Full text
Whilst the respondent supports the general locations identified in the CS, the means by which the land is identified is considered too vague. The respondent does not agree with the Council's opening statement in this section of the Strategy, which states:

"It is not the purpose of the Core Strategy to set out precise locations for new development - this is done through the Allocations Development Plan Document".

Whilst it may not be necessary in Rochford to identify the exact boundaries of strategic sites, the information that is given is too vague. The advice in Planning Policy Statement 12, Local Spatial Strategy (PPS 17, 2008) is that:

"Core Strategies may allocate strategic sites for development". The Core Strategy looks to the long term. It may be beneficial to delivery of its objectives for details of key sites to be included in it, where these sites are central to the achievement of the strategy and where investment requires a long lead-in"

Further, at paragraph 4.3, it states:

"it is essential that the core strategy makes clear spatial choices about where developments should go in broad terms. This strong direction will mean that the work involved in the preparation of any subsequent DPDs is reduced. It also means that decisions on planning applications can be given a clear steer immediately."

There can be little dispute, that the greenfield locations identified in the Core Strategy are essential to the delivery of the spatial strategy. At present, the district cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land, as required by PPS3. The lack of a 5 year supply may result in a rash of early planning applications coming forward on greenfield, which could undermine the Council's spatial strategy and the preparation of the Allocations DPD. To guard against this and to channel development towards the most appropriate locations, the Council has the option of being more site specific in its Core Strategy. This option would in principle be supported by PPS12 and could apply to the delivery of one or more of the Ashingdon locations identified in Policy H2 and thus assist the Council's in demonstrating a five year supply of housing land.

It is acknowledged in Policy H2 that the Council will be flexible with regard to the timing of the release of land to ensure a five year supply of land. Therefore, there is no reason not to be site specific on sufficient land that will bring forward development to meet the Council's current 5 year shortfall. The respondent feels that the land north and south of Brays Lane would be one such location, which could be specifically allocated in the Core Strategy. The land has been broadly identified by the Core Strategy Preferred Options and its early release would ensure a continuous five year supply, assist in the delivery of public open space, a long held aspiration of the Local Plan and more importantly, resolve a long standing and the pressing need to improve access to King Edmund Secondary School.

Indicative Master Plan Option
The respondent has prepared an indicative master plan illustrating an option for the broad locations in Ashingdon. The master plan is designed to be illustrative of what could be achieved and is by no means the only layout option.

The purpose of providing this indicative option is to demonstrate that there is sufficient land available within the locations to accommodate the growth; in fact, the area could take more. In addition, the master plan illustrates a workable and tested improvement to the access to King Edmund School and shows a possible location for the 3.0 hectare expansion of the school, required by policy CLT 3. It is understood that it may be more viable to build a new school either on the existing site or on adjacent land. The master plan option caters for such an eventuality as well as providing options for the layout of housing and public open space. The respondent has commissioned a Highway Access Strategy, which considers the optimum location of access points to serve the land parcels. A copy of the strategy is attached to these representations.

The land parcels in the broad locations identified in the Core Strategy as East and Southeast Ashingdon are largely free of constraint and are developable and deliverable in the first five years of the plan period. Sufficient housing land is available to exceed the allocations set out in Policies H2 and H3 and there are many advantages to the location, which would allow for additional growth. The respondent owns approximately 28 hectares of land in the general vicinity of the broad locations of East and Southeast Ashingdon abutting the urban area, which would accommodate up to 1000 residential units at 40 dwellings per hectare, as well as providing an additional 3.0 hectares for expansion of the school. The land is available and developable in the short term. It has the following advantages in terms of developability.

• un-contaminated land in arable use;
• falls within flood zone 1;
• abuts the urban area;
• is accessible and within walking distance of a secondary and three primary schools, shops, services and public transport;
• accessible to main drainage facilities and utilities;
• within agricultural land classification 3;
• located in an area free of special or important landscape or biodiversity designations;
• does not contain any important ecological or sensitive habitat areas.

In relation to the Green Belt and the five purposes of including land within the Green Belt:
• the land parcels would round off or infill the urban edge;
• there is no possibility of coalescence, the nearest settlement is several miles to the east;
• the urban extensions will not encroach into the countryside, much beyond the existing urban edge;
• the location does not interfere or impact on the setting or special character of a historic town or settlement.

The land parcels are capable of exceeding the allocations set out in the Core Strategy whilst enhancing the access and size of King Edmund Secondary School, a vital component in the District's infrastructure. The development will result in only limited harm to the character and appearance of the countryside and as such, the Council should give greater consideration to the production of more detailed assessment through the Allocations DPD and an early planning application.