Object
Rochford Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Schedule of Changes
Representation ID: 26521
Received: 30/11/2010
Respondent: Mr J W Graves
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Rochford district council schedule of changes to core strategy submission
Thank you for a further opportunity to raise concerns in line with the schedule of changes.
Numbers of houses proposed. There is no justification/consultation of how the 3,800 homes figure was calculated.
Brownfield sites/other sites. There is little evidence that known Brownfield sites and other land offered initially, (along with those sites the Rochford council show in their strategy) were considered and on what basis, if any they were not considered thereafter.
Against building on green belt. Many local residents choose to live in or moved to Rochford for it is a semi rural aspect and nearby countryside. Any lost greenbelt, and associated wildlife cannot be replaced. Planning legislation requires "exceptional circumstances" before Greenbelt can be used for building and the proposals have not been evaluated, countrary to government policy and alternatives have not been evaluated.
Congestion. No consolidated highways impact has been considered. The suggested phased housing does not show how the increased number of vehicles added to already congested roads to and from the new housing areas will be dealt with with additional congestion in both main roads and side roads. Ashingdon road is the busiest road in the district already and any additional traffic in Rochford, where initial building is proposed can only also affect access roads to Hawkwell, Hockley, Rawreth, Hullbridge etc.
Drainage. The proposals only consider tidal flood risk and not surface water drainage. Many areas suggested are recognized as flood plain.
Lack of appropriate local infrastructure. The proposals make no mention of developer contribution to additional services ie primary school places, medical facilities including doctors surgeries, hospitals etc, public transport links, policing and similar.
Re Development of land East of Ashingdon. The core strategy submission document, appendix H1 page 52 requires land to be made available with a new access road to King Edmund School. To accompany 100 new dwellings. A previous plan for 52 dwellings and access road for this site was put forward, and was turned down in February 2001 by Rochford District Council (Ref 00/00843/FUL) please see refusal recommendation. If this was the case then, what has changed now to warrant double the amount of dwellings and access road.
New Village. I understand that siting of all new required dwellings in one area to create a new village has been discussed by Rochford District Council before, and I feel that it is something that should not be dismissed.
Rochford district council schedule of changes to core strategy submission
Thank you for a further opportunity to raise concerns in line with the schedule of changes.
Numbers of houses proposed. There is no justification/consultation of how the 3,800 homes figure was calculated.
Brownfield sites/other sites. There is little evidence that known Brownfield sites and other land offered initially, (along with those sites the Rochford council show in their strategy) were considered and on what basis, if any they were not considered thereafter.
Against building on green belt. Many local residents choose to live in or moved to Rochford for it is a semi rural aspect and nearby countryside. Any lost greenbelt, and associated wildlife cannot be replaced. Planning legislation requires "exceptional circumstances" before Greenbelt can be used for building and the proposals have not been evaluated, countrary to government policy and alternatives have not been evaluated.
Congestion. No consolidated highways impact has been considered. The suggested phased housing does not show how the increased number of vehicles added to already congested roads to and from the new housing areas will be dealt with with additional congestion in both main roads and side roads. Ashingdon road is the busiest road in the district already and any additional traffic in Rochford, where initial building is proposed can only also affect access roads to Hawkwell, Hockley, Rawreth, Hullbridge etc.
Drainage. The proposals only consider tidal flood risk and not surface water drainage. Many areas suggested are recognized as flood plain.
Lack of appropriate local infrastructure. The proposals make no mention of developer contribution to additional services ie primary school places, medical facilities including doctors surgeries, hospitals etc, public transport links, policing and similar.
Re Development of land East of Ashingdon. The core strategy submission document, appendix H1 page 52 requires land to be made available with a new access road to King Edmund School. To accompany 100 new dwellings. A previous plan for 52 dwellings and access road for this site was put forward, and was turned down in February 2001 by Rochford District Council (Ref 00/00843/FUL) please see refusal recommendation. If this was the case then, what has changed now to warrant double the amount of dwellings and access road.
New Village. I understand that siting of all new required dwellings in one area to create a new village has been discussed by Rochford District Council before, and I feel that it is something that should not be dismissed.