local economic growth and employment. planning authorities are required to (paragraph 4). ensure that plans are based on analysis and evidence. 2.12 To help meet these and other objectives identified in the Statement, it explains Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) 2006 that a transparent, flexible, predictable, efficient and effective planning system is 2.16 PPS3 is the Government’s policy on required that will produce the quality housing provision and again embodies development needed to deliver the principles of sustainable sustainable development and secure development. To achieve the strategic sustainable communities. It also policy objectives, a range of principles emphasises that plans should be drawn are identified, including an evidence - up with community involvement and based policy approach (paragraph 11). present a shared vision and strategy of how the area should develop to achieve 2.17 Paragraph 10 of the document identifies more sustainable patterns of the Government’s housing policy development (paragraph 7). objectives which include the delivery of housing in suitable locations which offer 2.13 PPS1 stresses that regional planning a good range of community facilities and bodies and local planning authorities with good access to jobs, key services should ensure that development plans and infrastructure through the planning contribute to global sustainability by system. This approach is repeated at addressing the causes and potential paragraph 36. impacts of climate change - through policies which reduce energy use, 2.18 Paragraph 38 explains that Local reduce emissions (for example, by Development Documents should set out encouraging patterns of development a strategy for the planned location of new which reduce the need to travel by housing which contributes to the private car, or reduce the impact of achievement of sustainable moving freight), and take climate change development. It emphasises that there is impacts into account in the location and a need to provide housing in rural areas, design of development (paragraph not only in market towns and local 13(ii)). service centres but also in villages in order to enhance or maintain their 2.14 The document states that development sustainability. It explains that this should plans should promote development that ensure that growth is distributed in a way creates socially inclusive communities that supports informal social support and amongst other measures ensures networks, assists people to live near their that the impact of development on the work and benefit from key services, social fabric of communities is minimise environmental impact and, considered and taken into account. where possible, encourage Development should address environmental benefits. accessibility (both in terms of location and physical access) for all members of 2.19 PPS3 also states that housing sites the community to jobs, health, housing, should be deliverable (i.e. available, education, shops, leisure and community suitable and achievable within the plan facilities and take into account the needs period) and be located according to the of all the community (paragraph 16). At most appropriate strategies and policies the same time, it emphasises that for their areas, based on need and planning policies should seek to protect demand within the context of a spatial and enhance the quality, character and vision. amenity value of the countryside with a high level of protection given to the most valued townscapes and landscapes,

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 5

Planning Policy Statement 7 (Sustainable countryside should therefore be given Development in Rural Areas) 2004 great weight in planning policies in these areas. 2.20 Again, PPS7 embodies the principles of sustainable development in providing 2.26 It is important to note that paragraph 21 policy principles for rural areas. This adds that in addition to reflecting the includes preventing urban sprawl, raising above priorities, planning policies should quality of life, promoting the rural also support suitably located economy and supporting agriculture. development necessary to facilitate the economic and social well-being of 2.21 The document advocates the protection designated areas such as AONB of designated landscape and the including the provision of adequate concentration of development in or near housing to meet identified local needs. to local service centres where Paragraph 22 stresses that major employment, housing, services and developments should not take place in transport can be provided close together these designated areas, except in (paragraph 3). If facilities are closely exceptional circumstances. located and accessible by public transport and walking/cycling, a South East Plan reduction in car use and an increase in sustainability of the settlement can be 2.27 The South East Plan was published in achieved. 2006 and was subject to an Examination in Public in 2006/7. The Inspectors 2.22 Paragraph 6 states that local planning Report and proposed alterations have authorities should, through their Local been published. Adoption is expected in Development Documents, facilitate and Spring 2009. The South East Plan will plan for accessible new services and replace the Regional Planning Guidance facilities where there is an identified need 9 (South East) and represents the for them whilst paragraph 8 stresses that Regional Spatial Strategy for the South it is essential that local planning East of England. authorities plan to meet housing requirements in rural areas, based on an 2.28 The South East Plan advocates the up to date assessment of local need. majority of development needs to be met in the region’s urban areas, but 2.23 It explains that robust, up-to-date local recognises that there is also a need to information can inform local authorities encourage sufficient development and which settlements act as local service investment to develop thriving and centres (which could be a town, large socially-inclusive rural areas (see draft village or a cluster of settlements). policies SP2 and H21).

2.24 Paragraph 15 advises that local planning 2.29 The Plan divides the region into sub- authorities should continue to ensure that regions for the purposes of spatial the quality and character of the wider planning. The Coast Sub- countryside is protected and, where Region includes Bexhill and its rural possible, enhanced. It adds that they hinterland together with Rye and other should have particular regard to any smaller coastal settlements within Rother areas that have been statutorily District (for example Catsfield and designated for their landscape, wildlife or Winchelsea). The policy direction here is historic qualities where greater priority to reduce deprivation and enhance should be given to restraint of potentially economic performance whilst protecting damaging development. and enhancing the environment.

2.25 Paragraph 21 adds that nationally 2.30 Indeed, Policy BE5 of the Draft Plan designated areas including Areas of confirms the aim of supporting rural Outstanding Natural Beauty have been communities which are sustainable in confirmed by the Government as having terms of infrastructure and access to the highest status of protection in relation services while maintaining and to landscape and scenic beauty. It 1 explains that the conservation of the Policy numbers are those in the Proposed Changes to the natural beauty of the landscape and South East Plan.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 6

enhancing local distinctiveness. The functioning as service centres, could Plan does not seek to impose a standard benefit from some growth, where it approach to housing in rural areas as it is reinforces and promotes economic more appropriate that rural housing growth, contributes to local social needs issues are treated as a strand that runs and protects high quality environments. through the range of housing policies. It An overall aim is thriving and socially does, however, stress that Local inclusive settlements. Development Documents will need to consider the needs of local communities Key Findings from Section 2 including the potential for maintaining and creating new services. Policy National and regional policy points towards; numbers are those in the Proposed • Focusing development in sustainable Changes to the South East Plan. locations to make effective use of land, infrastructure, services and facilities, 2.31 It also includes a policy identifying the improve accessibility to them and role of small rural towns (‘market’ towns) reduce the need to travel. In within draft Policy BE4. This states that particular, concentrate development local planning authorities should where there is a good range of such encourage and initiate schemes and services and facilities or where there is proposals that help strengthen the potential to maintain and/or increase viability of small rural towns by amongst this range. other measures, providing for sufficient • Facilitating economic and social well- housing development where this would being of villages by providing sufficient reinforce and develop the distinctive housing to enhance or maintain their character and role of the town, and meet sustainability. identified needs. During the Examination • Promoting development that creates in Public there was some debate over socially inclusive communities and the definition of such towns and the minimises impact on the social fabric.

Panel Report has recommended that • Protecting and enhancing local

they should generally be up to about distinctiveness – particularly nationally

20,000 population. and internationally protected

landscapes and the character of

2.32 Draft Policy H2 of the Plan concerns the settlements.

location of housing in the region and • Promoting sustainable economic

repeats the general approach identified growth, particularly within the area of

in PPS1, PPS3 and PPS7 with the the study area covered by the Sussex

emphasises on selecting sustainable Coast Sub Region.

locations which have the necessary Box 1 infrastructure and services or where this is planned. In the case of rural areas, it advises that local authorities should identify areas which are in need of renewal and should give particular consideration to the benefits that could arise from encouraging housing development in these areas. It adds that some housing development will be needed in order to meet identified social or economic needs and advises that parish plans and local housing assessments will have a key role to play to establish the extent and type of needs for housing in villages.

2.33 The draft South East Plan and its Panel Report advocate a criteria-based approach to the determination of areas suitable to accommodate growth. The draft Plan also recognises that certain market towns and villages, when

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 7

• The character of existing 3. Review of County and development in the vicinity, of the District-wide Plans, village as a whole and its setting in Strategies and the surrounding countryside; Consultations • The practicable and acceptable level of traffic and parking; • The need to preserve and enhance buildings of historic, architectural and Structure or local interest and their settings, Plan 1999 – 2011 historic parks and gardens and conservation areas; 3.1 The Structure Plan was adopted in 1999 • The need to maintain adequate and will be superseded in due course by open space and gaps in the South East Plan. development which contribute to the character or amenity of the 3.2 Some of the policies within the Structure village. Plan have been saved beyond September 2007 during the preparation Rother District Local Plan of local planning authority Development Plan Documents and the South East 3.6 Rother District’s Local Plan was adopted Plan. Some are relevant to the spatial in July 2006. Chapter 4 of the adopted distribution of housing and employment Local Plan sets out the development land, and the protection of the strategy for the District and identifies the environment. approach towards development in rural areas. This identifies the importance and 3.3 The Structure Plan supports the concept value of the historic settlement pattern of a living working countryside and and character and the need to manage policies are designed to ensure that the recognised development pressures in development is appropriate to the rural areas. location and function of settlements. Strategic Policy S4 determines the 3.7 Policy DS1 identifies 14 principles to be pattern of development, focusing growth used when determining whether on the existing towns and the efficient development is appropriate in a and effective renewal of land and particular location. These are; seeking to ensure that development is well related to the strategic transport 1. Priority to making the best use of network, infrastructure and employment urban land especially through the opportunities. re-use of previously-developed land; 3.4 Policy S4 also allows for some 2. Fostering sustainable and socially development in the countryside which is inclusive communities including appropriate in scale and type where this support for local services and would contribute to the objectives of helping to meet local needs; achieving prosperous and attractive rural 3. Ensuring sufficient continuing areas and the protection of the supply of employment sites; environment. 4. Ensuring good accessibility to services and jobs by public 3.5 Policy S8 identifies the following transport; considerations to be used when 5. Making best use of existing determining the scale and nature of infrastructure; change in villages within the County; 6. Avoiding prejudicing the character and qualities of the environment • The relationship of the village to its (particularly the AONB and neighbouring towns and villages undeveloped coastline); and the services and facilities they 7. Protecting sites of nature provide and the transport links conservation importance; between them in order to minimise 8. Protecting historic parks and the need to travel; gardens and Battle battlefield; • The availability and capacity of 9. Respects the importance of the infrastructure and services; countryside;

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 8

10. Protects ancient woodland from • Promote cultural tourism through development that would prejudice provision of tourist its ecological and landscape value; accommodation. 11. Ensures development is safe from • Protection and enhancement of flooding; natural and built heritage. 12. Protects vulnerable countryside • Provision of homes to meet the gaps; needs of residents, including 13. Ensures a sufficient continuing affordable homes. supply of housing land; and • Promote the local economy and 14. Avoids development on unstable work opportunities. land unless actual or potential • Secure safe and convenient instability can reasonably be access to services and overcome. employment. • Locate development in areas with 3.8 Policy DS2 confirms that only relatively good accessibility. limited growth of Battle and Rye in line with the Structure Plan approach is 3.12 These aspirations are applicable to appropriate together with small scale Rother District in its entirety and the growth distributed amongst selected Community Strategy does not make medium sized villages with a reasonable distinctions between different areas of range of services. the District.

3.9 These selected villages were identified 3.13 The Rother Community Plan is now as Burwash, Etchingham, Fairlight, absorbed into a new Sustainable Flimwell, Northiam, Robertsbridge and Community Strategy for East Sussex, as Westfield. outlined below.

Rother Community Plan East Sussex Integrated Sustainable Community Strategy 3.10 The Community Plan for Rother District was prepared by the Local Strategic 3.14 The task of developing the Sustainable Partnership for the period 2004 – 2009. Community Strategy for East Sussex The Strategy identifies issues of concern was undertaken by the six Local to local residents and translates these Strategic Partnerships (LSPs), namely: issues into positive action and provision. East Sussex, , Hastings and St. Leonard’s, District, Rother and Key issues raised were: Wealden.

• Community safety, 3.15 The Sustainable Community Strategy for • Children and young people East Sussex 2008-2026, called ‘Pride of • Education Place’, sets out the vision for East • Culture Sussex to 2026: to address the • Waste and recycling inequalities in the county, and create • Health successful people, successful • Housing businesses and a sustainable • Jobs environment. It is available to view at • Transport http://www.essp.org.uk/essp/esiscs.htm

3.11 Where these issues cross over into Parish Action Plans spatial planning and uses of land, they are relevant to the Core Strategy and the 3.16 Local Action Plans are being prepared settlement strategy. This applies to the on a number of themes for Battle, Rye following issues: and some parishes. The Local Action Plan for Battle was completed in April • Services and support to children 2007. The Rye Local Action Plan is at and young people. an early stage and is not yet reportable. • Schools provision and Some parishes have been the subject of expansion/adaptability to meet Local Action Plans but these are not yet needs of other residents adopted.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 9

Battle and most cannot afford either private rented or privately owned homes. 3.17 The Battle Action Plan highlights need for more sport and recreation facilities, 3.24 The housing needs survey estimates that particularly a swimming pool, traffic 3.9% of all households (some 1000 calming and management, higher police households) contain one or more hidden presence, young people’s services, households. Most are the children of enhanced community buildings, existing residents who cannot afford to affordable housing, recycling facilities, move away to form their own and better access to health facilities. households.

