Unless you are an avid watcher of development planning matters or have a particular interest, you might be forgiven for assuming that all is quiet on strategic planning matters affecting Rye. However, much is going forward.
The new Rother local plan
First, Rother District Council is updating its local plan (for 2023) and is required by national planning policy to undertake a housing and economic land availability assessment (HELAA). This work has been progressing from late last year and involves a re-assessment across the district of all developers’ site submissions with claimed potential for development for housing or business.
The last time this was done was for the strategic housing land availability assessment (SHLAA) (2010 – updated 2013). That formed part of the evidence for the current Rother plans: core strategy (adopted 2014) and the development and site allocations plan (adopted 2019). It also formed the start point for work on the Rye Neighbourhood Plan (made in 2019).
The Rye sites submitted in the latest round are a mixture of some from the neighbourhood plan and some which fall outside it. All are subject to determination of suitability, availability and achievability for development. Sustainability, as defined below, remains a key consideration.
“Sustainable development is the concept that people should meet their basic needs, while making sure that the future generations are able to meet their basic needs. Sustainable development looks to create a balance between the economic, environmental and social needs.”
Having completed its own comprehensive site re-assessment last November, Rye is in dialogue with Rother about the details of all new submissions. The 2019 Rye Neighbourhood Plan provides the basis of Rye’s considerations.
At the start of this work, we reminded Rother of text in the existing (Rother) core strategy which we see as continuing to apply.
“Due to its topographical and landscape context and statutory designations, Rye is heavily constrained and further opportunity for development on the periphery of the town is confined. The strategy for Rye (and Rye Harbour) is the development of key sites and infill within the built up urban area.”
This approach is important to many planning in Rye, who seek to maintain the underlying principle that the character of Rye should be conserved. Despite Rother requiring more dwellings to meet its target, natural constraints provide key arguments against those proposals that aspire to go beyond the existing Rye development boundary, into areas of high flood risk and onto land in protected categories, such as the area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB), saltmarsh and green areas.
It is also accepted by Rother that the current work should ensure that the Rother strategy is synchronised with all existing neighbourhood plans. For this we have been reassured by Rother’s text:
“HELAA will be an ‘evidence-base’ document to aid plan making and not a statement of council policy. It will not pre-empt or prejudice any future council decisions about sites, nor will it determine whether a site should be allocated for future development, as that is the role of a local plan or a neighbourhood plan. It will not determine whether a site should be granted planning permission.”
The Rother HELAA is scheduled to be published in the spring for wide consideration and formal reconciliation with all made neighbourhood plans. At that stage it will be decided whether the made neighbourhood plans remain relevant, for instance, because of climate change impacts.
Current proposals
Secondly, there are proposals coming forward for residential development in parts of Rye. Some conform to the neighbourhood plan; some do not. One contentious example is the proposal for the dwellings alongside the railway in Mill Lane. 2753 RR/2019/840/P. This was first refused and then appealed. A national inspector has just dismissed the appeal on grounds, mostly covered in the neighbourhood plan, including flood risk, difficulties of access and parking, loss of greenery and overdevelopment, particularly in such close proximity to the railway line and the Ferry Road crossing.
The inspector’s report chimes with many of the factors that were applied to the non allocation (for development) of some sites considered by the neighbourhood plan.
Major issues
Thirdly, there are fundamental planning issues which are being addressed, such as ways to provide “affordable or first homes”. There is little early prospect of any of these from land allocated in the neighbourhood plan because developers so far have argued successfully with Rother that to do so would not be viable. With so much of Rye’s housing stock being sold for second homes or for letting, including Airbnb, this remains a significant challenge.
There are sites such as the former Tilling Green school, where an earlier scheme for affordable homes was planned but withdrawn. We look to East Sussex County Council, which owns some of Rye’s brownfield sites to support local initiatives to provide such housing.
There is much more, such as the first receipts of community infrastructure levy which Rye Town Council have to allocate to essential infrastructure and serious planning enforcement issues where developers have pushed the envelope too far.
All this work is recorded for the public at regular Rye Town Council planning and townscape meetings. Future developments will be recorded as they occur.
Image Credits: Anthony Kimber .
Any plans for social housing?
Before build more housing it’s time to build new road by pass fish market road and undercliff and bridge across river. Present road can’t take much more with cliff constantly moving.
Janet. Certainly there are aspirations. We have been talking about a potential scheme for some time but we depend on support from partners, mostly for the land. Expect to hear more in the near future.
It will be interesting now the pandemic is nearly over, when the developers will start clearing the eyesore in ferry road, this site it seems where they say its not viable to build social or affordable homes,but they will sit on it as house prices go through the roof in Rye,until the planning nearly runs out to maximise profits, its high time Councils reduce to 2 years the time, when building must start, over the past few years we have seen flood plains being built on in Rye, Western barn,and rock channel come to mind, and then tilling Green gets refused, the double standards of developers,and Councils is mind boggling.
Jason. Thanks. Bypass history (and the options considered from July 1992) was reconsidered at length during work on the plan. See the evidence paper on the Rother – Rye Neighbourhood Plan website . A recent exchange (2020) on the subject is linked below. At the time of the final draft of the plan, government policy was that there would be no significant roadwork between Hastings and Brenzett.
I can say that traffic and parking issues identified in the plan, posed the most difficult to resolve. In some cases there was no consensus and we had to compromise.
In reality, when one looks at the histories of say, the Newbury or Winchester bypasses,.we also concluded that there were enough challenges in getting the plan over the line to Referendum without including protracted and potentially divisive debate about a bypass.
https://www.ryenews.org.uk/opinions/finally-time-for-a-bypass