ROGATE AND RAKE
NEIGHBOURHOOD
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Consultation Statement
August 2020
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 2
GLOSSARY
ANGS Accessible Natural Green Space
BAP Biodiversity Action Plan
BOA Biodiversity Opportunity Area
CDC Chichester District Council
GI Green Infrastructure
HA Housing Association
LDF Local Development Framework
LEAF Linking Environment and Farming
LGS Local Green Space
LNR Local Nature Reserve
NNR National Nature Reserve
PMP Partnership Management Plan
POS Public Open Space
PROW Public Rights of Way
RPC Rogate Parish Council
Ramsar Wetland site of international importance defined by the Ramsar Convention
R&RNDP Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan
SAC Special Area of Conservation
SAM Scheduled Ancient Monument
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SINC Site of Importance for Nature Conservation
SNCI Site of Nature Conservation Importance
SAM Scheduled Ancient Monument
SDNPA South Downs National Park Authority
SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (by the SDNPA)
SPA Special Protection Area
SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest
SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage System
UKBAP United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan
VG Village Green
WHS World Heritage Site
WSCC West Sussex County Council
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 3
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan ................................................................. 4
Figure 1.1 Designated R&RNDP Area 2020 ................................................................................... 4
Figure 1.2. Boundary Change Area 2019 ................................................................................... 5
1.2 Governance and Process ............................................................................................................ 5
1.3 Evidence Base File Index ............................................................................................................ 6
1.4 Evolution of the R&RNDP ........................................................................................................... 7
2. CONSULTATION PROCESS ..................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Rogate Parish Plan ..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Steering Committee ................................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Website ..................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4 Email Database .......................................................................................................................... 8
2.5 Rogate and Terwick News .......................................................................................................... 9
2.6 Posters and Notices ................................................................................................................... 9
2.7 Parish Council Minutes .............................................................................................................. 9
2.8 Questionnaire Survey ................................................................................................................ 9
2.9 Housing Needs Survey ............................................................................................................. 10
2.10 Pre-Submission Consultation ................................................................................................... 10
3. LIAISON WITH SDNPA ......................................................................................................... 11
3.1 During Development of R&RNDP ............................................................................................. 11
4. WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC MEETINGS ................................................................................... 11
4.1 Studio LK Planning Advice ........................................................................................................ 11
4.2 Workshop and Main Findings ................................................................................................... 12
4.3 Public Meetings ....................................................................................................................... 12
5. QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY ................................................................................................... 13
5.1 Survey Form ............................................................................................................................ 13
5.2 Response Rates ........................................................................................................................ 13
5.3 Main Findings .......................................................................................................................... 13
6. POTENTIAL SITES FOR DEVELOMENT .................................................................................. 16
7. PLAN DRAFTING PROCESS .................................................................................................. 17
7.1 Vision, Objectives and Policies ................................................................................................. 17
8. PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION – JUNE 2017 .................................................................. 17
8.1 Consultees ............................................................................................................................... 17
8.2 Responses ................................................................................................................................ 18
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 19
1 Governance and Process Document ................................................................................................. 19
2 Evidence Base File Index ................................................................................................................... 19
3 Terms of Reference for Steering Committee ..................................................................................... 19
4 Posters and Notices .......................................................................................................................... 19
5 CDC Housing Need Survey Report ..................................................................................................... 19
6 Studio LK Brief .................................................................................................................................. 19
7 Studio LK Report and Workshop Output ........................................................................................... 19
8 Questionnaire Survey Form .............................................................................................................. 19
9 Questionnaire Results Analysis ......................................................................................................... 19
10 Response to Pre-Submission Consultation June 2017 ...................................................................... 19
11 Development Sites Background Paper July 2015 ............................................................................. 19
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 4
Figures
Figure 1.1 Designated R&RNDP Area 2019 ................................................................................................ 4
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan
1.1.1 The Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan (R&RNDP) relates to the whole of
Rogate civil parish which is designated as the Neighbourhood Area (see Figure 1.1).
1.1.2 Up and till 1 April 2019 the parish also included the north-eastern part of Nyewood but on
that date the boundary between Rogate Parish and Harting Parish was amended by
Chichester District Council. Consequently the designated R&RNDP area was also amended
by SDNPA in September 2020 and the current area is shown in Figure 1.1 and the area of
change in Figure 1.2. Consultations undertaken before 1 April 2019 covered the old
designated area.
