Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Search representations
Results for Fairview New Homes Ltd search
New search New searchComment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Vision
Representation ID: 4218
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Introduction
Representation ID: 4219
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H1 Distribution - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4220
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
General Locations
Representation ID: 4221
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H2 General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4222
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H4 Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4223
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H6 Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4224
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Protection of the Green Belt
Representation ID: 4225
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of
land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
GB1 Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4226
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
T7 Parking Standards - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4227
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Fairview New Homes Ltd
Agent: Planning Potential
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Dear Sir / Madam,
Rochford District Council Local Development Framework, Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document
We are instructed by our client, Fairview New Homes Ltd, to submit comments on the published Preferred Options Core Strategy Document, and these are set out below. For ease, specific reference has been made in accordance with the paragraph numbers as contained in the published document.
Vision
The Council's key planning objectives include the following:
o To work towards sustainable development by making the most effective and efficient use of land.
o To improve the quality of life of the inhabitants of the District by providing the best possible environment, and satisfying social needs by making accessible provision for the necessary health, housing, educational, community and leisure facilities in the interests of the total well being of all groups within the population.
o To ensure the availability of land in appropriate locations for housing, commercial and industrial uses.
o To retain, conserve and enhance the built and natural environments, including the architectural and historical heritage, flora, fauna and their habitats throughout the District.
o To make provisions for transportation improvements to effect the most environmentally sustainable, efficient, convenient movement of goods and people.
o To define and protect the Metropolitan Green Belt, the undeveloped coast and area of ecological interest by directing development towards the District's established settlements.
o To enable the existing business community to function as efficiently as possible and to support economic and regeneration development throughout the Borough.
Whilst our client would like to provide support for the Council's key planning objectives, at present there are a number of aspects which are currently inconsistent or do not accurately reflect the sentiments of the Preferred Policies set out in the remainder of the draft Core Strategy.
Firstly, there is currently no recognition within the Council's key objectives of the most appropriate direction for development. Whilst it is understood that these are overarching aims, it is considered particularly important that locating future development within and adjacent to the Borough's existing larger settlements is essential in order to uphold national, regional and local sustainability aims. This requirement is in line with our further comments on this particular subject below.
Further, it should be made clear as part of objective six that the Green Belt boundary is to be re-defined. This provision will ensure that the objective is consistent with the allowances made in preferred Policy GB1 and the associated supporting text to release some Green Belt land where deemed appropriate and necessary.
Housing
In response the Council's method regarding the location, type and timing of housing development, as set out on page 24 of the draft Core Strategy Document, care should be taken to ensure that the requirements stipulated at Paragraph 54 of PPS3 are adhered to. In particular, the deliverability of sites should be carefully considered when taking decisions on the timing of housing development, in that the site should be available, suitable and achievable, in order that the five year housing supply is realistic in its aims.
Distribution
The Council's Preferred Option for housing distribution is set out as follows:
Policy H1 - Distribution - Preferred Option
We will prioritise the reuse of previously developed land identified as being appropriate as part of our Urban Capacity Study, having regard to the need to protect sites of ecological importance. Areas coming forward for residential development identified within the Urban Capacity Study will be required to conform to all policies within the Core Strategy, particularly in relation to infrastructure, and larger sites will be required to be comprehensively planned.
In order to protect the character of existing settlements, we will resist the intensification of smaller sites within residential areas. Limited infilling will be acceptable if it corresponds to the existing street pattern and density of the locality. We will encourage an appropriate level of residential intensification within town centre areas, where higher density schemes (60+ dwellings per hectare) may be appropriate. The remaining housing requirement will be met through the allocation of land on the edge of existing settlements as outlined in H2.
Our client would like to provide support to the realistic approach taken by the Council in respect of brownfield development within existing settlement boundaries. However, in order that the character of existing settlements can be maintained and Policy H1 can be adequately implemented, Policy GB1 relating to Green Belt protection will need to incorporate a sufficient level of flexibility to allow the release of Green Belt land where it is considered appropriate.
General Locations
At present, support cannot be provided to the Settlement hierarchy as set out on Page 26 of the draft Core Strategy Document. Whilst it is considered appropriate for Rayleigh to be designated as a Tier 1 settlement, the draft Core Strategy is currently not consistent throughout in this respect. It is noted on Page 20 of the Strategy that Rayleigh is the only first tier settlement which could be classed as a 'principle town centre'. Rayleigh is also considered to have the best access to services in the District. However, when considering the general locations for housing development there is no consideration of the higher order level of the settlement of Rayleigh. Rayleigh should be considered the priority direction for housing development given the greater level of services available and public transport connections, in line with the designation set out on Page 20. The greater concentration of services available within Rayleigh results in adequate capacity being available to support a higher level of resident development. In addition, directing development in this manner will act to support the Council's environmental and sustainability aims, particularly, Preferred Policies ENV1,2 and 3.