Parishes 3.25 Although the current housing needs analysis is at District level, and further 3.18 Parish Action Plans have been prepared work needs to be carried out on actual for a number of parishes. housing numbers required to meet local needs within individual settlements, • Brede Parish Council Action Plan 2003 existing Local Plan policy is to require an • Crowhurst Village Action Plan 2007 element of affordable housing in all new • Etchingham Action Plan 2007 housing development over 15 units at a • Northiam Parish Action Plan 2007 level of 40%. However, the option of • Peasmarsh Parish Plan 2006 raising the requirement to 50% in rural • & Robertsbridge Local Action areas is being considered in the Plan 2007-08 emerging Core Strategy. PPS3 also • Sedlescombe Parish Plan 2002 allows the identification of land solely for affordable housing. • Ticehurst, Flimwell and Stonegate

Village Action Plan 2003-2012 3.26 The need to address this issue is • Westfield Parish Survey & Action Plan particularly acute and development that 2006 can act as a driver to provide affordable

housing for local people needs to be 3.19 The particular issues raised in each considered favourably. parish that have a planning dimension

are discussed in Part Two Village 3.27 A Housing Needs Study took place in Appraisals. 2001 on a parish basis. Although the

figures are now some 6 years old, they 3.20 In addition, Village Design Statements provide a more detailed understanding of have been prepared for Burwash and needs in the parishes than the 2005 Sedlescombe. They will be useful in District-wide study, which has no parish helping to inform the Development breakdown. The 2005 study did however Control process. analyse the need for affordable housing

on an ‘area’ basis, the areas being Housing Needs Survey 2005 Bexhill, Battle, Rye, Battle Rural, Rye

Rural and Ticehurst Rural. The results of 3.21 The District wide housing needs study this analysis are discussed in the (2005) concluded that 91% of the following paragraph. population was satisfactorily housed.

3.28 The locational preferences expressed by 3.22 The affordability of housing in the south concealed households up to 2009, east of England is a persistent theme suggest a major need in Battle and Rye that has significant social and economic relative to other parts of the District. implications. Affordability remains a Within the villages, the hinterlands of particular problem in Rother, especially Rye and Ticehurst appear to have the for newly forming households. most pressing need whilst villages

around Battle appear to have less need 3.23 The Housing Needs Survey examined for affordable housing. the issue of ‘concealed’ or ‘hidden’

households. Concealed households

predominantly have lower incomes (just

5% earn more than the national average)

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 10

Housing Needs Survey Individual Parish majority of towns and villages are owner Reports occupied (Appendix 7 identifies the relative proportions of owner-occupancy 3.29 As a Rural Housing Enabler (RHE), by parish). In the light of this, and the Action in Rural Sussex (AirS) aims to small average size of new developments, provide support, advice and information DTZ see no major issues in seeking to to Parish Councils concerned about the ensure that all of the affordable housing lack of affordable housing in their rural component on sites in Rural Rother is communities. The following Rother social rented housing. However, the parishes have asked AirS to carry out a report acknowledges that funding may Housing Need Survey (two still in Draft present a constraint on the development form) which have been produced in of social rented housing. Moreover high partnership with Rother District Council. costs of entering the owner occupied sector in rural Rother means that there • Brede Parish Report may be more of a market for • Salehurst and Robertsbridge intermediate housing than in Bexhill. DTZ Report suggest that it may also be desirable to • Ticehurst Report offer people with strong local • Brightling Parish Report (Draft connections the opportunity to buy in the Stage) rural area and hence there may well be • Camber Parish Report (Draft circumstances where it is appropriate to Stage) plan for a proportion of intermediate housing – say up to 20% of the total 3.30 The implications and findings of these housing provision. reports are discussed in the respective chapters in Part Two: Village Appraisals 3.34 PPS3 Housing also contains a proposal that authorities can allocate sites in Hastings & Rother Housing Market market towns and larger villages solely Assessment June 2006 for affordable housing. DTZ suggest that this could be a very useful tool for Rother 3.31 This study was carried out by DTZ DC to use in encouraging provision of consultants on behalf of Rother District additional affordable housing in its rural Council and Hastings Borough Council. It area. Existing powers to foster new noted that the rural parts of Rother development on exception sites remain experience major issues in terms of unaltered and should also be reflected in affordability. This is a product of high policy and active steps taken to identify average house prices associated with a and bring forward such sites. stock of larger dwellings, attractive market towns and villages set within an 3.35 The study also suggests the introduction Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, but of smaller homes, to counter the bias for low local wages. large high quality homes in the District and to broaden entry level housing in the 3.32 The study acknowledges that Rother DC area and increase younger people. This seeks to achieve a target of 40% will help to create more balanced affordable houses within the District but communities, since the bias to larger, suggests that in rural Rother it would more expensive properties has a probably be realistic to seek to achieve a tendency to be reflected in a bias target of 50% of affordable housing on towards older age groups among the development sites, and justifiable in resident population. terms of housing need. It also suggests that since the majority of sites coming Hastings & Rother Employment Strategy and forwards for development in rural Rother Land Review (2008) will be small, consideration should be given to lowering the threshold for 3.36 This study forms part of the Background application of affordable housing policies. Evidence for Rother’s LDF. It was undertaken jointly with Hastings Borough 3.33 DTZ state that the stock of social rented in recognition of the relationship between housing in rural Rother has been eroded the two districts and overlapping Travel by the Right to Buy, and therefore the to Work Areas. More detail on the findings of this study have been outlined

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 11

in section 5e ‘Economic Profile & North West Rother Assessment of Economic Vitality’. 3.42 North West Rother consists of post code WARR Partnership areas TN5 7 and TN19 7 which includes Ticehurst, Hurst Green, Burwash, 3.37 Wealden and Rother Rural (WARR) Etchingham, Flimwell, Stonegate, Partnership area covers the rural Burwash Common and Burwash Weald. parishes of the Wealden and Rother Districts in East Sussex and includes the 3.43 Residents preferred destinations for their market towns of , Heathfield, main food shopping appears to be Battle and Rye. Heathfield (19 respondents), Hastings/St Leonards (19), Other (13), Tunbridge 3.38 The WARR Partnership has been Wells (11). It is assumed that the bulk of awarded funding of £2.4 Million, to help the ‘Other’ category is comprised of more revitalise and support rural businesses local village stores of too small a scale to and communities over the next five warrant a specific mention in the survey. years. The Leader programme is a A significant minority (7) rely on internet source of funding from the EU and Defra, home delivery shopping, in this area (a through the Rural Development much higher proportion than anywhere Programme for England (RDPE). Leader else in the District). is a locally-led approach, which will support a range of schemes to 3.44 Interestingly by far the most popular regenerate rural areas. Individual reason given for choosing their projects will be eligible for grants of up to destination was that is ‘convenient to £50,000, with funding available to cover home’, which was given by 45% of NW a wide range of activities such as farm Rother respondents. diversification, tourism, renewable energy projects, collaboration to develop 3.45 The vast majority (84%) get their main new products and services, and food shopping by car, 5% walk and 11% innovative community projects. have it delivered.

3.39 WARR is a locally rooted group, which 3.46 Interestingly it seems many more people has been very successful in delivering a use local village stores for their previous Leader programme. secondary ‘top-up’ food shopping. Destinations cited by North West Rother residents included Burwash (22%), Rother District Wide Shopping Assessment Ticehurst (17%), Etchingham (11%), (2008) Heathfield (8%), (7%), Hawkhurst (6%), Hurst Green (6%) and 3.40 This study is being prepared for Rother Other (8.4%). 14.5% don’t do any top up District Council by GL Hearn shopping. Consultants. The study focuses on the main shopping centres of Bexhill, Battle, 3.47 For ‘Clothing, footwear and other fashion Rye and Ravenside. However the study goods’ Tunbridge Wells is by far the does have information of relevance to most popular destination (69%), with the rural villages. much smaller numbers preferring Hastings (8%) and Eastbourne (7%). 3.41 The Assessment divides the District into six broad areas based on post code Westfield, Guestling, Fairlight Area sectors (Bexhill East, Bexhill West, Battle, Rye, NW Rother and ‘Westfield, 3.48 The ‘Westfield, Guestling, Fairlight’ area Guestling, Fairlight’). Since the first four covers the TN35 4 postcode. It areas overlap with larger towns it is comprises the villages of the same name difficult to draw conclusions from them plus Fairlight Cove, Pett, Pett Level, regarding shopping patterns of village Three Oaks, Bachelor’s Bump and Friars residents. However the last two areas Hill. The vast majority of respondents do are solely comprised of villages and their main food shopping in the provide useful insights as a result. Hastings/St. Leonards area (56). The only other destinations of significance were Bexhill (11) and other (6).

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 12

result of remoteness as well as relative 3.49 The main reason given by ‘Westfield, affluence. Guestling, Fairlight’ residents for choosing their favoured destination were Open Space, Sport & Recreation Study (2007) ‘convenient to home’ (52%), ‘quality of goods’ (15%). 3.57 This study was completed by PMP consultants on behalf of Rother District 3.50 88% get their main food shopping by car, Council in accordance with the with smaller numbers using bus/coach requirements of Planning Policy (4%), walking (6%), cycling (1%). Guidance Note 17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport & Recreation, July 2002) 3.51 Hastings is still the main destination and its Companion Guide (September when it comes to secondary ‘top-up’ food 2002). shopping, cited by 25%. Other destinations included Fairlight (21%), 3.58 It included an audit and assessment of Winchelsea Beach (6%), Westfield (4%) the District’s open space, sport and and other (10%). A large proportion recreation and was supported by a series (29%) don’t do any top-up shopping. of consultations, including with parish Councils. It produced local provision 3.52 For ‘Clothing, footwear and other fashion standards (quantity, quality and goods’ Hastings is by far the most accessibility) for each type of open popular destination (59%), with a smaller space. The quality standard is an number preferring Eastbourne (13%). aspirational statement of intent for each type of open space, the access standard Conclusions is in terms of travel time/distance to nearest facility and quantity standard is 3.53 Although this analysis does not give us recorded in terms of hectares per 100- comprehensive picture of all villages, it people and surpluses and deficits by gives an interesting insight into the area are derived from this. Standards for typical shopping patterns in two areas – Rural Rother are as follows; ‘North West Rother’ and ‘Westfield, Guestling, Fairlight’. The two areas in Recommended Access and Quantity Standards question (‘North-West Rother’ and for Rural Areas ‘Westfield, Guestling, Fairlight’) are Access Quantity relatively far apart and have fairly Standard Standard different socio-economic characteristics, (Ha per so in combination provide useful insights 1000 into shopping patterns that are probably population) not untypical of rural villages as a whole. Outdoor Sports 20 mins. 4.84 walk time 3.54 It can be concluded that although Parks and Gardens 20 mins. 0.71 residents generally travel to larger towns drive time for their main weekly shopping, they will Amenity Green- 15 mins. 1.73 be more prepared to use smaller village space walk time stores for secondary ‘top-up’ shopping. Allotments & 20 mins. 0.17 For example this may entail popping to Community Gardens walk time the local shop for milk and a newspaper. Natural & Semi- 15 mins. 2.00 Natural Greenspace walk time 3.55 There are differences between the two Provision for 10 mins. 0.20 study areas. The ‘Westfield, Guestling, Children walk time Fairlight’ is generally less self-sufficient Provision for Older 15 mins. 0.20 and is heavily reliant upon neighbouring children /teenagers walk time Hastings, even for top-up shopping. 3.59 These standards were used to inform 3.56 Local shops appear to used more by recommendations for new or improved North-west Rother residents, probably as provision, and where applicable, a result of both its relative remoteness recommendations for individual villages Internet shopping / home delivery is have been outlined in part two of this patronised more which may also be as a

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 13

Rural Settlements Study, ‘Village High Weald AONB Management Plan Appraisals’. 3.65 Policy C2 of the Draft South East Plan 3.60 The Study divided Rural Rother into two, requires local authorities to have regard east and West along a north-south axis. to statutory AONB Management Plans. The East comprises Westfield, Broad Oak, Brede, Cackle Street, Northiam and 3.66 The High Weald AONB covers 15 local all villages further east including authorities and its Management Plan is Peasmarsh, Fairlight, Icklesham, Pett , the first statutory plan produced under Iden and Camber. The West comprises the Countryside and Rights of Way Act Crowhurst, Catsfield, Sedlescombe, 2000 for the area. The primary purpose Staplecross, Bodiam, Ewhurst and all of AONB designation remains rooted in villages further west including natural beauty. Recent government Robertsbridge, Ticehurst, Hurst Green guidance provides a useful non technical and Etchingham. definition: “Natural Beauty” is not just the look of the landscape, but includes 3.61 In the East, the study suggests there is a landform and geology, plants and plentiful amount of natural and semi and animals, landscape features and the rich natural greenspace, sufficient outdoor history of human settlement over the sports and allotments but a slight centuries’ shortage of amenity greenspace and parks and gardens and a further deficit of 3.67 The plan notes that the High Weald young people’s facilities. AONB is characterised by dispersed historic settlements of farmsteads and 3.62 In the West, the study also suggests hamlets, and late medieval villages there is a plentiful amount of natural and founded on trade and non-agricultural semi and natural greenspace. However rural industries. there is sufficient parks and gardens a slight shortage of allotments and outdoor 3.68 Most Rother villages are within the High sport facilities and a more significant Weald AONB (the only exceptions being shortage of amenity greenspace and those in the coastal area including young people’s facilities. Camber, Winchelsea, Fairlight, Pett and Netherfield). As such, the AONB 3.63 The study has translated the standards Management Plan is a highly relevant (quantity, access and quality) into more document to this Rural Settlements localised recommendations for new and Study. improved facilities. These recommendations have been 3.69 The Vision for 2024, in its own words, summarised in Part 2 ‘Village Appraisals’ takes a ‘positive view – not a cynical one’ as they apply on a village by village whilst facing up to likely realities: basis. There is also further information demographic changes that increase on the results of PMP’s Parish Council demand for housing, lifestyle and consultation. technological changes, increase in traffic, climate change and the decline of 3.64 It is important to clarify that the traditional farm businesses. Particular recommendations contained in the Open points within the vision of relevance to Space, Sport & Recreation Study (and the villages include; repeated in this Rural Settlement Strategy) are not the final say. They will ‘An increasing number of households need to go through the statutory LDF have been accommodated without process (including consultation stages) compromising the characteristic historic of the ‘Site Allocations DPD’ in order to settlement pattern. Strong planning be allocated. However, many of the policies and a sound understanding of smaller scale recommendations, such as the dynamic of sustainable communities for new children’s play areas or have influenced development. qualitative improvements to open Environmental building technologies spaces, would not generally warrant a have improved the construction of development plan allocation at all. buildings and the High Weald now supports ‘green’ modern designs using local materials…..