Figure 1.1 Designated R&RNDP Area 2020
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 5
Figure 1.2. Boundary Change Area 2019
1.1.3 The local planning authority is South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) and its
Planning Committee agreed the designation on 14 March 2013.
1.1.4 Rogate Parish Council (RPC) is the qualifying body for the R&RNDP and the parish is wholly
within the National Park. The local housing authority is Chichester District Council.
1.1.5 The Consultation Statement (CS) accompanies the R&RNDP Submission document and the
R&RNDP Basic Conditions Statement.
1.2 Governance and Process
1.2.1 Governance and Process document (Appendix 1) dated 19
th
of June 2013 was agreed in
concert with Andrew Triggs and Richard Dollaware of SDNPA and County Councillor
Gordon McAra. This document preceded any work on the plan’s construction. The
document provides a framework for the process and was lodged throughout on the plan’s
website for local inspection.
1.2.2 The document also sets out key criteria for the process including the development of a
shared vision for the neighbourhood, choosing where new homes and other development
should be built, identifying and protecting important local green spaces and, finally,
influencing the type and look of any new buildings.
1.2.3 The document crucially identified several conditions precedent to the process including the
following:
• The setting up of an independent steering committee comprised of 7-12 parishioners
and other value-adding individuals to contribute technical and oversight skills to the
process;
• Mandating an independent agency to help the parish with its process (here, Studio
LK, run by a former director of the Prince’s Trust for the Build Environment and
recommended by officers of SDNPA);
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 6
• Definition of the scope and reach of the process;
• Use of a questionnaire to identify issues that the community might want covered
(that questionnaire to be reviewed in advance by interested authorities);
• The setting up of a website to disseminate the questionnaire, minutes, presentations
and information on events and public meetings;
• A database to record email addresses of parishioners who voiced interest in being
involved, to keep parishioners up to date with the process and to manage the NP’s
questionnaire initiative;
• A rigorous framework to disseminate the plan’s updates as well as to log both
questionnaire responses and parishioner comments throughout the process;
• Writing and dissemination of minutes on all such events;
• Involvement of the Parish Council throughout the process.
1.2.4 It was also noted that the Parish already had an existing plan (the 2007 Plan) and it was
agreed that this should provide a useful foundation to develop further the NP’s shared
vision for the parish.
1.3 Evidence Base File Index
1.3.1 Evidence Base File Index (Appendix 2) catalogues 105 pieces of evidence covering the
period from 2013 to 2015. The files retained by Rogate Parish Council for reference and
inspection.
1.3.2 The evidence base recorded the following:
• all initiatives,
• documents,
• drafts,
• plans,
• commentary from parishioners,
• public meeting information,
• budgets,
• grant funding submissions,
• adjoining neighbourhood plan drafts,
• input from Chichester district Council,
• input from SDNPA,
• evidence arising from the formal enquiry by the design process,
• evidence arising from the questionnaire process (including its construction,
dissemination, correlation, coding and analysis),
• the plan’s appendix process,
• all annotations and manuscript edits,
• any other relevant information for subsequent inspection.
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 7
1.3.3 Material from both documents are used below to underpin this consultation statement.
1.4 Evolution of the R&RNDP
1.4.1 The R&RNDP processes can be divided into two phases.
• The first lasted from initiation in January 2013 to October 2015 and comprised a
formal enquiry by design process, a series of public meetings, steering committee
meetings, a questionnaire survey and the writing of a draft plan document. Version
20 of the R&RNDP was subsequently submitted to Pre-Submission Consultation in
October 2015 and did not allocate sites suitable for development.
• The second phase was from December 2015 to September 2018 during which time
the process was managed by Rogate Parish Council. Following SDNPA consultation
comments, specific sites suitable for development were identified and the vision,
objectives and policies were reviewed and rationalised. A second Pre-Submission
Consultation was undertaken in June 2017.
