Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)

The Rochford Core Strategy preferred options document (2008) recognises that:

o Rochford needs to plan for the delivery of 3489 dwellings between 2006-2026.

o The Government's target of providing 60% of new housing development on previously developed land has become unrealistic for Rochford and therefore it is proposed that 70% of this additional housing will need to be provided on green field sites.

o Green belt boundaries will need to be redrawn due to the limited opportunity to accommodate the development requirements outside of the green belt, and it will be inevitable that green belt land will have to be used for new housing development.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this overall approach.

Given that a large proportion of the required housing development will need to be provided on green belt sites, those sites that are to be allocated for new residential development should be in the most sustainable locations, in line with the guidance in PPS1 and PPS3.

The Core Strategy Preferred Options document recognises that the concept of sustainable development is at the heart of any decisions with regard to the location of housing, stating that:

"the primary factors in determining the location of future housing include current infrastructure (along with opportunities to deliver future infrastructure); access to services; facilities; housing demand/need; deliverability; public transport / possibility of reducing car dependency; opportunities to utilise brownfield land; community needs and physical constraints."

The Core Strategy Preferred Options document currently proposes to distribute the required housing throughout the district, based on the following settlement hierarchy:

Tier Settlements
1 Rayleigh; Rochford/ Ashingdon; Hockley / Hawkwell
2 Hullbridge; Great Wakering
3 Canewdon
4 All other settlements

The proposed hierarchy focuses on what are classified as higher tier settlements, whilst allocating a proportion of housing to the lower tier settlements (with the exception of the fourth tier).

Importantly, the document recognises the possibility of development in the eastern part of the district, around the settlement of Great Wakering, which is close to our clients' site, Tithe Park.

However, the document does not consider Rochford District in its wider spatial context, particularly its relationship to Southend. A potential extension to Southend has not been considered in any of the alternative options set out in Policies H2 and H3.

The importance of considering the wider spatial context is recognised in PPS 12 (paragraph 4.17) concerning Core Strategies, which sets out that many issues critical to spatial planning do not respect local planning authority boundaries, and noting housing markets and commuting catchments as examples which often cover larger areas. PPS 12 therefore advises that local authorities should explore and exploit opportunities for joint working with neighbouring authorities.

Southend comprises a large urban area, and has an extensive boundary with Rochford. The importance of Southend within the region is recognised in Policy SS3 of the East of England Plan, SS3 which seeks to focus development in Southend and other major settlements within the region.

An extension to Southend on land currently within Rochford District's administrative area provides numerous benefits.It will assist Rochford in meeting the relevant housing targets, whilst providing a sustainable form of development with the new residential development benefiting from access to the amenities and infrastructure that the location adjacent to Southend affords.

A masterplan of the Tithe Park site is provided with these representations and shows how residential development, community uses and open space can be provided. This is an illustrative plan and can be modified to incorporate different permutations/number of dwellings and other uses, in line with the views of Rochford District if so identified for residential development in the Core Strategy.

The development of Tithe Park as an urban extension to Southend is a more sustainable solution than are the proposed locations currently put forward in the Core Strategy Preferred Options document. For example, with reference to the primary factors determining the location of future housing as stated in the document and quoted above:

• Current infrastructure (along with opportunities to deliver future infrastructure) - the site is served with existing pedestrian and vehicular access as outlined in the masterplan.
• Access to services and facilities - the site is within an 800 metre walking distance of the Asda superstore, the wide range of community amenities within Great Wakering and Friars Park.
• Housing demand/need - N/A - A demand/need has clearly been identified by the East of England Plan.
• Deliverability - the site is owned by one landowner, Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP, who are committed to bringing the site forward for development within the next 15 years.
• Public transport / possibility of reducing car dependency - Currently bus routes run along Poynters Lane and it is intended to ensure a bus route passes through the site to increase patronage and sustainability. A green travel plan will promote these issues
• Opportunities to utilise brownfield land - N/A as the Core Strategy has identified the need to develop green field land.
• Community needs and physical constraints - Community uses can be provided on site. There are no physical constraints, the site is relatively flat and only a very small part of the site falls within an area of flood risk.