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 14

…..Many parishes now support a Balance, Safe and Inclusive Communities: combined heat and power plant running Strategy Directions on local wood, or a small scale wind turbine.’ Question 4 ‘What actions can best support rural communities’? 3.70 The plan notes that 38% of the AONB population and 64% of businesses are 3.75 A number of Parish Councils responded located in the countryside outside to this question. Crowhurst Parish villages, rather than within villages Council want there to be an integrated themselves. 100 years ago there were mix of housing. They want locals to be more High Weald houses outside listened to and there views respected villages than in them: this has reversed, especially concerning link road and with many villages tripling in size since urban sprawl. Etchingham and Bodiam 1945. Parish Councils are concerned with lack of affordable housing. The demand is for 3.71 The top 5 issues for settlement are small properties for young and old, identified as: highlighting the large number of elderly in inappropriate large properties. • Need for greater understanding – e.g. of the dispersed settlement pattern of the Overall Vision and Objectives for Rural Areas High Weald, and the connections between settlements and the Question 20 ‘is it appropriate to have an overall countryside. • Loss of rural function – becoming vision and objectives for rural areas and, if so, dormitories for commuting or places of what should the guiding objectives be? retirement. • Suburbanisation – erosion of AONB 3.76 The overall majority of the 17 character through extension of respondents comment that there is a curtilages, and inappropriate need to have a rural vision within the modifications, or treatments, of Core Strategy. boundaries and buildings. • Inappropriate new development – e.g. 3.77 Of the Parish Councils, Crowhurst Parish large-sized residences failing to meet needs of local community. Council thinks that there should be an • Inappropriate design and building overall vision and objective for rural materials – architecture not respecting communities. The guiding objectives AONB character, quality and objectives. should be to preserve the character of small villages; they have a special 3.72 The 3 objectives for settlement are ‘quality of life’. Etchingham Parish identified as: Council thinks that sustainability, protecting the landscape qualities and 1. To reconnect settlements, residents and the economic and social needs of their supporting economic activity with communities are important. Bodiam the surrounding countryside. Parish wants there to be acceptance by 2. To protect the historic pattern of local government and incomers of the settlement. 3. To enhance the architectural quality of differences between rural and urban the High Weald. areas.

3.73 The Management Plan is currently 3.78 From a developers perspective The undergoing review. Home Builders Federation feels it is necessary to have a spatial vision for Core Strategy Issues and Options rural areas. They believe that the guiding objective is to ensure the Area Strategy for Rural Areas sustainability of rural communities through providing for their needs, in the 3.74 The Core Strategy Issues and Options form of housing provision. paper posed a number of questions of relevance and the responses are 3.79 Comments from individual development summarised in turn below. companies include ‘It is essential that rural areas in the Core Strategy have a specific vision’ and ‘Priority should be given to creating mixed communities that

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 15

support local services and employment Area Strategy for Rural Areas: Future rather than giving priority to conserving Development Options and preserving the AONB.’ 3.85 The Core Strategy Issues & Options 3.80 High Weald AONB Unit sees it as paper contained four development important to have a rural policy and options. These four options and their vision. They believe that to conserve and implications are all discussed in more enhance the AONB requires supporting detail in Section 6, but in summary the land management and local based four options are; industries and activities as well as promoting the sustainable character of Option 1: Continue to focus on small rural settlements. English Village Service Centres Projects think that it is important to have Option 2: Development to Support an overall rural vision. However, they Community Needs and note that no attempt has been made to Deficiencies identify those characteristics of the individual’s villages which harm their Option 3: Focus Development on a appearance and character and no few larger Villages consideration has been given to how to redress harm. Option 4: Dispersed Development 3.86 The paper asked the following question, 3.81 Rye Conservation Society supports all the responses to which are summarized strategy directions proposed. The below. National Trust supports objectives and feels they should include support for rural Question 21 ‘Which option for the distribution of diversification and the protection and new development in rural areas is most enhancement of the built environment of appropriate and why? villages. The Forestry Commission thinks that the vision needs to consider 3.87 From the 17 responses received it can more than just housing development. be concluded that there is no consensus between any of the above option. The 3.82 Rother Voluntary Action comments that responses received were mixed however there should be an overarching vision all groups were in favour of development with the flexibility to respond to local of some kind. needs. Rother Valley Railway will help secure the following objectives for rural 3.88 East Sussex County Council think areas (h) –the fostering of tourism that is options 1 and 3 seem to be the variation compatible with and draws on heritage on the theme. They reflect the and countryside qualities of rural areas. methodology adopted by the County (i) Improved access for basic day to day Council in determining the housing goods and services by public transport, distribution for the “Rest of Sussex”. and (n) the encouragement of access to However, ESCC see little to differentiate the countryside and appropriate leisure between options 2 and 4. activities. 3.89 Of the parishes, Crowhurst Parish 3.83 A leading local Registered Social Council thinks that new development Landlord (RSL) thinks that derelict should be distributed in accordance with agricultural buildings should be paragraph 16.25 from policy DS2 (iv). – converted and the existing village development where village already have boundaries reviewed. a range of services which will support it. Beckley Parish Council support Rother 3.84 Generally, individual respondents District Council Local Plan which, for support a development strategy that Beckley contains five delineated provides residential development within development areas along Main Street rural areas but doesn’t encroach on and Hobbs Lane. They would strongly AONB. resist development in other areas of their village. Etchingham Parish Council support Option 2.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 16

3.90 The Highways Agency expects the local are available in other formats but for the planning authorities to assess the impact purposes of this exercise, it is the value of the new trunk road network of rural placed on different local facilities that is growth options. They would to see interesting and whether the respondents emerging policies that would minimise feel this is available in their local area. demand at the source and require the This gives a broad idea of what is mitigation of trunk road impacts required and a first impression of local throughout all stages of development need. planning, implementation and operation. 3.98 It is the discrepancies between these two 3.91 The Government Office for the South figures that give an early indication of East think that Option 1 and 3 overlap needs in an area. The areas of need that and Option 2 and 4 overlap in relation to stand out can be identified below: PPS 7 for (a) focusing development in, or near existing local rural services, Battle together with (b) some provision for limited development in other settlements 3.99 In Battle, discrepancies between as well. important facilities and provision appear to indicate that the following facilities 3.92 The Crown Estate support option 4. The could be said to be lacking in provision: Home Builders Federation think that Option 1 and 2 are most appropriate. • Convenience Shopping • Access to regular bus services 3.93 High Weald AONB would like Option 4 to • Convenient parking at facilities be explored in detail, supporting the • Jobs and businesses within the area dispersed development approach. Rye • Mix of house types Conservation Society think Option 2 should be pursued. The National Trust Rye support Option 1 because it is most likely to meet local needs in the District. Rother 3.100 In Rye, discrepancies between important Voluntary Action believes that all options facilities and provision appear to indicate have their merits. that the following facilities could be said to be lacking in provision: 3.94 A leading local Registered Social Landlord (RSL) feels that rural • Convenience Shopping settlements need more affordable • Doctors surgery housing even if they have lost most or all • Access to regular bus services of their services. However, rural • Convenient parking at facilities development is preferable in settlements where there is a range of existing • Easy access to railway station services. They think that where services • Jobs and businesses within the area are at risk they should benefit from • Mix of house types preferential and flexible planning decisions. Villages

3.95 Generally individual respondents support 3.101 There were 216 respondents from the development in suitable rural locations. villages (i.e., excluding respondents from Bexhill, Battle and Rye). Their responses Residents’ Questionnaire to each of the questions are discussed below. More detailed results for these 3.96 A residents questionnaire was also questions on a village by village basis included as part of the Core Strategy are detailed in the ‘Village Appraisals’ Issues & Options process. It asked four section in Part 2. When considering basic questions about the qualities that these figures, it is important to note that make settlements a good place to live the age range of respondents could have and priorities for development. been an influence on findings – 39% of respondents were over retirement age. 3.97 The results were broken down into three geographical areas: Battle, Rye and the Villages. The results of the responses

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 17

Q1 How important do you feel each of the following qualities are in making a town or village a good place for you to live in?

3.102 The list below indicates the responses of residents of rural villages. Clearly access to post offices and shops rank as highly important in making a village a good place to live.

3.104 From the above table it is clear that there is a lot of positive satisfaction with village/community halls, primary schools, post offices and not surprisingly – access to countryside.

3.105 However, rural residents think that other qualities are relatively poor, including access to local businesses/jobs, access to a mix of house type/sizes/prices and Q2 Thinking about the town or village you live in, over safe and convenient access by bike. or closest to, how do you rate the following However, the qualities considered poor qualities? are not necessarily those which are considered the most important. 3.103 The following list indicates the views of rural residents regarding their local 3.106 It is the discrepancies between questions village. 1 and 2 that give an early indication of needs in an area. Based upon relative numbers of rural residents who felt facilities were ‘essential’ or ‘important’ vis-à-vis the numbers who were satisfied with the quality of these same facilities, discrepancies appear to indicate that the following facilities could be said to be lacking in provision:

• Affordable housing/Mix of house types/Smaller homes • Convenience Shopping • Post Office • Doctors Surgery • Chemists • Sport and Leisure facilities

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 18

• Access to regular bus 3.110 The following list indicates the responses services/railway station of rural residents to this question. • Jobs and businesses within the area

3.107 Some of the above can be addressed through the forward planning process and others are dependent on the local market. Development could be a driver to the provision of some of these provisions in areas of deprivation or need.

Q3 Some new development will be needed in Rother over coming years. In planning this new development, how important are the following?

3.108 The following list indicates the responses of rural residents to this question.

3.111 Rural respondents tended to favour sites in towns (by infilling/higher densities) or sites on the edge of Bexhill. Whilst they generally opposed development on the edges of poorly serviced village or in the countryside, opinions were split on whether village infilling/higher densities or sites on the edge of service villages were a good idea.

Parish Councils Planning Seminar

3.112 Rother District Council also organised a Parish Council seminar in November 2007 for the purposes of consulting on the Rural Settlements Study and on Local Development Framework issues. The aims and purposes of the Rural Settlements Study were presented, and the following next steps proposed;

• Developing an individual approach to the settlements based on a range of issues specific to the local area. 3.109 From the above responses, two issues • Assessment of settlements stand out above all others as being the • Producing a hierarchy of Service Centres most important in making the villages and Local Service Villages with potential good places to live in – ‘Ensuring that to accommodate some additional design is in keeping with the surrounding development area’ and ‘Promoting energy efficient features’. 3.113 Draft Core Strategy Strategic objectives for parts of the district were also Q4 Given that some new development will be presented at the seminar including the needed over coming years, including for the uses following of relevance to this study; mentioned in Question 3, what general locations should be considered? (We are not looking at ‘For Villages: to continue to promote specific sites at this stage) strong, supportive rural communities,

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 19

with improved access to a mix of supported the proposed ‘next steps’ of housing, local shops, services, learning the Rural Settlements Study. and job opportunities, including by public transport, and to retain their essential 3.118 Sedlescombe Parish Council stated they character and relationship with their were not against the idea of building a surroundings.’ profile of each settlement on which to base future development but it believes ‘For the Countryside: to protect and that it is important to include in the promote its character, its role as a living constraints issues such as local school and working landscape and as an numbers and doctors’ lists and ecological, leisure and tourism asset.’ availability of land. The use of the Housing Needs Survey to substantiate ‘For the High Weald: to effectively development is also a concern because conserve the ‘natural beauty’ of the Area the Parish Council objected to its of Outstanding Natural Beauty and to conclusions at the time. meet the needs of its communities in a way consistent with its distinctive 3.119 Westfield Parish Council agrees with the landscape character and cultural objective to support villages in Rother in identity.’ terms of promoting improved access to a mix of housing, shops, services, public ‘For Coastal Areas: to protect coastal transport and learning and job communities from flooding and manage opportunities while striving to maintain risk, protect and manage the high quality their essential character and relationship ecology, support economic development, with their surroundings. They felt that the including leisure/tourism.’ planning framework should be flexible enough to support a strongly held local 3.114 As a follow-up to that event, Parish view. They felt the criteria used to Councils were invited to comment on the understand the make-up of villages options presented. Several Parish provides a valuable tool is assessing a Councils responded. Where their base line of population, economy and responses relate to District level options environment. they are summarised below. More locally relevant responses are summarised 3.120 Parish Council had no within Part 2 Village Appraisals. objections to the strategic objectives for development and change in Rother. 3.115 Beckley and Iden Parish Councils both They agreed with the stated approach to supported the draft strategic wide development in rural areas taking local objectives. needs into account. They are concerned that environment and character is 3.116 Bodiam Parish Council supported the maintained and that there is no broad strategic objectives for overdevelopment especially where development and change in Rother. infrastructure is not in place. They support the approach to development in rural settlements being Conclusions from Review of County and based on the circumstances of individual District-wide Plans, Strategies and villages in terms of services, Consultations accessibility, economic role, environmental characteristics 3.121 The key issues of relevance to the /constraints and local needs. They point settlement strategy emerging from this out that there are real differences in review of County and District-wide Plans, levels of service between otherwise Strategies and Consultations are set out similarly sized settlements. in Box 2;

3.117 Crowhurst Parish Council were pleased to note the importance given to protection from flooding for coastal area, but expressed concern that proposed Hastings/Bexhill link road may exacerbate flooding problems. They

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 20

Key Findings from Section 3

The Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation process indicated no preference regarding the village spatial distribution options that were presented.