2. CONSULTATION PROCESS
2.1 Rogate Parish Plan
2.1.1 A Parish Plan for Rogate was prepared in 2007.
2.2 Steering Committee
2.2.1 The public meeting on for 22 May 2013 agreed the appointment of the Project Manager,
Paddy Walker, and an initial Steering Committee (SC). The composition of the SC evolved
during the development of the plan, but the main members and their roles and status
were:
Member
Role / Topic
Status
Ann Arnold
Communications, old/young
Shopkeeper, Later RPC Councillor
Charles Hicks
Compliance, planning
Resident and Chartered Surveyor
Elizabeth Brown
Community
RPC Councillor
Eric Piper
Parsonage, old/young
Resident
Gordon McAra
County Council issues
WSCC Councillor
James Stock
Traffic
Resident and businessman
Johnny Gray
Design, build, planning
Resident and Architect
Ken Frievokh
Design, build, planning
Resident and Architect
Marcus Batty
Community
Resident and Businessman
Miranda Montagu
Design, build, old/young
Resident and Architect
Nick Jacobs
Planning, design
Resident and Chartered Surveyor
Nick Keith
Co-editor, Community, legal
Resident and Businessman
Paddy Cox
Community, sustainability,
energy
Resident and Landowner
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 8
Paddy Walker
Chairman, initial Editor
Resident and Developer
Peter Davey
Farming
Resident, Farmer and Landowner
Sarah O’Brien-Twohig
Community
RPC Councillor
Seb Price
Public realm, build, Rake
Resident and Architect
Shon Sprackling
Farming, land, economy
RPC Councillor
Simon Ward
Land, forestry, economy
Resident and Chartered Surveyor
Stephen Taylor
Communications,
community
Resident
Steve Williamson
Transport, Rake and later
Final Editor
RPC Councillor
Val Dexter
Parsonage, community,
old/young
Resident, later RPC Councillor
2.2.2 In order to cover the wide range and number of issues, SC members were allocated specific
topics (as indicated in the above table) and were assigned associated author and/or editor
roles.
2.2.3 Terms of Reference for the SC members were drawn up – Appendix 3.
2.2.4 The first SG meeting agreed that it was important to recognise the two villages in the
parish and so decided to call the Plan the Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development
Plan.
2.3 Website
2.3.1 The website was created by a sub-group of the Plan’s steering committee. It was
coordinated and run by a third-party commercial entity in Petersfield. The site has
remained open since its inception in 2013 and houses all draft documents, information on
the project’s process and communications, details of the broad parish questionnaire survey
together with interesting links relevant to the plan’s process.
2.3.2 The website also houses in chronological order the significant versions of the plan. It also
incorporates for public inspection all public meeting presentational materials together with
the plan’s several appendices.
2.3.3 The website was deliberately created in order to set out the project’s aims and references.
It details the reasons behind the project together with its core objectives and details on the
plan’s writing. The website was also structured such that any parishioner could get
feedback or ask questions on the process. Finally, the site was instrumental in informing
parishioners about the forthcoming events, forums and other planned developments.
2.4 Email Database
2.4.1 Started during the initial Studio LK submission phase of the Plan, the database has been
expanded and maintained throughout the time of the plan’s writing. Names and email
addresses were voluntarily provided at all public forums and plan events (in order to
evidence attendance) and, with those parishioners’ permission, the database has been
used throughout the process to alert its constituents on future events, public consultation
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 9
and to circulate at all points during the process copies of the current draft of the plan.
Some 240 names, approximately 45% of the area’s households, are represented on that
list.
2.5 Rogate and Terwick News
2.5.1 Articles explaining the progress and consultation meetings have appeared regularly in the
Rogate and Terwick News (R&T News) which is distributed monthly to about 400
households in the parish and some just beyond. The dates of these references are given
below.
2013
2014
2015
2017
2018
2019
2020
April
January
February
March
April
February
October
May
February
April
September
October
June
March
May
October
November
July
April
September
November
August
May
October
December
September
June
October
July
November
August
December
September
October
November
December
2.6 Posters and Notices
2.6.1 Examples of the posters and notices used to publicise public meetings, surveys and other
events are given in Appendix 4.
2.7 Parish Council Minutes
2.7.1 The Parish Council meets every month and the agenda always includes the Neighbourhood
Plan item. Consequently, every month there is an update which is minuted and these
minutes are published on Notice Boards and the Council’s website.
