The wording of this policy seems to suggest that any residential development proposed on brownfield land in areas of Flood Zone 3 will be permitted regardless of the outcomes of the Sequential Test. This Policy is therefore unsound because it is not consistent with national policy set out in PPS25.
We also consider this policy to be unjustified because it is not supported by sufficient evidence to justify the underlying assumption that protecting greenbelt land should take preference to avoiding high density development in areas within Flood Zone 3 which would pose risks to life and property. The general approach of giving priority to brownfield land is in line with national policy within PPS3, however PPS3 also recognises the need to take into account environmental constraints and risks, including flood risk, in setting out strategies for the planned location of new housing in order to achieve sustainable development objectives set out in Planning Policy Statement 1 and that some sites might not therefore be suitable for housing (see paragraphs 38 and 41). This ties in with the process of applying the PPS25 Sequential Test and Exception Test which places flood risk classification and the vulnerability of proposed developments as the primary concern, with the designation of land as brownfield as a secondary consideration when applying part b of the Exception Test. Given that the national target of 60% redevelopment of previously developed land (as required by PPS3) is deemed unrealistic in Rochford District (paragraph 4.15 of this Core Strategy) and that Policy H2 indicates that there will therefore be a need to release greenbelt land in order to accommodate required growth in nonconformity with Planning Policy Guidance note 2, there is no justification to support the assumption that developing the brownfield land in the high risk flood zone is the most appropriate course of action given the reasonable alternative of accommodating those housing figures in areas at lesser flood risk - either by releasing a minimal additional amount of greenbelt, or by slightly increasing density of development elsewhere.

We do support the inclusion of the Council's intention to capitalise on opportunities to make space for water wherever possible as this is in line with government objectives as set out in "Making Space for Water".

The Council will need to provide clear and transparent justification of their decisions by carrying out a Sequential Test to support this Core Strategy document. At this stage in the development of the LDF, in the absence of an up-to-date SFRA, this would have to be based upon the Environment Agency's flood maps (future iterations for more detailed DPDS would require an up-to-date SFRA). Applying the PPS25 Sequential test will allow for all of the available alternatives to be properly assessed, including justification for the Council's decision to prioritise brownfield development in areas of flood risk when some greenbelt land in areas of lesser flood risk is already being released, or development densities could be increased in other areas.

Should the above evidence be deemed to support the Council's preferences for previously-developed land over flood risk posed to life and property, the policy will however require rewording as follows:

"The Council will direct development away from areas at risk of flooding by applying the PPS25 Sequential Test. The vast majority of development will be accommodated within Flood Zone 1, however some previously-developed land within Flood Zone 3 will be considered for residential development where this will negate the need to release Green Belt land and evidence can be provided in support of the PSS25 Exception Test.

The Council will continue to work with the Environment Agency to manage flood risk in a sustainable manner through capitalising on opportunities to make space for water wherever possible and through the continued provision of flood defences where necessary."


An alternative approach would be to reword Policy ENV3 as follows:

"The Council will apply the sequential approach to new development in line with the requirements of PPS25. Where development can only be located within areas at risk of flooding, an overall reduction in flood risk will be sought with preference given to designs that manage flood risk in a sustainable manner.

The Council will continue to work with the Environment Agency to manage flood risk in a sustainable manner through capitalising on opportunities to make space for water wherever possible, and through the continued provision of flood defences where necessary."

Please note that should the Inspector deem it necessary for us to attend the Examination in Public, we would be happy to do so but our preferred method at this time would be written representations.