Rural residents considered that ‘design that is in keeping with surrounding areas’ and ‘energy efficiency’ are the two most important factors for new development.

In terms of location for development, rural respondents favoured sites in towns or on the edge of Bexhill. There were mixed opinions were split on whether village infilling/higher densities or sites on the edge of service villages were a good idea.

A number of facilities were perceived to be lacking in the villages.

• Affordable housing/Mix of house types/Smaller homes • Convenience Shopping • Post Office • Doctors Surgery • Chemists • Sport and Leisure facilities • Access to regular bus services/railway station • Jobs and businesses within the area

A number of Local Action Plans have also been produced which have all informed the process of developing a Rural Settlements Study.

The Housing Needs Survey 2005 suggested particularly high levels of housing need in Rye and Battle.

The Hastings and Rother Housing Market Assessment indicates a real need for affordable housing in rural areas. It suggests that a threshold of 50% affordable housing in rural Rother may be justifiable in terms of housing need. Box 2

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 21

4. Settlement Strategies of 4.5 Some have weighted the value of each Other Local Planning element of service provision according to Authorities its relative importance (for example Ashford Borough2, although the Inspectors report had not been received at the time of writing). 4.1 Settlement Strategies or Hierarchies have been prepared to inform Core 4.6 The definition of ‘accessible’ is dealt with Strategies by a number of local planning in different ways: authorities under the Local Development Council3 has suggested that a 5 minute Framework system. A number of the travelling time at 40mph to reach Core Strategies have been adopted services counts as ‘accessible’. South following the Examination in Public into Cambridgeshire4 settlements can claim a their ‘soundness.’ This review examines service if there is ‘good public transport some of the methods used in other accessibility’. settlement strategies in order to inform this exercise as many of the authorities 4.7 Chichester District Council5 also quoted here have been pioneering in this presented a criteria based approach to work and it helps to provide markers for its EIP. The approach was based on an others. assessment of the community facilities of each settlement and a hierarchy 4.2 In reviewing other strategies, a particular imposed. The inspector noted focus has been on examining those with Chichester’s method as a ‘blunt tool’, not similar local contexts to Rother District; taking into account the number and largely rural areas constrained by range of services, and the accessibility of significant levels of high quality settlements. The assessment gave landscape or other environmental equal weight to unequal facilities. constraints. Employment provision was not sufficiently detailed and failed to set out Criteria-based approach locations for employment generating development, and did not tie this 4.3 By far the most popular means of information to housing provision. distributing development appears to be Similarly it is acknowledged that there by categorising settlements according to are development needs in the Area of a pre-defined set of criteria to determine Outstanding Natural Beauty, but these their role or hierarchy. Many use the are again insufficiently justified using the existence of schools/shops/public tools utilised by the Council. The Core transport as a means to determine Strategy was found to be unsound. ‘sustainability’. This approach has generally been supported by Inspectors Travel data at Public Examination stage. This is based on the premise, advocated in 4.8 Following the criteria based approach national planning policy, that used by Horsham6, a further level of development should be directed to the research was undertaken examining the most sustainable settlements. categorisation of settlements against travel to work data. The Council sought 4.4 Local planning authorities using this to indicate which settlements were more method have selected a slightly different self-contained with respect to working approach to this hierarchy. Some patterns. This insightful piece of work authorities have kept the criteria was supported at Examination in Public. relatively simple. Others have suggested a more complex audit of services and travel times. However, of those that 2 Ashford Borough Council Housing Strategy and Core have been found to be sound, the Strategy sustainability audit has included 3 Wealden District Council draft settlement strategy population size, an assessment of 4 South Cambridgeshire Core Strategy 5 services, particularly schools, Chichester District Core Strategy and Inspectors report convenience shopping and transport June 2007. 6 opportunities. Settlement Sustainability and Greenfield site allocations in the Horsham District Sept 2005

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 22

4.9 The study acknowledged gaps in the defining them in terms of their role to the work on travel to work by Horsham district. Although this approach was District. The lack of information on the accepted by the Inspector, it was felt that use, rather than the existence, of there was insufficient local dimension or services was highlighted. spatial vision and that further work would be required to inform other Development 4.10 Work on the travel to work data indicated Plan Documents. unsustainable patterns of travel to work. In the rural areas of Horsham commutes 4.14 In a similar vein, Epsom and Ewell9 and journey times were longer than the relied on the County wide Housing Land national average. Assumptions were Availability study and a Housing Needs made about the distances and journey Study, and presented little spatial times to services. It was accepted that strategy. The Inspector approved the these may not necessarily follow travel to Core Strategy but noted that the work patterns, but that further surveys evidence base was poor and that if the based on householders use of services Borough had taken more time, it would and public transport would be required. have been differently presented. The Green Belt land surrounding the borough 4.11 This ‘gap’ in information was addressed and the relative wealth of identified by the work commissioned by the High brownfield land helped in this regard. Weald Unit and the Countryside The Inspector agreed that given the Agency7. As well as examining the situation, alternative development profile of the High Weald area in terms of patterns need not be explored at this available census data, a series of stage. householder surveys and telephone interviews established patterns of use of Strategic and Regional Policy services in sample settlements. This, combined with the census data and 4.15 Some authorities (e.g. South travel to work data, resulted in some Cambridgeshire, South Hams, Blyth useful strategic information relating to the Valley10 and Horsham) are subject to level of sustainability of settlements. In existing regional and strategic policies general it was found that the more distributing development. In these cases remote settlements tended to have the strategic locations for development higher levels of self containment for work have already been established and it is and services and those settlements the remaining housing land supply, if closer to larger urban areas tend to rely any, that must be distributed in the Core on them for work and services, Strategy. particularly if transport routes are good. 4.16 In some areas the criteria for auditing 4.12 The travel to work data, and that settlements and determining the strategy revealed from householder surveys on are set out in the Structure Plan. This is the use of services can therefore be the case with South Cambridgeshire used to determine the level of self- Core Strategy. containment within a settlement. Such data can also reveal links between 4.17 Plymouth City Council11 has taken a settlements or where settlements different approach. As identified in both function as a group. the Regional Strategy and in the Structure Plan as a Principal Urban Area, Sector Reviews the city council appointed architects to prepare a city vision. In conjunction and 4.13 One reviewed authority, South Hams consultation with local groups, District8, informed the Core Strategy with companies, business leaders, residents a series of reviews of different sectors; and the Local Strategic Partnership, a housing, employment, retail and strong Vision based on population and transport. The Principal Urban Areas economic growth, connecting elements were defined and a hierarchy for Area and joining up strategic opportunities for Centres, local centres and villages,

9 Epsom and Ewell Core Strategy July 2007 10 7 Planning for Sustainable Settlements in the High Weald Blyth Valley Core Strategy 11 8 South Hams Core Strategy Dec 2006 Plymouth City Council Core Strategy

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 23

growth, city management and key 4.24 Linking settlements functionally has not players for implementation. been addressed by all authorities surveyed. This is a difficult aspect to 4.18 This Vision, which was based on master address given the availability of planning and spatial growth and information to local authorities. Census development was supported by the data and travel to work data, which is Inspector and adopted by the city readily available, cannot reveal these council. types of relationships. Specialist surveys are required and given the volume of 4.19 This approach can be readily applied to evidence data required to demonstrate an urban area but would not be the soundness of the Local Development appropriate in a large disparate rural Framework priorities have to be set. area. 4.25 The High Weald Sustainable Settlements Size constraints survey found that some villages rely on larger settlements for the purposes of 4.20 Some authorities have applied service provision. For example, Bodiam development size constraints to certain relies on Hawkhurst and Tenterden for settlements. This often appears as an socialising, convenience shopping and arbitrary figure with little evidence to banking. Detailed householder surveys justify it. Wealden District Council has and telephone questionnaires were used consulted on the option of using a 10% in sample settlements to reveal general increase in the size of the existing trends. Some settlements, such as settlement population (based on Robertsbridge, displayed high levels of household size census data) but this is self containment for socialising and untested at Examination in Public. Other convenience shopping. This work only districts have chosen to set out size covered a sample handful of villages limits based roughly on population size. from the Rother area so has limited application to this project. 4.21 If size constraints are to be applied, they could be related in scale to settlements 4.26 The level of detail required to determine or linked with an element of identified linked settlements is high. However to needs. determine the functional role of places, it is a fundamental and revealing aspect of Linked settlements settlements’ relationships that cannot be overlooked. 4.22 PPS7 recognises that some settlements have functional relationships that depend Need on each other, or are inter-related in some way. This is addressed in some 4.27 The question of addressing needs has Core Strategies. been considered when determining the spatial distribution of development in 4.23 Hambleton District12 for example uses rural areas. two spatial principles (Areas of Opportunity and Areas of Restraint) as a 4.28 Horsham District Council has addressed starting point, following which this significantly by limiting all settlements are categorised into service development outside main service centres, service villages and secondary centres to that which addresses villages. The Service and Secondary identified need. This was supported by Villages are said to have a functional the examining Inspectors, who relationship with the Service Centres and advocated a clear definition of ‘need’ are situated in their hinterlands. At the when presented with information Examination in Public the Inspector demonstrating that development in small concluded that its approach was sound, centres was likely to re-enforce but noted that the spatial dimension was unsustainable development patterns. not as clear as it could be. This is more readily achievable when the Housing Land Supply is adequately met as was the case in Horsham District.

12 Hambleton District Council Core Strategy

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 24

4.29 South Cambridgeshire District Council’s approach explains that development in minor rural centres will be dependant on existing services and facilities being improved. In areas where the settlement performed poorly in the Structure Plan criteria, any developments over 8 dwellings must address the criteria performance.

4.30 The South Hams approach recognises that rural centres should not only be the focus for housing and employment development but that development should support the diverse needs of its own community and that of its hinterland. Development outside the permitted settlements will only be permitted where it relates to a demonstrable local need.

4.31 Similarly in Hambleton District Council’s strategy development in secondary villages will only be permitted where sustainability can be supported or local needs, for example housing, can be met.

4.32 Tandridge13 District Council has concluded that development outside the main service centres should be dependent on needs and the availability of brownfield sites, with affordable housing being the pressing need identified. However, it should be noted that this approach has yet to be subjected to an Examination in Public.

4.33 Needs have not been clearly defined or identified in the documents examined under this exercise. Aside from Housing Needs Surveys, which are often District, rather than Parish based, limited evidence of local needs appears to have been presented with definitions often broadly defined, leading to potential inconsistency in interpretation.

4.34 If local needs are to be included as a driver for development, they should be clearly defined.

13 Tandridge District Council Submission Draft Core Strategy

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 25 5. Profile and Assessment

5.1 The Rural Settlements Study for Rother District has been devised using the assessment of a wide variety of data to develop a thorough understanding of the nature of the study area as required in PPS12.

5.1 This section contains the information underpinning the assessments and where appropriate sets out how the method has been devised. It is structured as follows:

5a Population Profile 5b Environmental Profile 5c Assessment of Local Facilities & Services 5d Assessment of Accessibility 5e Economic Profile and Assessment of Economic Vitality 5f Assessment of Housing and Community Needs

Alternative Methods

5.2 The examination of the hierarchy of settlements in this section has been devised using the most appropriate method identified by Government guidance, the experience of other local authorities and an understanding of the issues facing Rother District.

5.3 Appendix 1 is an assessment of alternative methods which examines the alternatives considered and rejected, in the light of the specific circumstances in Rother District.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 26

5a Population Profile part of Rother District, of which some 27,500 (almost 80%) live in villages of 5.4 The population of Rother District is sufficient scale to be included in the 87,505 people in 39,489 households analysis of this study. (2007 estimates). 5.12 The composition of household types in 5.5 The population of the District is largely Rural Rother are couples (with/without aging. At the time of the 2001 census, children) – 48%, single person - 27%, Rother District accommodated the pensioner – 15%, lone parent - 6%. highest proportion of residents age 85+ in the country. 5.13 The largest villages in terms of population are Robertsbridge, Northiam, 5.6 The census also reveals that Rother Ticehurst, Westfield, Fairlight Cove, District has fewer young people and a Burwash, Camber, Hurst Green, lower proportion of people of working Peasmarsh and Broad Oak. These all age compared to the national average. have populations larger than 1,000 but This imbalance in the population has less than 3,000. implications for the future economic development of the district. 5.14 Larger villages that offer a good variety of services often act as ‘village centres’ 5.7 The highest proportions of 65+ years are for their surrounding hinterlands. The in Bexhill and Fairlight. In contrast the table of Service Level Indicators in northern parishes tend to have a lower Appendix 2 also identifies those Rother proportion of retired age population, villages that perform such a role and which seems related to the proximity of section 5c discusses the issue in more Tunbridge Wells. Another inter-district detail. disparity is that there appears to be greater health issues for people living at 5.15 Other settlements, or groups of the eastern and coastal parts of the settlements, despite population size, district. tend to rely on either proximity to large urban centres (Bexhill or Hastings) or 5.8 Bexhill is the largest settlement in the local service villages for day to day District, with a population of needs. approximately 41,600, and is a strategic focus of new development. It falls 5.16 There are a number of settlements with outside the scope of this study but has very small populations, which are an influence on the villages and physically cohesive as settlements, but settlements it serves. which have low population levels and little in the way of social or economic 5.9 Similarly Hastings, which is a large infrastructure (for example Burwash coastal urban centre, is beyond the Weald). Similarly, some other small administrative boundary of Rother settlements lack physical cohesiveness District but is a focus for some rural but are relatively well served by services settlements which use its services and (for example Bodiam). social infrastructure. 5.17 Population values for the rural 5.10 Although relatively small market towns, settlements of Rother District have been Battle and Rye operate as local foci for estimated. Census data is generally shops, services and facilities. Both offer presented by parish or ward, and this a range of services and shopping high does not indicate individual settlement streets. Both towns are historic, which populations. The population estimates means they also offer a tourist used in this study are produced by experience and can become congested. Rother District Council and are based on household numbers combined with 5.11 The rural area beyond the three main parish average household size. settlements of Bexhill, Battle and Rye is characterised by a large number of 5.18 It is readily recognisable that the larger settlements, varying considerably in size, settlements tend to have a wider variety layout and relationship with each other. of services and social and economic Just over 35,000 people live in the rural infrastructure. It therefore makes sense

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 27

to say that these larger settlements also would tend to act as hubs for the rural hinterlands and the very small settlements.

