Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)

So that the local position is clear, the comment in the margin on Page 28 (alongside Preferred Option H2) regarding the viability of small schools should note that the County Council has a presumption against the closure of rural schools.

In the table in H Appendix 1, the first bullet in the list of infrastructure required for the two locations 'North of London Road Rayleigh' and 'West Rochford' should be expanded to read 'Primary School with Early Years & Childcare provision'. In addition to the specific new educational infrastructure listed in the table for these two locations and for East Ashingdon and South East Ashingdon, development at other proposed locations will require an increase in capacity at other existing school sites and for expansion of early years and childcare facilities.

Proposals for the comprehensive development of London Southend Airport are supported, although a commitment to work to mitigate any adverse impacts on the environment or local amenities should be clearly stated. Despite the current difficult economic conditions, there are businesses based at the Airport that have significant vacancies for aviation engineers. The Core Strategy needs to further consider how it may support the take-up of these jobs through adult learning and re-training opportunities in light of likely redundancies in other sectors.

Economic Development aspects of the Strategy are generally supported, including the focus on significant regeneration projects, such as the development of London Southend Airport and the establishment of an Eco-Enterprise Centre. Much of Rochford's economic development planning is, quite rightly, based on the success of the two projects but, with current economic conditions, there is every possibility that market pressures could delay their development. Consequently, whilst reliance on these projects is logical the Strategy needs to consider a contingent approach in the event of either or both not coming to fruition or being progressed more slowly than expected.

There is a concern that the focus on the contribution of the Airport, Eco-Enterprise Centre and Town Centres to the economy of the district does not take enough account of the small businesses dotted between the various industrial estates and elsewhere. The balance should be redressed by setting out how the vision and strategy will assist such small businesses to develop and fulfil a future role in the local economy. For example, the medical sector has previously been a hidden sector in Rochford but some acknowledgement could only be beneficial.

Consideration of economic development should also acknowledge the importance of developing adult skills in Rochford. There are references in the Strategy to a 'healthy' level of skills for knowledge driven jobs, and to economic developments 'matching' the skills of the Rochford population. It would be beneficial for the plan to aim higher in this respect and to make the clear link between skills and economic development.

The proposed Eco-Enterprise Centre is supported as a sensible solution for reducing the rate of business start-up failure in the district. But its very development is reliant upon external funding and the good will and capability of the local business community. In the current economic circumstances the viability of such projects needs to be carefully considered - much will depend on the current financial status of the project in terms of whether funding, even in principle, has yet been secured.

The location and function of the Eco-Enterprise Centre should be considered in the context of the wider area because there are a number of proposals for such facilities across South Essex. Key to the economic development of Rochford District will be an offer to businesses from the Centre that is clearly differentiated from that of competing centres so that best efforts are not diluted and maximum benefit may be derived for the future local economy.

The importance of the historic environment in Rochford District is clearly identified within the Core Strategy document, including reference to Priority 10 of the Local Area Agreement and the commissioning of a Historic Environment Characterisation Project as part of the evidence base. However, there is insufficient policy guidance in the document to demonstrate how the core strategy will promote consideration and enhancement of the historic environment or how the historic environment will be used to shape place. Whilst there is policy reference to historic buildings and conservation areas, there is no policy reference to Rochford's important historic landscape and archaeological deposits.

The Core Strategy should clearly identify how the valued historic environment of the District is to be protected. It is recommended that an additional section be added in Environmental Issues chapter of the Core Strategy, to read,

"Protection and Enhancement of the Historic Environment

We are committed to the protection, promotion and enhancement of the diverse historic landscape and extensive surviving archaeological deposits of the District. There is the potential to protect and enhance the historic environment assets and their surroundings both within development areas, and in the rural and coastal landscape.

The historic environment of Rochford District has developed through a history of human activity that spans over 450,000 years. Much of the resource lies hidden beneath the ground in the form of archaeological deposits. Other elements such as the historic landscape, the pattern of field, farms, woods and grazing marsh which characterise the District, are a highly visible record of millennia of agriculture, industry and commerce. Of particular significance are the coastal, island and estuarine areas where multi-period landscapes reflecting the exploitation of coastal and marshland resource survive. Rochford District contains five scheduled monuments; these range from a burial mound at Plumberrow to a Heavy Anti-Aircraft Gun Battery dating to the Second World War The District also includes the important historic medieval market towns of Rochford and Rayleigh.

ENV ? Protection and Enhancement of the Historic Environment
We will work to preserve and enhance the Historic Environment resource through working with our partners and the planning process
We will ensure the appropriate recording of Historic Environment assets which cannot be physically preserved"

Preferred Option ENV9 (BREEAM) proposes the adoption of the BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) rating of 'Very Good' as the minimum requirement for new non-domestic buildings. However, unlike the Urban Place Supplement and the 'Merton Rule' the BREEAM rating does not include provision of renewable energy generation for new buildings. Therefore, the policy should be expanded to incorporate the 'Merton' rule that at least 10% of energy estimated to be used by new development will be required to be produced by on-site renewable energy generation. This would also be consistent with the Urban Place Supplement.