2.8 Questionnaire Survey
2.8.1 The questionnaire process was a key component of the plan’s writing. Content of the
questionnaire went through several iterations within the steering committee and was
agreed in advance with both the Parish Council and SDNPA. The questionnaire process was
run by the steering committee and involved three methods of circulation to ensure
maximum participation. First, hardcopies of the questionnaire were hand-dropped to the
majority of the Parish dwellings. In addition, the survey was mounted on the plan’s website
in order for parishioners to complete the document on-line. Finally, hard copies of the
Parish’s questionnaire were launched at the two public houses and two post offices.
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 10
2.8.2 The questionnaire comprised several sections. The first solicited answers on the character
of the Parish. In particular, it sought to rank the importance of several rural characteristics
and to establish their importance in parishioners’ life. Its second section quizzed
parishioners about housing in the area. The third section asked about building
development and land use changes including where in the Parish respondents would like to
see development taking place in the future. Section Four then sought to identify
parishioners’ attitudes to local amenities and facilities, to ask about possible new facilities,
about schools (section five), transport (section six) and work/employment (section seven).
The Questionnaire finished by establishing the demographics of those answering the
survey.
2.8.3 The analytical evidence gathered from the questionnaire process was subsequently
reviewed and its voracity endorsed by a third party: an independent firm of accountants.
Chapter 5 provides details of the response rates and main findings.
2.9 Housing Needs Survey
2.9.1 In June 2017, the Parish Council and Chichester District Council jointly undertook a local
Housing Needs Survey of the parish (Appendix 5). In total 244 (38%) households
representing 588 household members provided valid returns and the key findings are as
follows:
o
Local housing need for:
§ Market Housing
• 3-8 Market purchased units
• up to 6 Market rented units
• equals up to 14 Market units
• assume average of 8 Market units in total
§ Assisted Housing
• 14-22 Affordable rented units
• up to 10 shared ownership units
• equals up to 32 Assisted units
• assume average of 23 Assisted units in total
o
Most need is from:
§ Younger people want 1 bedroom flats and 2 bedroom houses
§ Downsizers wanting 1/2/3 bedroom bungalows
o
Development
§ 2 or more sites in both Rogate and Rake was supported by 87% of
respondents
§ 55% (excluding no responses) support between 10 and 20 units in total
§ overall average support is for 28 units in total.
2.9.2 The CDC Housing Need Survey Report is included in Appendix 5.
2.10 Pre-Submission Consultation
2.10.1 Version 20 of the R&RNDP was submitted to Pre-Submission Consultation in October 2015.
Crucially, based on advice from SDNPA planning officers, it did not allocate sites any
suitable for development. The consultation process resulted in 14 pages of comments
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 11
from SDNPA including that there were no development sites allocated and the authority
expected a site(s) for11 dwellings to be identified within Rogate.
2.10.2 Consequently, the development of the plan was halted. Given the need to now identify
sites, the Parish Council decided to take over the development of the plan and embarked in
a significant reviewing, editing and rewriting process to reduce the length of the document
and increase its accessibility and clarity.
2.10.3 Given the significant change in the housing policies since, the 2015 Pre-Submission
Consultation is not fully document here but is available should it be necessary.
2.10.4 Following the major revisions that included sites suitable for development the R&RNDP
went through another round of public consultations and approvals by the Parish Council,
culminating in June 2017 with a second round of Pre-Submission Consultations. These are
reported in Chapter 7.
3. LIAISON WITH SDNPA
3.1 During Development of R&RNDP
3.1.1 Between 2013 and 2017, the plan underwent 31 iterations. A substantive number of these
drafts were copied to planning officers at SDNPA.
3.1.2 In addition, members of SDNPA were invited to all the public meetings (some of which they
attended). At key points of the process, meetings were held with the organisation’s
relevant planning officers in order to gain guidance and evidence compliance.
3.1.3 In 2015, acting on advice from SDNPA officers, a decision was taken by the SC to remove
from the Plan any specification of sites suitable for development. This version (V20) of the
R&RNDP was extensively circulated and discussed with SDNPA officers and subsequently
went to Pre-Submission consultation in October 2015. Nonetheless, as part of that
consultation SDNPA table a considerable number of comments including that the Plan did
not allocate developable sites for the 11 dwelling the authority had calculated and
allocated to the Rogate Settlement Area.
3.1.4 As a result, the Plan development was halted and a major rethink undertaken. During 2016
and 2017 further liaison and consultation took place with SDNPA officers as sites suitable
for development were reconsidered and finalised.
4. WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC MEETINGS
4.1 Studio LK Planning Advice
4.1.1 A letter dated 21st of August 2013 from the studio LK Limited sets out the understanding
of need as well as the eight topic areas to be covered by the NP (scale, mix and location of
development, affordable housing, business and the local economy, traffic and movement,
environment, a young and old, community and recreational interest as well as other parish
specific issues). The purpose of the studio LK brief was also to build upon the 2007 parish
plan.
4.1.2 Their brief (Appendix 6) was to undertake a collaborative design process, to establish
community capital, to identify stakeholders and create an appropriate evidence base for a
final neighbourhood plan. The process also included a program of workshop events and
follow-up telephone calls with members of the steering committee.
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 12
4.1.3 The Studio LK element of the NP process cost £11,750 which, in the main, was funded by a
grant from Central government topped up by a contribution from the Parish Council.
4.2 Workshop and Main Findings
4.2.1 A three-day open session workshop was organised by Studio LK on 27 to 29 October 2013
in Rogate Village Hall. Detailed map plans were laid out with transparency overlays
enabling notes to be written, sketches drawn and post-its added. The purpose was to
record the issues raised by the attendees and in particular to explore sites that might be
suitable for development. The resultant maps and overlays were recorded and are
presented in Appendix 7.
4.2.2 In total there were nine potential development sites identified. These far more than was
required as SDNPA had stipulated only 11 dwellings were expected in Rogate.
Unfortunately, the reporting of the workshop conclusions led to the belief that the
neighbourhood plan was going to include all the sites with a total of over 60 dwellings.
This was clearly not the case but the mis-information raised considerable concerns about
the process and generated a defensive view of the planning process instead of promoting
the opportunities of safeguarding that it provided.
4.3 Public Meetings
4.3.1 The following public meetings were undertaken with posters and emails advertising the
events beforehand:
11
th
May 2013
Rogate Village Hall
initial neighbourhood plan meeting, Parish
Council and NP team
22
nd
May 2013,
Rogate Village Hall
Public meeting to launch NP
19
th
and 20
th
July 2013
Rogate Village Hall
Rake Village Hall
two day presentation and governance
meeting
23
rd
August 2013,
Rogate Village Hall
CDC Housing and public meeting
October 2013,
Rogate Village Hall
CDC presentation to parish council on housing
requirements;
27
th
to 29
th
October 2013,
Rogate Village Hall
Studio LK design process presentation
followed by workshop open to public
20
th
October 2013
Rogate Village Hall
Inaugural meeting of plan steering committee
8
th
December 2013
Rogate Village Hall
Public Meeting on Workshop findings
9
th
February 2014,
Rogate Village Hall
Public meeting explaining questionnaire
23
rd
February 2014
Rogate Village Hall
Public meeting explaining questionnaire
2
nd
March 2014
Rake Village Hall
Public Meeting explaining questionnaire
4
th
April 2014
Rogate Village Hall
Public meeting providing general update
12
th
October 2014,
Rogate Village Hall
public meeting to discuss questionnaire
output
8
th
February 2015,
Rogate Village Hall
Public Meeting update
21
st
March 2015
Rogate Village Hall
Public Meeting and Workshop
20
th
September 2015
Rogate Village Hall
Public meeting providing general update
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 13
8
th
December 2016,
Rogate Village Hall
Public Meeting on Policies and Development
sites
20
th
April 2017
Rogate Village Hall
Public Meeting on Policies and Development
Sites
4.3.2 In addition, progress on the R&RDNP has been included on the agendas of each Annual
Parish Meeting (open to all) since 2013.
5. QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
5.1 Survey Form
5.1.1 The questionnaire was developed from contributions supplied by the Topic Leaders and
reviewed and rationalised to manageable proportions. The final questionnaire is in
Appendix 8.
5.2 Response Rates
5.2.1 243 individual responses were received to the questionnaire, equating to 16% of all the
parishioners (1556) living in the Parish and potentially up to 38% of the 639 households
currently in the Parish – although more than one questionnaire form is likely to have been
returned for some of these households.
5.3 Main Findings
5.3.1 The responses to the questionnaire survey are presented in Appendix 9 as a series of
quantitative graphs, as a written summary and interpretation and a summary of the
qualitative data. A summary of the interpretation of the results for each question is
provided below.
• Q1 How important are the environmental characteristics of the Parish?