5.19 Small settlements can be physically closely related to other small settlements and can operate as a group or cluster. Appendix 4 shows which villages operate in this way by virtue of having other towns and villages within easy reach and this issue is discussed further in section 5d.

Key Findings on Population

Population provides a starting point for consideration of which settlements may be suitable for growth. Other attributes to be factored in to the consideration, including environmental constraints, service role, accessibility, economic profile and housing and community needs are discussed in the remainder of this section. Box 3

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 28

5b Environmental Profile Woodland, which it is important to protect. 5.20 This section can be read alongside Appendix 8 ‘Environmental Factors’, Map 5.27 As Map 2 demonstrates, the District is 1 ‘Environmental Designations’ and Map also considerably constrained by the risk 2 ‘Flood Risk Areas’. All can be found in of flooding along the main river valleys the separate Appendices & Maps and in the coastal areas around Rye, document. Camber and Winchelsea.

5.21 As Map 1 illustrates, the District is highly 5.28 Conservation Areas are areas of special constrained by environmental and historic or architectural interest the landscape designations which should be character of which it is desirable to afforded the highest level of protection preserve or enhance. Conservation available. This is in line with national Areas are designated at Battle, Bexhill policy set out in PPS1 and PPS7 and in (two locations), Burwash, Northiam, order to protect biodiversity and Robertsbridge, Rye, Sedlescombe, landscape of intrinsic value. Ticehurst and Winchelsea. It is primarily the historic centres of villages that are 5.22 The High Weald Area of Outstanding covered with this designation and reflects Natural Beauty (AONB) is a significant the quality of the buildings and spaces constraint and covers some 80% of the between them. Development is not district. Major development in the AONB precluded in Conservation Areas, but should normally only be approved if it is should be designed and scaled to in the national interest. In addition, all preserve or enhance the quality of the development should respect the townscape. objectives of designation, which are to preserve the natural beauty of the 5.29 South East Plan’s policy NRM 5 landscape and quiet enjoyment of the identifies areas of strategic opportunity countryside. for biodiversity improvement. These include the wetlands of the Romney 5.23 An important policy implication for the Marsh / south east corner of Rother AONB is that Local Development District as well as the ancient woodland Documents and Regional Plans should that covers much of the remainder of support suitably located and well Rother. In line with this, policies in designed development necessary to Rother’s Core Strategy Preferred facilitate the economic and social well Options are proposing to ‘Identify, with being of designated areas and their partners, strategic areas of opportunity communities, which may include the for biodiversity improvement in the provision of adequate housing. coastal areas of the Romney Marshes as identified in the South East Plan’s policy 5.24 Much of the remainder of the district, NRM 4, by developing and supporting of outside urban areas, is covered by Sites the ‘Romney Marsh Living Landscapes of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Project’

5.25 The Pevensey Levels an area of 5.30 The Council is also proposing to prepare internationally recognised nature a ‘Green Network Strategy’ which will conservation interest. It is in part use the mapping of key green spaces designated as a SSSI and is also a within the Natural England’s Accessible National Nature Reserve and a Ramsar Natural Green Space Strategy, to identify site. Its importance as a wetland habitat gaps and strategic opportunities in the for birds and flora is renowned. ecological and recreational networks

5.26 Significant areas of the levels between 5.31 Although this Rural Settlements Study is Dungeness and Pett are also a primarily concerned with the villages designated SSSI and Special Area for there may be opportunities to pursue Conservation and a proposed Special biodiversity improvements, including any Protection Area for birds. These are that may be identified in the forthcoming both of European importance. Rother ‘Green Network Strategy’. This may be also contains significant areas of Ancient achieved either alongside new

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 29

development or indirectly via developer’s contributions.

Key Findings on Environment

A number of relevant environmental

constraints affect the study area and the

individual settlements within it. The Sites of

International biodiversity importance, the

High Weald AONB and the SSSIs and are

the most significant designations affecting

the study area. Equally relevant is the

frequency of Ancient Woodland, which

characterises the district and the High

Weald.

There are also large areas at risk from

flooding along the coastal levels, and along

the banks of rivers.

In combination, these factors cause

significant environmental constraints across

most of the District. The predominantly

coastal areas beyond the AONB boundary

are generally the same areas that are at risk

from flooding and/or covered by international

habitat designations.

Whilst suitably designed and located

development to support local needs is

supported by Government policy, the

significant environmental constraints, require

careful planning. Where other factors

demonstrate that a settlement is suitable for

growth, development will need careful

planning around environmental factors.

There may indeed be opportunities for net

improvements to habitats via planning gain

and/or developer’s contributions. Such

improvements will need to be identified in the

Council’s forthcoming ‘Green Network Study’.

Box 4

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 30

5c Assessment of Local are more mobile and willing to travel Facilities/Services further. The section ‘Village Clusters and Relationships with other Settlements’ in 5.32 This section can be read alongside section 5 of this document, examines this Appendix 2 ‘Service Level Indicators’. issue in more detail.

5.33 The identification of Local Service 5.39 Each settlement will therefore be Centres as areas suitable for growth is examined in terms of the services identified in national planning guidance available within it (see Appendix 2). In (Planning Policy Statement 7). addition, within the assessment of Accessibility (see Appendix 3), the 5.34 As outlined in more detail in Chapter 2, relationship of that settlement to a the Draft South East Plan and its Panel service centre or larger urban area will Report also advocate a criteria-based be noted. approach to the determination of areas suitable to accommodate growth. 5.40 The services considered appropriate to highlight are those which respond to the 5.35 It is recognised that certain villages, day to day needs of the population, when functioning as service centres, within the economic and social context in could benefit from some growth, where it which they live. The full analysis of reinforces and promotes economic services is contained in Appendix 2, but growth, contributes to local social needs in summary the services are: and protects high quality environments. • Convenience shopping 5.36 The approach advocated here is the • Primary school examination of a range of important local • Secondary school services and their distribution in • Doctors Surgery settlements, as a means to determine • Dentist which act as service centres. This has • chemist been presented in matrix form by • Post Office settlement. • Public House • Community Hall 5.37 This information is not examined in • Play Area isolation, but will be overlaid with • Sports Pitch information on the accessibility of a • Place of Worship settlement, economic and population • Library (Permanent or Mobile) profiles and information on Nursery School environmental constraints. Coupled with • Petrol Filling Station information on local needs, a spatial analysis of the role of settlements will 5.41 This list is devised by examining other emerge enabling the identification of districts’ studies and the use of settlements that could accommodate judgements regarding the role of such growth, and where that growth would be facilities in the social, economic and of economic, social or environmental cultural life of a settlement. It is notable benefit. that in response to the Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation, rural 5.38 Account needs to be taken of the role of residents emphasised the importance of adjacent towns, especially Battle and local facilities. For example, more than Rye that act as service centres for many 80% of rural residents considered that villages. In rural areas, as has been 14 post offices and shops for day to day established in other surveys, the use of purchases were either ‘essential’ or services is not limited to those who live ‘important’ in making a village a good nearby. Equally, those living in a place to live in. Sections 3.71 to 3.80 village/market town may not always use contain more detail on these results. local services. Due to the relative isolation of homes from a full range of 5.42 Those settlements which have a broad services, car ownership is high; people range of services could be said to act as

14 a Service Centre. Planning for Sustainable Settlements in the High Weald

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 31

5.43 Depending on the local range, a ‘Rural Key Findings on Service Centres Service Centre’ is defined as a settlement with at least 14 service level The identification of Service Centres is an indicator services within the settlement. important part of the development of the Rural Settlements Study. 5.44 If a settlement contained a more limited range of services, but acts as a local hub (i) Rural Service Centres for smaller settlements, it has been defined as a ‘Local Service Village’. For the purposes of this study Service Depending on the local range, a Local Centres are defined as those with a good Service Village is defined as having at range of local shops, services and social least 10 service level indicator services infrastructure (at least 14 out of 18 of the within it. The presence of a primary identified service level indicators) serving an school is also considered a pre-requisite area that extends beyond its own of classification as a Local Service boundaries. Rural Service Centres are Village, which explains the exclusion of identified at Robertsbridge and Ticehurst. Camber (No primary school) as a Local Service village in Appendix 2. (ii) Local Service Village

5.45 A settlement acting as a ‘Service Centre’ For the purposes of this study, a Local may be considered suitable for growth if Service Village has a smaller range of local development can address identified shops, services and social infrastructure needs and should other factors which caters for a more local population. (economic, accessibility and They are defined as those with a minimum of environmental) also indicate suitability. 10 of the 18 identified service level indicator services, and include a primary school. 5.46 Some interesting background information regarding shopping patterns in Rother Local Service Villages are identified as were contained in the 2008 District Wide Burwash, Catsfield, Hurst Green, Northiam, Shopping Assessment and some of the Peasmarsh, Sedlescombe and Westfield. more relevant results were summarised at section 3.36. Generally they indicate (iii) Other Settlements that rural residents may tend to use local village shops for secondary top-up Some 39 other villages are included for shopping, but for their main weekly shop analysis within this study although not the tendency is to travel to a larger town. considered to fulfil a service centre role.

This information is not to be used in isolation, but is to be overlaid with information on the other identified factors. When compared to information on the accessibility of settlements, the economic activity levels and a detailed examination of environmental constraints, the settlements’ suitability for development can be assessed.

Box 5

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 32

5d Profile of Village Accessibility Road Accessibility

5.47 This section can be read alongside 5.53 Accessibility to the main road network is Appendix 3 ‘Accessibility Indicators’ an important consideration when considering the appropriateness of village Public Transport growth and development.

5.48 The accessibility of settlements within the 5.54 In particular, locations along the two trunk study area is affected by the levels of road (A21 and A259) corridors are public transport available to residents. inherently more accessible. Proximity to Those settlements that are best served by other A roads and to a lesser extent, B public transport can be considered to be roads, also increase the accessibility of a more accessible, and hence more settlement. sustainable, than isolated settlements. 5.55 The Highways Agency has a number of 5.49 There are two principal categories of major road schemes near within Rother. public transport available; bus transport The schemes are; and the railway network. As fixed transport infrastructure, the railway is a) A21 Baldslow Junction Improvements considered more permanent and less b) A21 Flimwell to Robertsbridge subject to service level fluctuations and c) A259 Pevensey to Brenzett economic circumstance. improvements

Rail Network Additional schemes just outside the District are 5.50 Parts of the study area are connected by rail. Railway stations with a ‘full service’ d) A21 Tonbridge to Pembury are available at: e) A21 Kippings Cross to Lamberhurst

• Crowhurst 5.56 The current Regional Transport Board • Battle Programme indicates that’s schemes a, d • Robertsbridge and e will be delivered in the period up to 2016. However schemes b and c are • Etchingham scheduled as post 2016, and are subject • Stonegate to the current refresh of the priorities and • Guestling Green these dates may change. Only the A21 • Rye Tonbridge-Pembury scheme has been finally approved for construction. Even within the above definition it is acknowledged that some stations have Cycling more stops than others. 5.57 East Sussex Cycling Strategy is a means 5.51 In addition there are three stations of informing and co-ordinating all policies operating ‘partial’ services, including; and programmes of action which can help to promote cycling in East Sussex. • Winchelsea Although the document is non-statutory, it • Three Oaks is a useful tool that provides a coherent • Doleham overview of existing, proposed and potential provision for cyclists. It will inform Bus services the statutory planning process and will contribute to other County Council policies 5.52 For the purposes of this assessment, a and strategies. It dates from 2000 but a village bus service is recognised if it offers new one is currently being prepared by peak hour services that run from the the County Council and is expected in settlement before 9.30 in the morning with 2009. The primary focus is on utility rather a return journey before 6.30 in the than recreational routes. evening. This enables a day long visit for work or education purposes. 5.58 For recreational cycling there are 8 Millennium Cycle rides set through the hearty of 1066 country.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 33

Access to cycle routes comes up as a Key Findings on Accessibility consistent concern of village residents during consultation. Public Transport The higher the level of accessibility the more Village Clusters and Relationships with suitable for development a settlement may other Settlements be. Relationships with other settlements 5.59 This section can be read alongside Settlements within close range of Bexhill Appendix 4 ‘Relationships between (within 10 minute drive time) include: Settlements’. • Normans Bay Settlements within close range of Hastings 5.60 Car ownership in the study area is high (within 10 minute drive time) include: and the majority of residents are highly • Friars Hill mobile. This is a function of the relative • Guestling Green isolation of some settlements and the • Icklesham relative wealth of parts of the District. • Westfield • Westfield Lane 5.61 Services within a settlement may not Settlements within close range of Battle always be first choice for residents. (within 5 minute drive time) include: Where there are close physical links to • Netherfield nearby service centres or large urban • Johns Cross areas, it is expected that services within • Catsfield these areas would be used. An example Settlements within close range of Rye (within here is Fairlight Cove, with a larger 5 minute drive time) include: population but few local services. In this • Iden case, it is expected that residents would • Peasmarsh look to Hastings for their immediate • needs. •

• Winchelsea 5.62 Similarly, a village with a low service level, Settlements which lie close to Robertsbridge which lies close to a village with larger Rural Service Centre (within 5 minute drive service levels, is likely to use the latter time) include: settlements’ services. A local example is Rye Harbour, relying on Rye. • Hurst Green • Johns Cross 5.63 It is for this reason that a key indicator for • Mountfield accessibility is the travel time from one Settlements which lie close to Ticehurst settlement to a larger urban area or a Rural Service Centre (within 5 minute drive service centre as set out in Appendix 4. time) include: An examination of this factor will indicate • Flimwell where settlements rely on others for • Stonegate services and, in particular, whether Settlements which act as linked settlements settlements act as a group or cluster for include: service provision. A group or cluster can, • Broad Oak, Brede and Cackle between them, act as a Service Centre or Street, Local Service Village. • Four Oaks and Beckley, • Etchingham and Hurst Green, • Pett, Pett Level and Friars Hill. • Winchelsea and Winchelsea Beach • Burwash, Burwash Common and Burwash Weald. Box 6

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 34

5e Economic Profile and of the resident economically active Assessment of Economic Vitality population also work.

