Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document

Sport England strongly objects to option NLR3 as this would include Rayleigh Sports & Social Club's site which is where Rayleigh Town Football Club and Rayleigh Fairview Cricket Club are based and play their matches. These are two of the principal community sports clubs in the Rayleigh area. Potential redevelopment of the site would result in the loss of the entire playing field (which are large enough to accommodate the equivalent of at least three football pitches and a cricket pitch). No reference is made to the loss of these facilities in the document or to replacement provision being an essential pre-requisite of any development. The loss of the Rayleigh Sports & Social Club's site to development is therefore objected to for the following reasons:

* The development would result in the loss of one of Rayleigh's main community outdoor sports facilities. The Football Association and the England & Wales Cricket Board have advised that the clubs would be very concerned about losing the facilities and both the FA and the ECB strongly object;
* No replacement provision is proposed for the playing fields and other sports facilities. Consequently, there would not appear to be any compensatory provision proposed.;
* There is no up-to-date evidence base available that, in Sport England's view, would justify the playing fields being released for development on the basis of them being surplus to community needs i.e. an up-to-date playing pitch strategy. In any case, even if there was a confirmed surplus of playing fields in the district, there would still be a need to relocate the club's facilities to another site.

If this option was pursued as a site allocation in the DPD, it would not be considered to meet any of the tests of soundness in terms of being justified, effective or according with national policy e.g. lack of evidence base to justify disposal, lack of certainty of delivery in view of need to relocate existing facilities in advance of any development and not accord with Government planning policy guidance in PPG17 (especially paragraph 15). In addition, it should be noted that Sport England would be a statutory consultee on any future planning application affecting the site. If this site was allocated for development in the DPD without satisfactory replacement playing field provision being made, Sport England would have to object to a future planning application as a statutory consultee. Due to the weight that should be applied to objections made by statutory consultees and the need to refer planning applications to the Secretary of State (through the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009) that Sport England objects to, there would be potential for significant uncertainty and delays in the delivery of any development on this site.

It is therefore requested that Rayleigh Sports and Social Club site be removed from option NL3 if it is pursued unless the development was to make provision for at least like for like replacement facility provision which is supported by the users of the playing field.

Sport England strongly objects to option NLR5 as this would include the majority of Rayleigh Sports & Social Club's site which is where Rayleigh Town Football Club and Rayleigh Fairview Cricket Club are based and play their matches. These are two of the principal community sports clubs in the Rayleigh area. Potential redevelopment of the site would result in the loss of the entire playing field (which are large enough to accommodate the equivalent of at least three football pitches and a cricket pitch). No reference is made to the loss of these facilities in the document or to replacement provision being an essential pre-requisite of any development. The loss of the Rayleigh Sports & Social Club's site to development is therefore objected to for the following reasons:

* The development would result in the loss of one of Rayleigh's main community outdoor sports facilities. The Football Association and the England & Wales Cricket Board have advised that the clubs would be very concerned about losing the facilities and both the FA and the ECB strongly object;
* No replacement provision is proposed for the playing fields and other sports facilities. Consequently, there would not appear to be any compensatory provision proposed.;
* There is no up-to-date evidence base available that, in Sport England's view, would justify the playing fields being released for development on the basis of them being surplus to community needs i.e. an up-to-date playing pitch strategy. In any case, even if there was a confirmed surplus of playing fields in the district, there would still be a need to relocate the club's facilities to another site.

If this option was pursued as a site allocation in the DPD, it would not be considered to meet any of the tests of soundness in terms of being justified, effective or according with national policy e.g. lack of evidence base to justify disposal, lack of certainty of delivery in view of need to relocate existing facilities in advance of any development and not accord with Government planning policy guidance in PPG17 (especially paragraph 15). In addition, it should be noted that Sport England would be a statutory consultee on any future planning application affecting the site. If this site was allocated for development in the DPD without satisfactory replacement playing field provision being made, Sport England would have to object to a future planning application as a statutory consultee. Due to the weight that should be applied to objections made by statutory consultees and the need to refer planning applications to the Secretary of State (through the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009) that Sport England objects to, there would be potential for significant uncertainty and delays in the delivery of any development on this site.

It is therefore requested that Rayleigh Sports and Social Club site be removed from option NL5 if it is pursued unless the development was to make provision for at least like for like replacement facility provision which is supported by the users of the playing field.

Sport England is supportive of protecting the district's schools from development as they provide many facilities that meet the wider needs of the communities where they are located as well as the needs of individual schools. In particular, schools provide indoor and outdoor sports facilities that make a major contribution towards meeting community needs. Consequently, there protection is justified especially if supported by an evidence base such as a playing pitch assessment which demonstrates the role that such facilities play in meeting community needs.

All of the identified open spaces should be protected and any proposal affecting the open space should be considered against a Development Management policy on open space protection. This preferable as it provides clarity and certainty to developers and the community and provides a consistent basis for determining planning applications which would accord with PPG17. The DPD should identify and protect all of the district's principal open spaces. Other open spaces not identified can be protected through a development management policy as it will not be possible to define every open space of value in the DPD

The focus of identifying new open space allocations has been those required to meet the needs of new development. However, no consideration appears to be given to whether there is a need to identify open space allocations to meet the needs of the existing community. For example, there is considered to be deficiencies of community playing pitch provision in the district which has been exemplified through the recent planning application for an expanded site for Rayleigh Boys Youth FC. If the Council's emerging playing pitch strategy confirms such deficiencies, new playing field allocations should be made.

Support is given to the allocation of the Rayleigh, Clements Hall and Great Wakering leisure centres as they represent the main community indoor sports facilities in the district. In view of the potential for enhancements on these sites to meet existing and future community needs, it is is important that they are safeguarded from inappropriate development to prevent proposals which may prejudice existing use or future enhancements.