Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document

1 Introduction

1.1 This report sets out representations submitted on behalf of H R Philpot and Sons Ltd and P W Robinson to Rochford District Council's public consultation on its emerging Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD)

1.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson are local landowners with land interests to the west of Hullbridge. Bidwells has previously submitted representations on their behalf in respect of previous consultations on the Council's emerging Core Strategy, as explained in the following section.

1.3 The Council is currently consulting on its Issues and Options draft Allocations DPD. The document identifies four potential options for the expansion of Hullbridge to accommodate 500 new homes. This report sets out a critique of each option in respect of their suitability, opportunity and constraints for development.

1.4 Our client wishes to express support for the Council's emerging strategy of new housing locations as highlighted in the Core Strategy Submissions. New development focused on larger villages such as Hullbridge has the potential to provide the following significant benefits:

New first time buyer and family homes.
New local affordable housing.
Public open space.
Improvements to the wider road network.
Enhancement to local community facilities and schools as part of planning contributions.
Enhanced access to the water side by introducing new footpaths and cycle routes.
Sustainable homes using modern methods of construction and sustainable energy.

2 Background to Representations

2.1 The Council's Core Strategy, which was submitted to the Secretary of State in September 2009 and is due to be examined this summer, identifies South West Hullbridge as a growth location for 250 homes over the period 2015-2021 and a further 250 post-2021 (500 homes in total - see Figure One below). The document is likely to be adopted by the Council if it is found to be 'sound' by an Inspector following the examination.

2.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson have submitted representations as part of the Core Strategy drafting process over the last three years, including the most recent consultation on the submission draft in October 2009. Whilst the proposed expansion at Hullbridge as whole is supported, these representations identified only if South West Hullbridge as a specific location for growth. H R Philpot and P W Robinson contend that, to be found sound, the Core Strategy should not identify site specific locations for growth and should simply identify Hullbridge as a growth settlement, leaving more scope for the Site Allocations DPD to identify the most suitable sites to facilitate the strategic growth of the town and to allow the testing of these options. We await a further opportunity to present to the appointed Inspector on these points later in 2010.

3 Critique of Rochford District Council's Options for Growth

3.1 In accordance with the scope of the Core Strategy, the four options for growth have been put forward and these are all located to the south west of Hullbridge. The options presented by the Council, as shown below, illustrate that various parcels of land being considered for development over the Core Strategy Plan period. This section of the report sets out H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson's critique of each and provides the Council with our clients' thoughts on specific development options including opportunities and constraints.


Option One - SWH1

3.2 Option One would lead to the development of the field immediately north of Lower Road, with development extending further to the north and west, joining up with existing development along Windermere Avenue. It would surround Malyon's Farm.

3.3 Lower Road currently presents a highly attractive approach to the village from the west (see Figures Two and Three below). A high quality hedgerow marks the boundary of the highway with the open countryside to the north. Grassland and paddocks frame the village and add to its character as a settlement. This option for development would significantly increase the sense of urbanisation on the approach to the village and have a considerable impact on visual amenity in this highly sensitive area should part or all of this option be taken forward then landscape impact and enhancement measures would need to be reconsidered.

3.4 The suggestion of expanding the village to the south-west as proposed by Option One would locate new development close to the main highway at Lower Road, however, many of the new homes would be located further from the centre of the village and the hub of essential services provided on Ferry Road and the leisure opportunities on offer closer to the River Crouch. You would need to drive from these locations to the centre of the village. More need for car usage for groups living on new development.

3.5 The suggested arrangement may engender the creation of a separate 'dormitory' annexe to the village that bears little relation to the main settlement. With easy access to Lower Road and the higher order settlements surrounding Hullbridge, many residents may not need to enter the village centre, pass via the High Street or provide passing trade for local facilities. To this end, Option One would reduce the current cohesiveness of the settlement and provide less support for its facilities than could be the case if developing further north.

Option One Opportunities

Good access onto Lower Road.
Potential for limited development to the west of the village.

Option One Constraints

Impact on immediate landscape as you enter village.
Development could drift further to the west as unconstrained.
Potential for local flooding.
No direct access to waterfront and access to large areas of open space.

Option Two - SWH2

3.6 Option Two would have a similar impact on the character of the village by extending development further west along Watery Lane, however this does illustrate increased growth to the west along Watery Lane which we consider is unacceptable. Malyons Farm remains surrounded by development.