Hastings Travel to Work Area

5.64 The Rother and Hastings economy currently underperforms vis-à-vis the South–East average. Earnings are below the regional average, unemployment is higher and economic activity is lower. The economy is described as weak. This is due in part to its inaccessibility, large rented sector, large stock of small dwellings, particularly in Hastings.

5.65 The attractive local environment has the affect of making in-migration selective. Those migrating into the rural sub-region tend to be older people who are down- 5.70 Whilst rural villages export labour to shifting their work requirements. This Hastings, the whole of the Hastings TTWA causes the economic and age imbalance is also a net exporter of labour to other and exacerbates the lack of affordability in areas. housing. 5.71 As suggested by the Hastings & Rother 5.66 The Hastings and Rother Housing Market Employment Strategy and Land Review, Study suggests that the existing features more localised labour markets are also of the market will drive this process; the evident in Rother. Rye is an employment high stock of private rented housing in focus in the east, as is Battle Town for the Hastings, that new affordable homes tend surrounding rural central area. to be in urban areas and that rural Rother Interestingly, Darwell ward (which includes District is more expensive due to the Brightling, Burwash, Mountfield and attractions of the environment. This Whatlington) is highlighted as drawing in creates the selective migration detailed commuters. above. 5.72 Those living in north Rother, in Ticehurst 5.67 The importance of considering economic and Etchingham, display considerable issues when developing the settlement dependency on Tunbridge Wells as a strategy for Rother District is reinforced by centre of employment. In addition, north- these findings. In addition, the inclusion of east Wealden and southern areas of part of the study area within the Sussex Tunbridge Wells districts also draw in Coast Sub-Region in the South East Plan commuters from the eastern and western with its emphasis on socio-economic fringes of Rother. Robertsbridge draws in regeneration also serves to illustrate the workers from across the Tunbridge Wells need to consider economic indicators boundary. within the methodology. Employment and Earnings Travel to Work Areas 5.73 There are some 23,200 jobs in Rother, 5.68 Rother substantially forms part of the some 40% of which are part time. defined Hastings economic area (Travel to Work Area), with the northern part of the 5.74 Rother District has a high proportion of District within the Tunbridge Wells TTWA. small firms and a very low proportion of Only 4 Rother Parishes (Ticehurst, large firms compared to the country, the Burwash, Hurst Green and Etchingham) region and the county. fall within the Tunbridge Wells TTWA. 5.75 In broad terms, the pattern of employment 5.69 TTWAs are officially recognised “labour sectors is similar at local and regional market areas”, defined by the ONS. They levels. The greatest percentage of are areas in which the bulk (at least 75%) Rother’s working population is employed in the public service sector (27.8%), a

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 35

higher rate than for the region as a whole have more small businesses and self- (23.6%). Conversely, the regional employed. Brightling, Playden, East importance of financial and businesses Guildeford, Udimore and Whatlington have services in employment terms (20.7%) is the highest levels, whereas Bexhill has the not reflected locally (16.8%), nor is lowest. employment in transport, storage and communications (5.4% in Rother, 8.1% in 5.81 The high levels of own account and small the South East). Whilst low in overall employers can indicate a high level of self percentage terms, employment in containment, and it is interesting that the agriculture and related activities in Rother parishes with the highest levels are (3.3%) is significantly above the regional possibly the less accessible and more average of 1.5%. isolated settlements in the district.

5.76 Average weekly earnings of Rother 5.82 At the “micro-business” scale, Rother is residents are £549, with average full-time highlighted in the Employment Strategy male earnings some 50% higher than Review as having a high level of home- those of women. Average earnings of all based employment, being in the upper people working in Rother are noticeably quartile nationally and having the highest lower than average earnings of residents, level in the South East region. illustrating the higher incomes available by commuting out of the District for work. Economic Indicators

5.77 The average household income in Rother 5.83 This section can be read alongside falls significantly below the regional Appendix 5 ‘Economic Indicators’. average. This may be linked to the high proportion of retired residents. The 2001 5.84 PPS7 encourages local economic Census revealed that of those aged development particularly ‘where there is a between 16 and 74 in Rother, 22.3% are need for employment creation and retired. This is the highest proportion of all economic regeneration’. There is also a the 67 local authority areas in the South case for arguing for promoting East. development where there is easy access to a range of employment opportunities by Employment Sectors non-car modes. This translates to the following objectives and measures: 5.78 Rother District has a low proportion of people in higher professional, higher and Objective Evidence lower managerial occupations and To take account of the Number (and intermediate occupations than the national need to reduce percentage) average. This is also the case with lower unemployment unemployed supervisory technical employment and To take account of the Economic activity semi-routine employment. need to encourage vibrant rate15 communities 5.79 The rural areas are by no means To take account of the Ratio of in:out- homogenous in their economic availability of local commuting characteristics. Some parishes enjoy employment opportunities proportionally high levels of higher To take account of access Percentage professional and managerial occupations, to work by non-car modes commuting other particularly in the north (Bodiam, than by car Brightling, Burwash, Dallington, To take account of extent East Sussex parish Etchingham, Ewhurst, Ticehurst and of rural deprivation rank of index of Whatlington). Conversely areas in the multiple deprivation east (including Camber, Rye and 5.85 Appendix 5 contains the detailed results of Icklesham) have a proportionally lower the above indicators on a parish by parish percentage of professional and basis, together with a discussion of likely managerial occupations. implications for the need for new business development in villages. It is important to 5.80 Rother District does however have a note that parish-based and ward-based higher than average level of small employers and own account workers. 15 Economically active population is the number of people, who Parishes more distant from towns tend to are economically active aged 16 to the

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 36

statistics may have some limitations when rankings. Areas suffering from deprivation applied to an individual village, which may may also benefit more from economic be untypical of the parish. Some parishes development. contain several villages to which the same parish-based set of statistics have been Rural Industrial Estates applied. 5.93 Appendix 6 indicates the location of rural 5.86 The presence of employment areas within industrial estates, together with their floor a settlement has also been highlighted area, vacancy level and use class. within individual village appraisals in part 2. 5.94 By far the biggest industrial area is British Gypsum at Mountfield which comprises 5.87 Where settlements have a high level of over half the total rural floorspace. unemployment, this may be interpreted as a village with a need for more economic 5.95 Most estates show a high level of development, particularly if combined with occupancy. The vacancy level averages at higher levels of economic activity. 4%.

5.88 The economic activity rate in this instance 5.96 It is important to note that this is not the measures the number of people who are full extent of rural employment in employment or unemployed expressed opportunities. Many smaller scale as a percentage of the population aged business uses exist scattered throughout over 16. In combination with the the district in addition to opportunities on unemployment rate, it offers a good larger business / industrial estates. indication of the employment opportunities offered by the local labour market. Need for Additional Business Floorspace

5.89 A low level of economic active populations 5.97 The 2008 Employment Strategy Review may suggest a high proportion of retired (ESR) stated that there is clearly ongoing persons, people looking after offspring or demand for small workshops and, to a students – although in Rother it seems the lesser degree, office space in rural Rother, former is most likely. as evidenced by the number of small sites, conversion schemes and high occupancy 5.90 In principle therefore, settlements with low rates. Most provision is of small workshop levels of economic activity would not and office units, with some demand for generally be considered as suitable for larger units. growth. However, if other indicators demonstrated a high level of suitability for 5.98 The ESR also maintained that business growth, any development proposed should space both serves to support the vitality of address economic needs through rural communities and provide accessible developments such as mixed uses or jobs. A broad distribution of home working. This is particularly accommodation across rural settlements important within the area of the District therefore meets wider objectives. Many which falls within the Sussex Coast Sub- smaller developments stem from the reuse Region in the South East Plan given its of former agricultural buildings and these emphasis on socio-economic also provide an important source of space regeneration. for rural businesses.

5.91 A high ratio of in:out commuting indicates 5.99 Conclusions regarding particular villages a village that provides a higher number of that are suitable for employment growth jobs relative to its economically active can be found in section 6.69 onwards. population, which suggests a degree of economic buoyancy. A low ratio suggests a village that would benefit from the provision of more local employment areas.

5.92 The index of multiple deprivation rankings across the District are also lower (i.e. worse) in the east, although there are other areas with lower than average

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 37

Key Findings on Economy

Economic development is a key need in the study area.

Analysis of the following key statistics has helped inform the need for new business and employment provision in the villages.

• Unemployment • Economic activity rate • Ratio of in:out commuting • Percentage commuting other than by car • Multiple Deprivation Indicators

The analysed information is a snapshot at the time of writing, but taken cumulatively with other evidence, can provide a picture of need and used as a starting point for employment allocations. Box 7

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 38

5f Assessment of Housing and development can contribute towards Community Needs sustainable settlements.

5.100 When considering new development, the 5.106 The most pressing local need is that for need to foster vital and viable communities affordable housing. The lack of and to respond to their particular needs is affordability is the subject of the Housing paramount. A line from the Northiam Market Assessment, and local housing Parish Action Plan, but one that equally needs surveys. be applied to any of our villages states that ‘there is clearly a demand to build 5.107 Appendix 7 contains the detailed housing more of a community, to create closer ties indicators. To inform the distribution of between people, foster co-operation and new housing across Parishes, and therein reap the benefits that people working to villages, the following information is together can achieve – socially, used: environmentally and politically. What people fear is that the village loses its Objective Evidence amenities and its identity, that neighbours To take account Number of become strangers and everyone looks to of the scale of households in someone else to solve their problems or local need housing need provide their entertainment.’ Number of To take account households in 5.101 As identified earlier in this document, both of the scale of the housing need as a national planning policy and the emerging issue percentage of all regional spatial strategy both identify the households importance of assessing local needs when To take account Percentage of considering the option of housing of the tenure social rented provision in rural areas. balance in the housing (RSL/LA) existing housing in the existing stock 5.102 Indeed, this is particularly emphasised in stock PPS7 when considering housing Number of development in designated areas such as To take account households on the AONB. This issue is therefore important of demonstrable Housing Register to the development of the Rural current needs seeking Settlements Study for Rother District given accommodation that 80% of the administrative area falls To take account within the High Weald AONB. Number of of demonstrable households on current needs 5.103 The needs of the District are identified as housing register as relative to a means of linking the potential for a % of all existing stock of development with local needs, as ratified households households in the South East Plan. This approach has also been supported by Inspectors at some Examinations in Public into Core 5.108 A mixed picture emerges from analysis of Strategy Development Plan Documents. the above sources of information in Appendix 6. For example, villages which 5.104 Development can act as a driver to the exhibit high levels of housing need do not provision of a wide range of services and always correspond with those for which facilities. If needs are identified on a there is a high demand from the housing settlement basis, development can be register. Peasmarsh is the one example directly linked to contribute towards that which demonstrates a correlating need for need. new housing from both measures.

5.105 Needs have been identified from a 5.109 Other community needs have been number of local sources. It is important to highlighted from Parish Plans, the note that this section is to some extent a Council’s Community Strategy, Local snapshot of needs at a certain point in Action Plans, the Council’s ‘Open Space, time. Nevertheless, it will provide a useful Sport & Recreation Audit and Assessment’ indicator of needs to examine how and the responses to the Core Strategy Issues & Options Paper. There are too

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 39

many identified needs to be mentioned here, but in Part Two, individual needs are drawn out on a village by village basis.

5.110 By considering this feedback a strategy can begin to be developed with the involvement of the local community which takes into account its needs in line with the approach also promoted in PPS1 (paragraphs 7 and 16) and PPS7 (paragraph 8) (see earlier).

Key Findings on Housing and Community

Housing is a particularly pressing need in the study area. Analysis of the following key statistics has helped inform the need for new housing provision in the villages.

• Number of households in housing need.

• Proportion of social rented housing in

stock.

• Numbers on housing register.

The analysed information is a snapshot at the

time of writing, but taken cumulatively with

other evidence, can provide a picture of

housing need in an area and used as a starting

point for housing allocations.