We, therefore, recommend on behalf of Fairview New Homes that the settlement hierarchy set out on Page 26 be amended in order to reflect the higher level order of Rayleigh.
The Council's preferred option for the general location and phasing of housing development is as follows:
Policy H2 - General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
We will extend the residential envelope of existing settlements for the purposes of residential development in the following areas to deliver the following approximate number of units by 2015 or between 2015 and 2021, as stipulated below and indicated on the Key Diagram.
Area - North of London Road, Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 450
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 200
Area - South West Rayleigh
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - West Rochford
No. of units by 2015 - 300
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Hockley
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South Hawkwell
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 120
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South East Ashingdon
No. of units by 2015 - 20
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Area - South West Hullbridge
No. of units by 2015 - 0
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 450
Area - South West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 100
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - West Great Wakering
No. of units by 2015 - 50
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 100
Area - South Canewdon
No. of units by 2015 - 60
No. of units 2015 - 2021 - 0
Total no. of units by 2015 - 1450
Total no. of units 2015-2021 - 1050
The detailed location and quantum of development will be articulated within the Allocations Development Plan Document.
Development with the above areas will be required to be comprehensively planned. A range of other uses and infrastructure (including off-site infrastructure), having regard to the requirements of the Core Strategy, will be required to be developed and implemented in a timely manner alongside housing. H Appendix 1 outlines the infrastructure that will be required for each residential area, and should be read in conjunction with Preferred Option CLT1.
We will maintain a flexible approach with regards to the timing of the release of land for residential development to ensure a constant five year supply of land.
Fairview New Homes would like to offer strong support in response to Preferred Policy H2 as well as to the general housing locations as shown on the accompanying Key Diagram. In particular, it is requested that the intention to extend the existing settlement boundary in the south west area of Rayleigh is retained when formulating the Core Strategy Submission document. Our client has an interest in a large parcel of land in this location of Rayleigh which is available for redevelopment in the immediate future, therefore, reflecting the phasing option set out in Preferred Policy H2.
In addition, the retention of a flexible approach to the timing of the release of the areas of land set out in Policy H2 is particularly important in order that sites can come forward when available and required.
Affordable Housing
The Council's preferred option for affordable housing is set out as follows:
Policy H4 - Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
At least 35% of dwellings on all developments of 15 or more units, or on sites greater than 0.5 hectares, shall be affordable. These affordable dwellings shall be spread (pepper potted) throughout larger developments. Affordable dwellings shall be required to remain affordable in perpetuity - this will be secured through legal agreements.
This requirement will only be relaxed in highly exceptional circumstances, for example where constraints make on-site provision impossible or where the developer is able to definitely demonstrate that 35% provision will be economically unviable, rendering the site undeliverable. In such cases we will negotiate the proportion of affordable dwellings based on the economic viability calculations. It is expected that affordable housing will be provided on each development site; in rare cases, taking account of particular site characteristics, the affordable housing contribution may be provided by way of a commuted sum towards off-site affordable housing.
The Council's realistic approach to securing affordable housing throughout the Borough is supported by Fairview New Homes. In particular, the flexibility and recognition that it may not be possible to provide the full requirement of affordable housing on all sites is offered strong support by our client. In this respect full consideration should be had towards individual locations and specific sites depending on the findings of the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (PPS3 Paragraph 29 Part 3).
It is requested that the Council seek to retain an element of negotiation within Policy H4 when developing the Core Strategy to submission stage in order to allow a sensitive approach to local housing need as it fluctuates throughout the Council's administrative area rather than a blanket approached.
Further, the first part of the preferred policy requires that affordable housing be spread "(pepper potted)" throughout new development. Whilst my client is sure you are aware, management is a real issue for social landlords, and often it is not practical to adopt a 'pepper pot' approach, and further consideration should be had of the 'user' / 'management' requirements when developing the Core Strategy to Submission Stage.