More information on the site in relation to these sustainability factors is detailed in the accompanying masterplan.

Furthermore, the community infrastructure which is required to be accommodated with the new residential development at Great Wakering, as set out in appendix 1 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options, can also, or alternatively, be accommodated within the proposed development at Tithe Park: public open space, play space and community space.

The proposed public open space and community facilities could be made accessible to the existing residents of Rochford District, and, in particular, Great Wakering by extending the existing public footpath, as indicated within the proposed masterplan, and public transport can be upgraded to connect Great Wakering with the proposed new facilities.

Providing a sustainable urban extension to Southend, will have the benefit of directing a significant amount of development away from the existing villages within Rochford District, in particular the settlements identified in the document as Tier 2 and Tier 3 settlements i.e. Hullbridge; Great Wakering and Canewdon, and where new residential development may be more sensitive.

Currently, a significant amount of development is proposed in the document as extensions to these lower tiered settlements, and this could change the character of the villages and put a strain on infrastructure, and social and community resources. By reducing the amount apportioned to these villages, the character of these settlements can be maintained.

The development of Tithe Park will not result in coalescence.

In conclusion, further thought should be given to the distribution and extent of the housing allocations with a proportion of the housing allocations in Policies H2 and H3 being available for Tithe Park, perhaps described as: 'land to the south west of Great Wakering, adjoining the boundary with Southend'.

The text explaining the philosophy regarding protection of the Green Belt recognises that a small proportion of the District's land that is currently allocated as Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed due to the need to develop additional housing and employment uses. This is compounded by the limited opportunities to accommodate development outside of the Green Belt. Stolkin and Clements support this approach.

Green Belt boundaries will need to be amended to enable the required development to take place. If the Tithe Park site is taken out of the Green Belt, careful modelling of the proposal can provide well managed and defensible boundaries which will afford protection in the future to the areas to the north and west, thereby preventing any potential coalescence.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this policy which seeks to protected the character of existing settlements by resisting the intensification of use of smaller sites within residential areas.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this policy which seeks at least 35% of affordable housing on all developments of 10 or more units or on sites greater than 0.5ha unless there are site constraints which make the provision impossible.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this policy which confirms that new developments will be required to contain a mix of dwelling types including a proportion of the affordable housing provided to be three-bedroom dwellings.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this policy which requires all new housing developments to comply with the Lifetime Homes standard from 2010 unless this threatens the viability of the development.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this policy which requires development to meet the Code for Sustainable Homes code level 3 and, by 2010, to meet code level 6, unless this threatens the viability of the development.

As with Policy H2, further thought should be given to the distribution and extent of the housing allocations with a proportion of the housing allocations in Policies H2 and H3 being available for Tithe Park, perhaps described as: 'land to the south west of Great Wakering, adjoining the boundary with Southend'

The Rochford Core Strategy preferred options document (2008) recognises that:

o Rochford needs to plan for the delivery of 3489 dwellings between 2006-2026.

o The Government's target of providing 60% of new housing development on previously developed land has become unrealistic for Rochford and therefore it is proposed that 70% of this additional housing will need to be provided on green field sites.

o Green belt boundaries will need to be redrawn due to the limited opportunity to accommodate the development requirements outside of the green belt, and it will be inevitable that green belt land will have to be used for new housing development.

Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP support this overall approach.

Given that a large proportion of the required housing development will need to be provided on green belt sites, those sites that are to be allocated for new residential development should be in the most sustainable locations, in line with the guidance in PPS1 and PPS3.

The Core Strategy Preferred Options document recognises that the concept of sustainable development is at the heart of any decisions with regard to the location of housing, stating that:

"the primary factors in determining the location of future housing include current infrastructure (along with opportunities to deliver future infrastructure); access to services; facilities; housing demand/need; deliverability; public transport / possibility of reducing car dependency; opportunities to utilise brownfield land; community needs and physical constraints."

The Core Strategy Preferred Options document currently proposes to distribute the required housing throughout the district, based on the following settlement hierarchy:

Tier Settlements
1 Rayleigh; Rochford/ Ashingdon; Hockley / Hawkwell
2 Hullbridge; Great Wakering
3 Canewdon
4 All other settlements

The proposed hierarchy focuses on what are classified as higher tier settlements, whilst allocating a proportion of housing to the lower tier settlements (with the exception of the fourth tier).

