Object

Core Strategy Submission Document: Schedule of minor amendments (2011)

Representation ID: 28254

Received: 07/10/2011

Respondent: Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP

Agent: Firstplan

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The Core Strategy Schedule of Minor Amendments proposes to revert back to the East of England Plan housing target of 250 dwellings per annum Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP welcome this.

However, Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP continue to object to the proposed locations for housing. As currently drafted, Policies H1, H2 and H3 are neither justified nor consistent with national policy.

A sustainable urban extension to Southend in the location of the Tithe Park site could be a preferred choice compared with the provision of large housing extensions to existing villages and small towns elsewhere in Rochford District.

Full text:

On behalf of our clients, Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP, who own the Tithe Park site, and whom we represented at the recent Core Strategy Examination hearings, we would like to make the following comments on the Core Strategy Schedule of Minor Amendments.

The Core Strategy Schedule of Minor Amendments proposes to revert back to the East of England Plan housing target of 250 dwellings per annum. Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP welcome this, the RSS is currently still in place and PPS12 requires that Core Strategies must be in general conformity with the RSS in order to be legally compliant.

However, Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP continue to object to the proposed locations for housing. As currently drafted, Policies H1, H2 and H3 are neither justified nor consistent with national policy.

A sustainable urban extension to Southend in the location of the Tithe Park site could be a preferred choice compared with the provision of large housing extensions to existing villages and small towns elsewhere in Rochford District. Tithe Park site is available, deliverable, and suitable for residential development and, by virtue of its location, its development can have advantages in terms of sustainability, accessibility, landscape and environmental issues and, whilst it will involve the rolling back of the green belt boundary, new defensible boundaries can be provided.

Overall, our client's position remains unchanged and therefore we consider the Core Strategy with the Schedule of Minor Amendments to be unsound.