Box 8

Key Findings from Section 5

Rother District is characterised by a wide rage of settlement sizes and types. Development potential will be considered in the context of a broad range of sustainability indicators, including population, services, accessibility, economy, housing/community needs and environment. Box 9

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 40

Villages 6. Conclusions (per annum Bexhill Battle Rye figure in brackets) District Option 1 – 2,075 2,900 275 350 Housing Population based (104pa) District Option 2 1,200 – Service centres 3,400 500 500 Scale of Overall Housing Development in Rural (60pa) (preferred) Villages District Option 3 – 1,880 3,150 330 235 Trend based (94pa) 6.1 All growth options are drawn up in the light District Option 4 – 1,665 2,525 935 475 of the Draft South East Plan requirement Commitment led (83pa) District Option 5 – 2,720 920 1,100 860 for 280 dwellings per annum in Rother Housing needs (43pa) District up to 2026 which is in turn split on based a 200/80 basis. 6.5 Some options clearly imply more growth in 6.2 Under Policy SCT7 of the Draft South East villages, i.e. a distribution based upon Plan, the Sussex Coast Sub-Region of population (Option 1) equates to 2,075 Rother (which includes Bexhill and Rye as dwellings over twenty years (or 104 per well as a number of smaller settlements annum) for rural villages, as opposed to a such as Camber, Winchelsea, Pett, distribution based upon the areas of need Catsfield, Icklesham) is expected to identified in the Housing Needs develop at least 200 dwellings per annum. Assessment 2005 (Option 5), which The remaining rural area that is wholly equates to just 43 per annum for rural within the AONB and includes the market villages. town of Battle as well as Robertsbridge, Ticehurst, Northiam, Hurst Green and 6.6 As set out in the Core Strategy Directions many other villages is expected to develop paper, option 2 (service centre based) is at least 80 dwellings per annum. preferred, implying a need for some 1200 dwellings in the rural villages over the 6.3 The scale of appropriate development is period 2006-2026. This is a ‘medium guided by the place-shaping agenda of growth’ option when compared to individual villages. Individual village alternative options that would imply a appraisals have helped inform the quantity need in the rural villages ranging from 43 of housing growth that is considered to 104 per annum. The preference for appropriate for the rural villages in their option 2 is moderated by option 5 (needs entirety. based) and option 1 (population based).

6.4 The overall level of development in 6.7 The Core Strategy Directions document villages is also dependent on a suggests this is the preferred option since consideration of spatial distribution in the it accords most closely to the Plan’s district as a whole. Consideration of these strategic objectives and to the results of options has taken place as part of the the Sustainability Appraisal process. Core Strategy Preferred Options, but in summary the options presented were as 6.8 The final scale of growth for rural villages follows; will depend on a number of factors, in addition to the results of individual appraisals – such as the relative levels of growth that are considered appropriate for Bexhill, Battle and Rye. These options may of course be subject to amendment in the final spatial strategy.

District Wide Spatial Distribution of Housing 2006 to 2026

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 41

Village Housing Distribution Options Village Housing Distribution Option A – Continue to Focus on Village Service Centres 6.9 An important caveat to clarify at the outset of this section is that the options 6.13 Option A conforms with the preferred discussed are indicative only. In all spatial option at the District-wide level and examples options will need further also conforms strongly with government moderating on the ground at the local guidance in PPS7 which states; level in the light of more detailed Paragraph 3 ‘Away from larger urban examination of local environmental / areas, planning authorities should focus landscape constraints and in the light of most new development in or near to local identified local needs. In part two of this service centres where employment, Rural Settlements Study on ‘Village housing (including affordable housing), Appraisals’ the implications of these services and other facilities can be indicative spatial options are examined in provided close together. This should help light of the benefits they may bring in to ensure these facilities are served by meeting local needs and in the light of public transport and provide improved their realism and achievability on the opportunities for access by walking and ground. cycling. These centres (which might be a country town, a single large village or a Relationship of ‘Village’ Housing Distribution group of villages) should be identified in Options to Preferred ‘District’ Spatial Distribution the development plan as the preferred Option location for such development.’

6.10 Although there is a district-wide preferred 6.14 This option would see most growth being spatial distribution, this still needs directed towards the two rural service interpreting at the village level. Five centres and to a lesser extent towards the options for distribution amongst the seven local service villages. villages are presented below, four of which were set out in the Core Strategy Issues Rural Robertsbridge and Options paper in October 2006. Given Service the district wide preference for a ‘service- Centres Ticehurst centre based distribution’ there is an initial Burwash presumption in favour of following the Hurst Green same preference down to village level (i.e. Local Sedlescombe option one). The extent to which this Service Northiam should be moderated by other factors is Villages Westfield discussed in the following sections. All Peasmarsh options for spatial distribution across the Catsfield villages have also been subject to the sustainability appraisal process (see 6.15 More detail on this hierarchy can be found Appendix 7 for more details). in Appendix 2.

Relationship of Village Housing Distribution 6.16 Growth would be dependent on Options to Core Strategy Issues & Options environmental factors would be proportional to current household numbers 6.11 Of the five village spatial distribution so that each village would have a options discussed below, the first four manageable growth that is more readily were set out in more detail in the Core absorbed into the existing community. Strategy Issues and Options paper. As section 3.56-3.67 highlighted, there was 6.17 The option allows the maximum amount of no real consensus from consultees on a people to benefit from the provision of ‘preferred’ option. services, which in turn increases the economic vitality of the services 6.12 A fifth option ‘Focus Development on themselves. It may also be cost-effective Transport Corridors’ has been added since compared to other options it may subsequently in light of comments require less new infrastructure and received. A summary of the strengths and services. weaknesses of all five options is contained in Table 1.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 42

6.18 However, it may be argued that this Option C – Focus Development on a Few Larger method places undue importance on Villages service provision at the expense of other factors, particularly public and private 6.25 This option builds upon option A, but transport accessibility. narrows development options to a smaller number of suitable villages. Essentially Option B – Development to Support Community this would be villages that are not only well Needs and Deficiencies served in terms of services (as visible on Appendix 2), but are also well served by a 6.19 Option B targets those villages which have range of transport options (as housing need (based on a number of demonstrated by Appendix 3). factors detailed in Appendix 7 including number of households in housing need, 6.26 Only four villages appear to score number of households in housing need as sufficiently well on both criteria. They are a percentage of all households and Hurst Green, Robertsbridge, Ticehurst and number of households on the housing Northiam. register seeking accommodation). 6.27 However, focussing development on such 6.20 This option also incorporates an element a small number of villages may have an to facilitate specific identified needs within adverse impact on the cohesiveness of villages such as new play areas or the settlements in question since they community centres. Such specific needs would inevitably need to grow at a high may have been identified in a number of rate in light of their current populations. sources, including Rother District Council evidence studies or Parish Plans. 6.28 Smaller villages would get proportionally much less under this option. Therefore, it 6.21 An advantage of this option is that it is may also deny smaller villages of the arguably the one that does the most to development which could be used to address the key issue of affordable facilitate community services and facilities housing. It may therefore be popular at the and may result in genuine housing needs local level if there are clear benefits over within smaller settlements being costs. overlooked.

6.22 However, the reliability and robustness of Option D – Dispersed Development supporting information particularly in respect of housing pressures could be Option D(i) – Population based across Villages questioned. For example; the choice of preferred location from those on the 6.29 Option D(i) would spread development housing register is arguably influenced across settlements proportional to their dependent on where availability is existing populations. perceived to be. 6.30 It may be that this option corresponds 6.23 Information on other locally identified more with the existing dispersed ‘needs’ may be only partially complete settlement pattern of villages and hamlets where information has only been that is already a key feature of the High forthcoming from a minority of parishes. It Weald AONB. The option would direct may also be difficult and expensive to more development towards smaller deliver the full extent of needs and villages more than the alternative options deficiencies. Delivery may be dependent A, B, C and E. As such it would concur on S106 agreements at the Development with English Heritage and High Weald Control level. AONB Unit research that suggests sustainable lifestyles are actually fostered 6.24 This method may also result in an over more in smaller settlements than in larger focus on unsustainable locations where ‘service centre’ villages. services/infrastructure may be lacking as well as providing only limited opportunities 6.31 In option D(i), the growth would be in other villages which may be more distributed amongst all villages included in sustainable locations. the Rural Settlements Study, as well as the service and most accessible villages. Although very small hamlets would be

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 43

excluded, this option generally spreads 6.38 Rather than constituting an alternative development more widely. rural spatial option, these matters overlap more directly with the issues of exception 6.32 This option may be problematic in the site policy and key worker affordable context of current Local Plan policy housing. Therefore they are dealt with in regarding development boundaries. Only more detail in the Core Strategy Preferred a selected group of villages have Options Paper sections on re-use of development boundaries, and policy does redundant agricultural buildings. not allow for extensive development in the other villages. Therefore the application of Option E – Focus Development on Transport this option would require a major change Corridors of policy direction regarding development boundaries in the LDF. 6.39 Another option that has emerged is to focus upon existing transport corridors. As 6.33 Although this option may distribute maps 3 and 4 indicate, the two main trunk development in a way that is perceived as roads (A21 and A259) and the two main ‘equal’, population is not always a gauge rail lines follow broadly similar north/south to accessibility, provision of services or (to via Robertsbridge) and local needs, and therefore this option may east/west routes (to Ashford & Kent via be contrary to sustainable planning. R y e ) .

Option D(ii) Rejected at Outset – Developments 6.40 A number of villages are located along of Smaller Settlements and Historic Farmsteads these two corridors. Focussing development along these villages may 6.34 This option has been considered but facilitate increased accessibility and discounted at the outset as a viable commuting to larger towns and cities to alternative. Therefore it does not appear the north (London, Tunbridge Wells), east as a rural spatial distribution option in the (Ashford, Dover, Folkestone) and south main Core Strategy. (Hastings and Bexhill). As such, option 5 may offer an attractive option from an 6.35 Essentially it is an alternative economic development point of view and interpretation of ‘dispersed development’ may act as a spur to regeneration of that concentrates expansion on smaller Hastings and Bexhill. It may also help re- and remoter settlements and farmsteads enforce the rail service and enhance has been promoted by the High Weald Rother’s role in the region. Area of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB) Unit, and supported by research 6.41 Villages that would be main focus for conducted by English Heritage. development on this option include Hurst Green, Robertsbridge, and Flimwell 6.36 To an extent the adaptation, conversion (amongst others). and re-use of historic farm buildings happens anyway under existing Local 6.42 This option accords to a large extent with Plan policy HG11, although economic and national guidance in the form of PPS7 and tourism purposes are generally prioritised PPG13. PPS 7 states ‘Accessibility should ahead of residential. be a key consideration in all development decisions. Most developments which are 6.37 However, large scale development at likely to generate large numbers of trips these locations (entailing extensions and should be located in or next to towns or new build) would inevitably impact on the other service centres that are accessible historic character and act as an alternative by public transport, walking and cycling, in to providing dwellings in and around line with the policies set out in PPG13, accessible service centres. Such a policy Transport. Decisions on the location of would clearly be contrary to national other developments in rural areas should, (PPS7 and PPS3) and regional planning where possible, give people the greatest policy. Therefore it is not a genuine spatial opportunity to access them by public development option in the sense of being transport, walking and cycling, consistent a realistic alternative for the overall scale with achieving the primary purpose of the of development required. development’.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 44

6.43 However, focusing development on transport corridors may withhold development from other buoyant local service villages such as Northiam and Peasmarsh.

6.44 In addition, this objective may encourage commuting further distances, reduce the incentive to provide local jobs, create negative impacts on the character of certain villages, and increase house prices disproportionately, due to access improvements.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 45

Table 1: Housing Distribution Options between the Villages

Option Central theme Main areas of change Strategy emphases Strengths/ weaknesses A Continue to ‘Rural Service Centres’ Service role of Strengths Focus on (Robertsbridge and Ticehurst), settlements (i.e. provision • Conformity with ‘Preferred Option’ at District- Village Service and to a lesser extent ‘Local of shops, schools, health wide level. Centres Service Villages’ (Burwash, facilities, post offices, • Conformity with government guidance Hurst Green, Sedlescombe, pubs, community halls, (PPS7). Northiam, Westfield, play areas, sports • Should help to ensure facilities are served by Peasmarsh, Catsfield) and a facilities, places of public transport and provide improved village cluster such as Broad worship, library, petrol opportunities for access by walking and Oak. stations) cycling. • Allows maximum amount of people to benefit from provision of services, which in turn increases economic viability of services themselves. • Cost effective – option that would require less new infrastructure and services. Weaknesses • Does not take into account transport infrastructure, although this typically influences the location of services anyway. • Undue importance placed on service provision at the expense of other factors. B Development to Housing Needs Assessment Led by Housing needs to Strengths Support identified particular needs in a large degree. • Arguably the option that does most to address Community east and north (centred on Rye Secondary emphasis on key issue of affordable housing. Needs and and Ticehurst respectively), but locally identified need for • May be popular at local level if there are clear Deficiencies no need in villages in centre supporting services (e.g. benefits over costs. (centred on Battle). play areas, village halls). Weaknesses Other needs spread across the Such specific needs may • Question marks over reliability of supporting district. have been identified in a information, particularly regarding housing number of sources, pressures (e.g.; housing registers dependent including Rother District on where availability is perceived to be) and Council evidence studies locally identified ‘needs’ (where information or Parish Plans. has only been forthcoming from a minority of parishes) • Difficult and complex to interpret and implement, (e.g. may be dependent on S106

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 46

Option Central theme Main areas of change Strategy emphases Strengths/ weaknesses at DC level) • Directs development towards where services are lacking (arguably the opposite of service centre approach advocated by PPS7) • Arguably over-emphasises affordable housing issue. • Expensive – may require new facilities and infrastructure.