Overall, a broad consensus exists in the parish that a very high importance is placed
on the natural environmental and the wellbeing of residents. This finding suggests
that people in the parish are generally supportive of overarching guiding principles of
Sustainability to guide future development and land usage in the Parish.
• Q2 How important are the characteristics to your enjoyment of living in the Parish?
A high value placed on both the natural environment and on community and
personal well-being. People appear more ambivalent about the strength of
community cohesiveness in the Parish. Community cohesiveness may be more
fragmented than the responses appear to suggest. (This conclusion is supported by
the qualitative data in which many people in Rogate felt unable to express
preferences for the settlements near Rake, and vice versa).
• Q3 What issues are you most concerned about?
Many of the 18 ‘issues’ listed are by their nature more likely to adversely affect only a
minority of the population in the Parish. Therefore, if responses were guided mainly
by concern for the respondents’ personal situation, the charts may mask the
significance of concerns to the wellbeing of the community as a whole. For example,
despite the parish being an affluent area, any minority of less well-off residents may
have deep and possibly justified concerns about the costs or access to basic services
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 14
and facilities. Furthermore, although the charts indicate low concern about “Over-
crowding in current accommodation”, some level of concern exists and warrants
further attention, as it may be considered socially undesirable to tolerate any families
living in overcrowded accommodation at all. Again, whist more “local employment”
may be considered desirable as a long-term Sustainability objective (so more young
people can remain in the Parish), a respondent currently enjoying secure
employment outside the Parish, may not consider this aspect as a current concern at
the personal level but may agree about the need for more local employment
generally.
• Q4 Future availability of housing in the Parish
Responses to this question suggests a broad reluctance for significant housing
development in the Parish, balanced by a recognition that targeted housing may be
needed to meet specific housing needs in the community.
• Q5 Does housing adequately meet needs of community?
The concept of Sustainability includes supporting the wellbeing of the community.
The findings in this question suggest that people generally endorse such a notion of
community. It is notable that people reveal a moderate interest in the allocation of
housing to key workers, land-based workers and lower-income members of the
community, even in the absence of evidence presented in this survey of the needs of
these groups. Implicit is the acknowledgement that successful and cohesive
communities rely upon a range of occupations and that the valued natural
environment requires careful management. Market forces alone cannot offer such
services to the community.
• Q6 What scale of new development would you like to see?
Most respondents selected the lowest available band of unit numbers above zero in
all categories of development except for “retail provision”. The broad pattern of
responses represents a conservative appraisal of the possible scale of any future
development in the Parish.
• Q7 Where would you like to see any new development?
A significant minority (45%) of respondents chose either to not answer this question
or considered all the suggested areas as “highly unsuitable” for development. A wide
spread of views was recorded about the suitability of the listed areas for future
development. Three areas of proposed development attracting the greatest number
of “Highly unsuitable” responses were located around the centre of Rogate village:
“Land in the centre of Rogate Village”, “Land west of Rogate Village Hall” and “Land
surrounding the Rogate Rec Ground”. Only the “Land opposite Rake Garden Centre”
and “Rogate Renault Garage and land south of A272” recorded greater numbers of
“very suitable” responses than other responses, although in both cases similar
number of respondents chose not to answer this question. The community appears
unwilling to accept all the development proposed by a consultant’s report, which
may alter the historical, architectural and cultural setting of Rogate village. This does
not equate to an anti-development sentiment, as other areas in the Parish (ie Rake)
are regarded as more suitable for future development and land use change.
• Q8 What form of housing development is acceptable?
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 15
The pattern of responses to this question revealed no broad consensus on the
acceptable clustering of future housing development in the Parish, and a marginal
preference for building conversions, extensions and clustering within existing
settlements. Significantly, over 50% of people chose not to provide an answer for
either option involving housing development in a “single grouping” or in a “number
of smaller developments”. When considered together with other findings here that
suggest an acknowledgment of the need for future development to meet the needs
of the community, it appears, from the high number of uncommitted respondents in
this question, that a debate over spatial clustering and distribution of any new
housing in the Parish requires more informed consideration.
• Q9 What form of workplace development is acceptable?