Importantly, the document recognises the possibility of development in the eastern part of the district, around the settlement of Great Wakering, which is close to our clients' site, Tithe Park.

However, the document does not consider Rochford District in its wider spatial context, particularly its relationship to Southend. A potential extension to Southend has not been considered in any of the alternative options set out in Policies H2 and H3.

The importance of considering the wider spatial context is recognised in PPS 12 (paragraph 4.17) concerning Core Strategies, which sets out that many issues critical to spatial planning do not respect local planning authority boundaries, and noting housing markets and commuting catchments as examples which often cover larger areas. PPS 12 therefore advises that local authorities should explore and exploit opportunities for joint working with neighbouring authorities.

Southend comprises a large urban area, and has an extensive boundary with Rochford. The importance of Southend within the region is recognised in Policy SS3 of the East of England Plan, SS3 which seeks to focus development in Southend and other major settlements within the region.

An extension to Southend on land currently within Rochford District's administrative area provides numerous benefits.It will assist Rochford in meeting the relevant housing targets, whilst providing a sustainable form of development with the new residential development benefiting from access to the amenities and infrastructure that the location adjacent to Southend affords.

A masterplan of the Tithe Park site is provided with these representations and shows how residential development, community uses and open space can be provided. This is an illustrative plan and can be modified to incorporate different permutations/number of dwellings and other uses, in line with the views of Rochford District if so identified for residential development in the Core Strategy.

The development of Tithe Park as an urban extension to Southend is a more sustainable solution than are the proposed locations currently put forward in the Core Strategy Preferred Options document. For example, with reference to the primary factors determining the location of future housing as stated in the document and quoted above:

• Current infrastructure (along with opportunities to deliver future infrastructure) - the site is served with existing pedestrian and vehicular access as outlined in the masterplan.
• Access to services and facilities - the site is within an 800 metre walking distance of the Asda superstore, the wide range of community amenities within Great Wakering and Friars Park.
• Housing demand/need - N/A - A demand/need has clearly been identified by the East of England Plan.
• Deliverability - the site is owned by one landowner, Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP, who are committed to bringing the site forward for development within the next 15 years.
• Public transport / possibility of reducing car dependency - Currently bus routes run along Poynters Lane and it is intended to ensure a bus route passes through the site to increase patronage and sustainability. A green travel plan will promote these issues
• Opportunities to utilise brownfield land - N/A as the Core Strategy has identified the need to develop green field land.
• Community needs and physical constraints - Community uses can be provided on site. There are no physical constraints, the site is relatively flat and only a very small part of the site falls within an area of flood risk.

More information on the site in relation to these sustainability factors is detailed in the accompanying masterplan.

Furthermore, the community infrastructure which is required to be accommodated with the new residential development at Great Wakering, as set out in appendix 1 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options, can also, or alternatively, be accommodated within the proposed development at Tithe Park: public open space, play space and community space.

The proposed public open space and community facilities could be made accessible to the existing residents of Rochford District, and, in particular, Great Wakering by extending the existing public footpath, as indicated within the proposed masterplan, and public transport can be upgraded to connect Great Wakering with the proposed new facilities.

Providing a sustainable urban extension to Southend, will have the benefit of directing a significant amount of development away from the existing villages within Rochford District, in particular the settlements identified in the document as Tier 2 and Tier 3 settlements i.e. Hullbridge; Great Wakering and Canewdon, and where new residential development may be more sensitive.

Currently, a significant amount of development is proposed in the document as extensions to these lower tiered settlements, and this could change the character of the villages and put a strain on infrastructure, and social and community resources. By reducing the amount apportioned to these villages, the character of these settlements can be maintained.

The development of Tithe Park will not result in coalescence.

In conclusion, further thought should be given to the distribution and extent of the housing allocations with a proportion of the housing allocations in Policies H2 and H3 being available for Tithe Park, perhaps described as: 'land to the south west of Great Wakering, adjoining the boundary with Southend'.