C Focus Robertsbridge, Northiam, Settlements that have a Strengths Development on Ticehurst, Hurst Green service role as well as • Incorporates consideration of service role Few Larger good accessibility. combined with consideration of accessibility. Villages Weaknesses • May result in levels of growth in identified settlements disproportionate to current populations and therefore possible negative impacts on cohesiveness of selected towns. • May result in genuine housing needs within smaller settlements being overlooked. D Dispersed 4a – Spread between all 45 More manageable growth Strengths Development villages identified in the Rural at a greater number of • Spreads development in a way that could be 4a: Population Settlements Study. settlements. Reinforces perceived as ‘equal’ based across 4b – Spread even more widely, historic pattern of • Conforms to High Weald AONB and English villages incorporating tiny hamlets and settlement within High Heritage representations suggesting 4b: Historic even smaller historic weald AONB. sustainable lifestyles are fostered in smaller Farmstead farmsteads settlements. based Weaknesses • Population does not necessarily correspond to either accessibility, provision of services, or local needs – all factors that constitute ‘good planning’. • Directs development to settlements that may not even have a defined development boundary (i.e. were not considered appropriate locations for development at Local Plan). • New development in unsustainable locations.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 47

Option Central theme Main areas of change Strategy emphases Strengths/ weaknesses • Arguably contrary to government guidance in the form of PPS7, particularly 4b. therefore cannot really be considered as a realistic alternative as a result. • May lead to additional strain on infrastructure and increased travel patterns. E Focus Two existing transport Economic development Strengths Development on corridors. led. • Facilitates greater commuting (north to Transport The two main trunk roads (A21 Emphasises London and Tunbridge Wells, south to Corridors and A259) and the two main rail strengthening Rother’s Hastings and Bexhill, and east to Kent). lines follow broadly similar role within wider South- • May have knock-on benefit of facilitating north/south (to London via East England context. regeneration of Hastings and Bexhill Robertsbridge) and east/west Emphasis on connectivity • Enhances Rother’s role in region. routes (to Ashford & Kent via to London (via A21) and • Helps re-enforces rail services. Rye). Europe (via Ashford, Weaknesses Folkestone, Dover) • Negative environmental impacts - may encourage commuting longer distances and more car travel. • Less incentive to provide jobs and facilities locally. • Possible negative impacts on village identity. • May lead to higher house prices and worsening affordability gap.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 48

Preferred Option for Village Housing Distribution policies and strategies for delivering the level of housing provision, 6.45 The five options have all been subject to including identifying broad locations sustainability appraisal (SA), the results of and specific sites that will enable which are published in Appendix 9. continuous delivery of housing for at Together with an assessment of the least 15 years from the date of options against the Core Strategy adoption. Rother’s LDF is expected Strategic Objectives this has helped to be adopted in 2010/2011. A inform the preferred option. fifteen year horizon from adoption will extend to the end of the plan 6.46 The preferred option for villages is a period in 2026. In effect, national combination of options including the planning guidance does not Service Centre (Option A), whilst taking normally allow the inclusion of into account environmental constraints, windfalls towards housing supply in local needs (Option B) and accessibility that period. (Option E). 6.52 In Table 2, 20 years worth of Preferred Housing Option for Individual Villages housing supply in rural villages is demonstrated. This will include 6.47 The rural housing distribution range for completions from the first 2 years of each village in Table 3 equates to the the 20 year period, supply from District-wide ‘Preferred Option’ of allocations, permissions that have approximately 60 dwellings per annum for not yet been completed as well as the rural area. new sites identified through the LDF. 6.48 The results also reflect the outcome of the sustainability appraisal process by 6.53 As Table 2 demonstrates, significant focussing on service centres whilst housing development already took moderating results to reflect individual place in the rural areas during the village needs and circumstances and first two years (2006-2008) of that incorporate other key factors (as detailed period. in Part Two: Village Appraisals). 6.54 Table 3 indicates where the Council 6.49 Although the preferred option for villages intends to meet the need through is to primarily focus on service centres, a allocations. number of villages that have not been defined as service villages have Phasing nonetheless been listed as potentially suitable for development. This is because 6.55 The LDF covers the period 2006 to the preferred option also takes into 2026. It is generally assumed that account other factors such as local needs, existing allocations will be environmental factors and accessibility. developed within the earlier stages of the plan period. In villages which 6.50 Equally, environmental constraints have have further proposed housing in moderated the level of growth considered addition to existing allocations, appropriate in some service villages. For these will preferably be developed in example, whilst Burwash is a local service the latter part of the plan period to village the extent of environmental and ensure a balanced phasing of heritage constraints are such that there development. are limited opportunities for development. 6.56 Proposals along the A21 may also Timing of Housing Development be more appropriate to develop in the latter half of the plan period to A Twenty Year Timescale allow for the resolution of uncertainty regarding the proposed 6.51 The LDF is planning to a twenty year A21 bypass route. timescale (2006-2026). National guidance in the form of PPS3 states that Local Other proposals may be developed at Planning Authorities should set out in intervals extending across the whole plan Local Development Documents their period to allow a gradual assimilation of

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 49 development with the existing villages. It is Cackle Street considered that this will be beneficial to the social Camber cohesion of existing villages. Catsfield Crowhurst Windfalls Etchingham Fairlight Cove 6.57 National planning guidance in the form of Flimwell PPS3 does not generally allow for the Four Oaks inclusion of windfalls in demonstrating a Guestling Green 15 year housing supply. Hurst Green Icklesham 6.58 However, Rother has a good track record Iden of bringing forward windfall housing Netherfield developments. Therefore in accordance Normans Bay with the principles of ‘Plan, Monitor, Northiam Manage’, regular monitoring of windfall Peasmarsh completions will be necessary to help Pett and Friars Hill inform appropriate levels of land release. Pett Level Windfall completions will generally occur Robertsbridge in villages with an established Sedlescombe development boundary, but government Staplecross planning policy (PPS3) prevents local Stonegate authorities from making an allowance for Three Oaks windfalls in demonstrating housing supply. Ticehurst Westfield Development Boundaries Westfield Lane Winchelsea 6.59 The housing growth that individual villages Winchelsea Beach will develop in the period to 2026 will not necessarily be accommodated by outward 6.62 Development boundaries are expansion on new allocations. Policy will established around all service allow for “internal growth” of other villages centre villages. However, as the within their development boundaries. above list indicates they are also Development boundaries serve to established around a number of determine the extent of village envelopes, other villages which offer a good within which infilling, redevelopment and range of local services, and changes of use are generally acceptable – therefore provide for infilling and subject to consideration against other redevelopment. However, not all policies in the plan. villages with development boundaries have been identified for 6.60 Local Plan Policy DS4 stipulates that housing allocations in Table 3 due settlements without development to the lack of opportunities available boundaries are generally covered by LDF for development of a sufficient scale policies relating to the wider countryside. to warrant an actual allocation At this stage it seems likely that the LDF (Allocations will consist of at least 6 will continue with this approach, although dwellings). there should still be an emphasis on retaining valued local services in all 6.63 However it can be expected that villages, whether or not the village has a windfalls in rural areas will development boundary. predominantly be within those villages with development 6.61 Those villages which have Local Plan boundaries. Development boundaries are as follows; 6.64 Smaller settlements without Beckley development boundaries will Brede generally be covered by policies Broad Oak relating to the wider countryside. Burwash Policy will generally resist the Burwash Common intensification of sporadic Burwash Weald development and existing smaller

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 50

settlements, for which there is no development boundary, whilst promoting sustainable land-based industries and sensitive diversification, primarily for employment uses.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 51

Table 2: Villages Housing Requirement Source Housing Numbers 2006/08 completions 298 Permissions not yet completed 396 Allocations Approx. 582 (see Table 3 for details) Approximate Dwellings provided 2006-2026 1250-1300

Table 3: Villages Housing Distribution - Preferred Option Village Current Unimplemented Proposed Additional Total Allocations Allocations Allocations Robertsbridge 46 10-55 55-100 Westfield 42 15-30 57-70 Ticehurst 0 15-60 15-60 Flimwell 24 10-25 35-50 Northiam 0 10-50 10-50 Broad Oak 0 10-50 10-50 Winchelsea Beach 0-50 0 0-50 Etchingham 17 0-25 17-40 Peasmarsh 0 10-40 10-40 Hurst Green 0 0-40 0-40 Catsfield 0 0-40 0-40 Fairlight Cove 17 0-20 17-35 Burwash 17 0-15 17-30 Camber 0 0-20 0-20 Icklesham 0 0-20 0-20 Iden 0 0-15 0-15 Crowhurst 0 0-15 0-15 Stonegate 0 0-15 0-15 Netherfield 0 0-15 0-15 Sedlescombe 0 0-10 0-10 Beckley 0 0-10 0-10 Brightling 0 0-10 0-10 Exception sites* 0 est.65* est. 65* TOTAL 188 Mid-Point=394 Mid-Point=582 *In accordance with the target for 65 exception sites as set out in the Housing Strategy for Rother 2007-2012

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 52

Business and Industrial Floorspace 6.71 This is mirrored in a number of 6.65 Whilst focussing in particular upon initiatives at local level housing, the preferred village spatial development option outlined will need 6.72 Action in Rural Sussex (AiRS) have supporting job growth. recently conducted a survey of village shops and are also 6.66 Given the information presented in investigating how they can be Appendix 5, several villages in particular supported. would probably benefit from more local employment opportunities, including: 6.73 The moves to establish a ‘Bodiam • Broad Oak Food Hub’, supported by SEEDA • Camber and Rother District Council will do • Hurst Green, much to promote local produce once • Winchelsea, Winchelsea Beach, established. Icklesham area. • Northiam Community Facilities & Open Space • Peasmarsh • Robertsbridge, 6.74 Rother District Council has produced a separate piece of • Sedlescombe evidence entitled ‘Open Sport & • Ticehurst / Flimwell area. Recreation Study’, as discussed in • Westfield. Section 3. This recommended a rural standard for a variety of types 6.67 Based on the information pulled together of open space as well producing in section 5e, development of small recommendations for new facilities workshops and office units needs to be on an area basis. encouraged across the rural area. This would be alongside housing development. 6.75 Wherever possible it is intended to help facilitate pressing local Local Shops community needs alongside development via developer’s 6.68 In Section 3, the summary of the ‘Rother contributions. It is expected that a District Wide Shopping Assessment forthcoming ‘Developer (2008)’ summarised the results of surveys Contributions LDD’ will address the of shopping patterns. These indicated that issue in more detail as part of most rural residents travel to drive to the Rother’s LDF. nearest large supermarket for their weekly shop, although they rely on local village 6.76 Local needs have been identified shops to a larger extent for secondary from a variety of sources including ‘top-up’ shopping. evidence studies, Parish Plans and responses to Rother District Council 6.69 In recent years, local village shops have LDF consultation processes. declined in number – to the detriment of both village community life and of 6.77 Part 2 ‘Village Appraisals’ identifies environmentally sustainable travel local needs for community facilities patterns. Section 3 also demonstrated and open space on a village by how this issue was at the forefront of rural village basis. residents concerns in their feedback to LDF consultation exercises. Infrastructure and Utilities

6.70 There are signs that these negative trends 6.78 All estimates of growth at individual could be reversed in the future. At a villages will be subject to further national level, there is evidence of an feasibility assessments with the increasing consumer propensity to favour various utilities bodies. They will all locally sourced organic goods. This may be subject to further investigation in be augmented by the affects of rising fuel the Strategic Housing Land prices reducing the cost benefits of driving Availability Assessment (SHLAA) further afield to large supermarkets. and statutory consultation in the forthcoming Site Allocations DPD.

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 53

Highways points were raised in relation to Robertsbridge, Peasmarsh and 6.79 At the Core Strategy Preferred Options Etchingham. Further consultation stage, the Highways Agency made a will be required with Water & number of comments of relevance to this Sewerage companies on this issue. proposed housing distribution. Of particular concern to the HA is Fire & Rescue Service development along the Strategic Road Network on the villages along the A21. 6.82 At the Core Strategy Preferred The HA commented that they expect that Options stage, the Fire & Rescue the traffic modelling work, being Service was also consulted. The undertaken as part of the Hastings Bexhill Service clarified their response Local Area Transport Strategy (HBLATS), targets for calls are 50% within 8 will be used to inform the Site Allocations minutes and 90% within 13 minutes. DPD and to ensure that development Their response time however for within this part of the District is located in rural locations is 15-18 minutes, sustainable areas. being dependant upon retained fire- fighter coverage. 6.80 The HA comment that their A21 model could be of use to assess the impact of 6.83 Due to this the Service has development within the villages along this requested that ALL new route. However, the HA comment that the developments in rural locations are level of development envisaged at the required to install domestic sprinkler villages is relatively small and the need systems. for, and scope of, an assessment at Core Strategy stage for these developments Education Authority would depend on the proximity of the sites to the A21 and the nature of the 6.84 Broadly speaking, the East Sussex development. Further investigations are County Council Education Authority ongoing. is supportive of housing development in rural areas ahead of Water & Sewerage Companies urban, in order to sustain viable rural primary schools. More detailed 6.81 At the Core Strategy Preferred Options information regarding individual stage, a number of Parish Council’s schools and individual areas is expressed disquiet regarding the impact of being produced. development on mains drainage and flooding due to surface run-off. These

Rother District Council Local Development Framework - Rural Settlements Study November 2008 54