Significant minority preferred not to cluster new workplaces “in a single grouping”
but instead to distribute these “near to main highways”. Nevertheless, broadly the
respondents were ambivalent, with a significant minority choosing not to answer the
question. These findings suggest that tacit acknowledgement that workplaces with
good access are needed in the Parish and locating them needs to be done sensitively.
• Q10 How important are facilities?
Responses suggested that “Vehicle garage services” in the Parish were not important
to over 50% of people, while “Allotments in Hugo Platt” were generally considered as
of mixed importance. The former is likely to reflect the lack of vehicle fuel depots in
the Parish and the ability of people to travel by private transport to obtain fuel
outside the Parish. The latter is likely to reflect the diminished provision of allotments
and the inappropriateness of confining these to area of predominantly sheltered
housing – although these clearly remain of significant importance to some people.
Significant minorities of people chose not to answer the question relating to “Pubs”
and to “Playgrounds” in the Parish, which the qualitative data suggests may relate to
the level of personal use by some respondents rather than a judgement on the
importance of these two facilities to the community as a whole. The current range of
facilities in the Parish is regarded as being important to the wellbeing of the
community. It is reasonable to suggest that the sustainability of the community
would be affected by any changes in the range and level of facilities currently enjoyed
in the Parish.
• Q11 How important are additional new facilities?
“Moderate importance” ascribed to new facilities in the Parish may not reflect a view
about a known need for such facilities, but rather may suggest the availability of a
range of facilities outside the Parish is considered satisfactory to many respondents.
In terms of community wellbeing and resilience, less dependency on facilities that
require more travel and higher access costs would improve the long-term
Sustainability of the community.
• Q12 How to fund community projects?
In terms of promoting the wellbeing and addressing the needs of all residents and
visitors in the Parish, the ambivalent responses suggest that greater public debate
and consensus building on this matter would be useful and necessary prior to any
attempt to short-list or rule out potential community projects.
• Q13 How good are educational facilities?
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 16
The availability and suitability of out of school, informal and later-life learning
experiences in the Parish appear to be largely unknown to many respondents. In
terms of equipping the community to adapt and flourish in a rapidly changing world,
it would be beneficial to promote greater awareness of and participation through
such auxiliary learning experiences relevant to local conditions and circumstances.
• Q14 How good are transport facilities?
Parking amenity, sense of road safety and road maintenance in the Parish were all
rated “Poor” by most respondents, while a substantial minority rated pedestrian or
cycle access and footpaths as “Satisfactory”. Most people rated bus services as
either “Unknown” or “Poor”. “Parking at home” (both on-street and off-street)
attracted an even spread (roughly) of ratings. Generally low ratings assigned to local
public parking amenity and the condition of public highways road maintenance
suggests a reliance on private vehicle travel that is not adequately supported by local
transport infrastructure. Good standards of foot and cycle access is important to
using and encouraging more sustainable modes of transport, the poor to moderate
rating given by respondents in this question suggests that the community would
benefit from improving and extending such provision.
• Q16 What priority for supporting local businesses and employment?
Promoting new local employment opportunities, reducing local fuel poverty and
minimising climate change impacts of energy consumption are fundamental to the
prospects of a more sustainable community. The findings here suggest that this point
is not widely appreciated and furthermore suggest a paucity of younger participants
in the survey. Support for existing (especially farming) businesses and promoting the
responsible use of local natural resources currently appear to be the preference of
most respondents, which would contribute positively to the flourishing of the
community as a whole, if widely supported.
6. POTENTIAL SITES FOR DEVELOMENT
6.1.1 Following the Enquiry by Design consultation process a number of development sites were
identified. These were evaluated culminating in a report in July 2015 – see Appendix 11.
Further discussions were held with SDNPA at that time and it was decided to not to specify
development sites in the R&RNDP that would go to Pre-Submission Consultation in
October 2015.
6.1.2 Subsequently in 2016 the Parish Council took back the preparation process and resolved to
include sites suitable for development. In addition to the two sites finally included in the
Plan, a site at 1-4 Parsonage was also seriously considered. It would involve demolishing
four houses and constructing 8 3-bed semi-detached houses and a car park for 24 vehicles.
6.1.3 Strong views were expressed at the consultation against development on the Parsonage
but for the need for additional parking spaces since the garages site has been lost to
development. The Council initially thought that a smaller development of eight units plus
an off-street car park would work but subsequent discussions cast doubt about the viability
of such a development. It was also recognised that with the recent development next to 77
Parsonage and the redevelopment of the garages site, there was probably enough change
in the area.