Lifetime Homes
The Council's preferred policy for Lifetime Homes is as follows:
Policy H6 - Lifetime Homes - Preferred Option
We will normally require all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes Standard from 2010. Exceptions will be made where such a requirement threatens the viability of developments, in which case we will seek a proportion of units to comply with the standard.
In line with our comments in respect of Preferred Policy H4 Fairview New Homes would like to provide support to the recognition that in some instances the Lifetime Homes Standard will not be able to be met. It is requested that this level of flexibility is retained when developing the Core Strategy Submission Document.
The Green Belt
Protection of the Green Belt
Whilst it is recognised that there is a need to protect Green Belt land throughout the Borough, on behalf of our client, we would like to provide full support to the acknowledgement on Page 41 that a proportion of the currently allocated Green Belt land will need to be released for redevelopment. When considering areas of land for release, those adjacent to the existing settlement boundary should be prioritised in order that settlements within the Borough are coherently extended.
In particular, the area of land to the South West of Rayleigh, designated as a general location for housing in Preferred Policy H2, should be a key priority for reallocation. This land is available for development and is sited in a particularly sustainable location, therefore, meeting with the wider aims of the draft Core Strategy, as well as contributing towards the Council's housing requirements for the Borough. Release of small areas of Green Belt surrounding larger settlements will allow a concentration of development in key areas. In addition, there is no risk of coalescence of settlements should Green Belt land be release to the south west of Rayleigh.
Further, our client would also like to support the provision set out on Page 42 of the Draft Core Strategy document for high density development on the areas of Green Belt land released for development in order that remaining Green Belt land is sufficiently protected.
The Council's preferred policy for Green Belt Protection is stated as follows:
Policy GB1 - Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
We will seek to direct development away from the Green Belt, minimise the reallocation of Green Belt land and will prioritise the protection of Green Belt land based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt.
The need to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements, in order to help preserve their identities, will be given particular consideration.
In line with our comments above, our client would like to endorse Policy GB1 in that some allowance remains within the policy to permit the release of Green Belt land where appropriate and necessary. This flexibility is essential in order that the Council are able to meet the housing provision requirements set out in the adopted East of England Plan in the plan period until 2021.
Transport
Parking Standards
Rochford Borough Council's preferred policy on parking standards is set out as follows:
Policy T7 - Parking Standards - Preferred Option
We will apply minimum parking standards, including visitor parking, to residential development. We will be prepared to relax such standards for residential development within town centre locations and sites in close proximity to any of the District's train stations.
Whilst applying maximum parking standards for trip destinations, we will still require such development to include adequate parking provision. Developers will be required to demonstrate that adequate provision for the parking, turning and unloading of service vehicles has been provided.
At present our client is unable to support Preferred Policy T7 in its current form, due to the lack of coherence with national planning policy set out in PPG13. The first part of the preferred policy specifies the Council's intention to apply minimum parking standards to residential development. Paragraph 17 of PPG13 clearly states that parking policies should not be expressed as minimum standards. Considering this against advice set out in PPS12 at Paragraph 4.52, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that Core Strategies are consistent with National Policy in order that the document can be considered to be sound. As this is the case we are unable to endorse Preferred Policy T7 in this respect. Instead, it is requested that the Council seek to enforce a maximum parking standard to ensure that the sustainable aims of PPG13 are upheld.
Open Space
The Council's preferred policy relating to the provision of open space is set out as follows:
Policy CLT5 - Open Space - Preferred Option
New public open space will be required to accompany additional residential development, having regard to local current and projected future need. Standard Charges may be applied to developments as necessary.
In particular we will seek the incorporation of a significant amount of public open space to accompany new, and be integrated with existing residential development in the west of Rayleigh.
Furthermore, the following existing uses will be protected, whether in public or private ownership:
• Parks
• Amenity areas
• Allotments
• Playing pitches
• Any other form of open space that has a high townscape value or is intrinsic to the character of the area.
New forms of the above will be promoted.
Fairview New Homes strongly object to the requirements set out in preferred Policy CLT5.
Whilst the sentiments of the policy are well founded and it is recognised that there is a need to provide public open space throughout the Borough, there is no justification as to why a significant amount of public space will be required in the west of Rayleigh. No information or evidence is provided to rationalise this requirement either as part of preferred Policy CLT5 or within the accompanying supporting text. Further, there is no explanation as to why this particular area of the Borough is specified for a higher than average provision of public open space, as an exception.
On behalf of our client, we would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this submission and have due regard to these comments when making changes to the Core Strategy prior to the submission of the document.
