Rayleigh Town Centre Area Action Plan - Issues and Options

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.

Thank you for sending the Issues and Options Consultation Document to the Government Office.

The Consultation document is clear and well written. Issues and options are identified. It contains helpful illustrations and photographs that explain issues and possible options. You have used the opportunity to draw on experience elsewhere. The document appears to be supported by thorough survey work.

Detailed comments on the AAP are appended to this letter. The majority of my comments deal with minor issues of an editorial or drafting nature.

Please contact me if you would like to discuss anything contained in this letter or on any aspect of your work with the Local Development Framework.

Reference - Para 1.3.1
Comments and observations - The Area Action Plan links to Core Strategy Policy RTC4

Reference - Para 2.2.1
Comments and observations - You have identified modes of consultation including meetings with Members, a letter-drop and Placecheck events with stakeholders.

Reference - Para 2.3.2
Comments and observations - The importance of Rayleigh's heritage and Conservation Area are apparent.

Reference - Para 2.5.5
Comments and observations - The AAP correctly identifies the East of England Plan requirements for new development. On a point of clarity, the East of England Plan requires 55,000 across the Thames Gateway sub-region.

Reference - Para 2.5.6
Comments and observations - To avoid confusion, we recommend that you refer to the East of England Plan rather than RSS14.

Reference - Chapter 3
Comments and observations - The description of the Vision and Objectives complement each other. Respondents' views to question two will help you work-up a thorough and detailed vision statement, that is pertinent to the characteristics of Rayleigh town centre.

Reference - Page 78
Comments and observations - Infrastructure Tariff. In subsequent versions of this document, you might consider making a clear link to Policy CLT1 and Appendix CLT1 of the Rochford Core Strategy.