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 17
6.1.4 As the two other sites proposed on the R&RNDP met the number of dwellings indicated by
SDNPA, the Parish Council resolved to drop the site at 1-4 Parsonage.
7. PLAN DRAFTING PROCESS
7.1 Vision, Objectives and Policies
7.1.1 As has been described in this document and the R&RNDP Submission document, the
preparation of the policies for the Plan spanned a number of years. However, the main
components of the Vision were established by the SC early on and always presented at
public meetings for discussion and agreement. Similarly, the topics of the objectives were
established early on and allocated to individuals from the SC.
7.1.2 The 2015 version of the R&RNDP that went to Pre-Submission consultation in October
2015 was a very long document that did not clearly set out the policies under each of the
objectives and in many cases the policies overlapped resulting on a lack of clarity.
Following that consultation process a major review was undertaken.
7.1.3 During 2016 the vision, objectives and policies were refined to eliminate duplication and
ambiguity and to ensure they were comprehensive across all necessary policy areas. The
work was undertaken by a working group of Parish Councillors and the results presented at
a number of public meetings as well as being report at council meetings.
8. PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION – JUNE 2017
8.1 Consultees
8.1.1 The Pre-Submission Consultation is divided in to two groups: the statutory consultees and
the general public. In total 40 statutory consultees (see table below) were emailed the
Pre-Submission R&RNDP document (Version 31) on 20 June 2017 with a closing date of 1
August 2017. SDNPA then explained that its Planning Committee that would consider the
document and agree comments would sit on 10 August 2017. Consequently, it was
decided, in consultation, with SDNPA officers to extend the consultation period until 18
August 2017 and a subsequent email was sent to all consultees on 3 July 2017.
Statutory Consultees
National
Organisations
Statutory
Undertakers
Local Authorities
Parish Councils
Local
Organisations
English Heritage
BT Openreach
Coast 2 Coast LEP
Harting PC
Bowling Club
Environment Agency
South East Water
CDC Planning
Liss PC
Little Angels
Forestry Commission
Southern Gas
Networks
CDC Housing
Milland PC
Lunch Club
Highways Agency
Southern Water
NHS Coastal W
Sussex CCG
Sheet PC
Milland Church
Historic England
Scottish and
Southern Electricity
NHS S East Hants
CCG
Trotton and
Chithurst PC
R&T News
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 18
Homes and
Communities Agency
SDNPA Planners
Rake School
Marine Management
Organisation
SDNPA Mineral
Waste
Rogate PCC
National Grid
WSCC Highways
Rogate School
National Trust
Rogate Society
Natural England
Rogate Tennis Club
Network rail
Rogate Village Hall
Woodland Trust
Sussex Wildlife
Trust
Thursday Club
Youth Club
8.1.2 For the general public, the R&RDNP email database was used to notify them of the Pre-
Submission Consultation, the closing date and how and where to obtain a copy of the
R&RNDP document ie to contact the Clerk for a copy or to inspect a copy at Rogate Village
Shop, Rake Garden Centre and Flying Bull PH. In total, emails went to 216 individuals,
businesses and organisations both on 20 June and on 3 July 2017.
8.2 Responses
8.2.1 A total of 21 responses were received from Statutory Consultees and five from members of
the public – see Appendix 10. The most substantive comments were received from Historic
England and SDNPA and these were reviewed with changes made subsequently to the
R&RNDP document. The comments and actions are detailed in Appendix 10.
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Development Plan Consultation Statement
V8 October 2020 Page 19
APPENDICES
1 Governance and Process Document
2 Evidence Base File Index
3 Terms of Reference for Steering Committee
4 Posters and Notices
5 CDC Housing Need Survey Report
6 Studio LK Brief
7 Studio LK Report and Workshop Output
8 Questionnaire Survey Form
9 Questionnaire Results Analysis
Quantitative results and Graphs
Qualitative data results
Interpretation of results
10 Response to Pre-Submission Consultation June 2017
Table of Statutory Consultees and responses
South Downs National Park Authority comments and R&RNDP actions
Responses from Historic England, Natural England, Southern Water, CDC, Environment
Agency, Forestry Commission, Liss PC, WSCC.
11 Development Sites Background Paper July 2015
