Support
Rochford District Core Strategy Regulation 26 Draft
Representation ID: 645
Received: 03/07/2007
Respondent: Mr G Marshall
Section 4.9
I support the council's preferred options for good design and design statements. I would suggest though, that good design does not lie in an ability to 'blend' within an urban environment. This will stifle innovation and foster pastiche. Good design is indeed about response to context, but context is not just geographical, context is relevant to time and history. The traditional buildings within its towns and villages embody the historic nature of Rochford district. These traditional buildings can be placed in time because of their architectural response to a myriad of local factors and because of this, these buildings have integrity and this is why we seek to preserve them. We now face huge challenges with limited space, dwindling natural resources and climate change. This is today's context and we should build responsively and responsibly. In paragraph 2.6, new housing with renewable energy features is mentioned as part of the vision for the district. This inevitably means that architectural forms will evolve to meet the challenges of a low carbon footprint and it is within this context that 'good design' should also apply.
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Regulation 26) Consultation Response
In response to the council's invitation for consultation comment on the Regulation 26 draft of the Core Strategy Preferred Options, I attach my views on some of the issues raised within the consultation document. I have also delivered a hard copy of this response to the council's offices this afternoon.
My comments are not a comprehensive critique of the consultation document and are limited to those issues that I either have an understanding of, or which I feel are most closely related to issues that are important to me at this point in time. Broadly speaking, there are no items to which I object and I consider that the Regulation 26 draft is comprehensive and well rounded. My comments are merely to either suggest some additional considerations on a few points or to fully support the council's preferred options on others.
With Andrew Meddle's departure, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself to you and clarify the reason for my participation in the LDF consultation process. We met at the first of the Core Strategy 'Roadshow' exhibitions at Hockley Parish Hall. I am one of two owners of a site to the south of Sutton Court Drive and to the east of Southend Road/Warner's Bridge Chase, and I have been promoting the site for release from the green belt for residential development on the grounds of sustainability. I have taken the liberty of attaching (with my consultation response) a copy of the submission that I made to the council in February this year in response to the Allocations Development Plan Document questionnaire. I also attach a copy of the site plan that I submitted at that time.
I would be obliged if you would acknowledge receipt of this consultation response in due course.
I trust that my enclosed consultation response is of use to the council and if I may be of any further assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.