3.7 A new access from Lower Road or Watery Lane would be required. The most favourable solution in highway engineering terms would appear to be a roundabout at the junction of the two roads, but this may not be feasible given the location of existing development north of the junction.

3.8 There is significant local concern about the impact of flooding along Watery Lane and this does not yet appear to have been fully investigated by the District Council in relation to the southern element of the site.

Option Two Opportunities

Access to Lower Road good in highway terms.
Limited development adjacent access road.

Option Two Constraints

Increased built form along Lower Road and Watery Lane.
Identified flooding on Watery Lane/potential on site flooding.
Impact on wider landscape when viewed from highway.

Option Three - SWH3

3.9 Option Three proposes growth of Malyons Farm and a number of roads abutting land further to the north.

3.10 Option Three is the most deliverable option for preserving the rural character of the village. It will have significantly less impact on visual amenity when approaching the village from the west and should cause less harm to the character of the settlement as a whole.

3.11 Removing new development from the edge of Lower Road and Watery Lane will make it less prominent for the majority of residents and reduce perceived urbanisation of the village. Whilst there may be implications for the views enjoyed by some properties at the ends of Riverview Gardens and Grasmere and Windermere Avenues, the impact on the village as a whole should be significantly reduced. To mitigate the concerns of the residents' better planting could be introduced as strategic planting. However we consider a new access would need to be located on Lower Road and there may be opportunities for landscape enhancement to the north-west and south-west of the village by incorporating open space or recreational land in these areas. A growth option plan attached at Appendix 2 illustrates options for maintaining development abutting the western boundary with a new access road acting as a defensible boundary with strategic planting and open space. An attractive
avenue of trees and shrubs would be introduced to enhance the local area.

3.12 This option is likely to enable the village to be expanded in a more cohesive manner. The dwellings would be located close to the centre of the village and the range of essential services available on Ferry Road, including the Cooperative market, Post Office, opticians and pharmacy (see Figure Five below). The development would form a more integrated part of Hullbridge given that access to some of the new homes could be provided from existing streets leading off the main thoroughfare of the village such as Ferry Road. Utilising these roads, some of which are in a poor state of repair and not maintainable at public expense, may present an opportunity to support their enhancement, to the benefit of existing residents. There would be no need to use motor cars as there are strong links on foot with good linkage with the introduction of shared surface.

Option Three Opportunities

Reduced impact on wider landscape to the west.
Delivery of considerable amount of open space for wider village use.
Access to beauty riverside walk for local residents.
Permeable access to facilities including local shops and school.
Opportunity to enhance adjoining access roads.
Attractive balancing ponds for water run off.

Option Three Constraints

Impact of development to the south of the village in landscape terms. Enhancement required.
Careful consideration will be required for linkages to the waterside area.

Option Four - SWH4

3.13 Option Four appears to be the least favourable of all the proposals put forward by the Council. Not only would it lead to the development of open fields to the north of Lower Road and Watery Lane, with all the drawbacks highlighted in relation to Options One and Two, it would also extend development south of Lower Road (see Figure Six). This is currently a defensible, physical barrier to the expansion of the settlement that should be maintained.

3.14 Access would be required to the north from Lower Road/Watery Lane, a further highway junction would be required to the south, to serve the southern parcel of development. This would need to be in the vicinity of the existing junction with Watery Lane, which is on a sharp bend, and the new access to development land to the north. This could be to the detriment of highway safety.

3.15 Option Four would increase the urbanisation of the approach to the village, affecting the character of the whole settlement, and, again, engender a more fragmented form of development that may not encourage a cohesive community. Whilst the views of the few properties overlooking open fields on Windermere Avenue, Ambleside Gardens and Elm Grove would be less affected than by Options

One to Three, the wider relationship of development as a whole should be considered. To this end, Option Four is not considered to be a favourable solution.

Option Four Opportunities

Provision of open space at entrance to village.
Opportunity to provide much needed housing for village
.
Option Four Constraints

The site is divided by Lower Road which divorces the site from the village.
Development proposed to the south of the village does not provide suitable access to the village facilities.
Need for use of car little ability to walk to centre.

4 Conclusions

4.1 The emerging Rochford District Core Strategy, which has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is due to be examined and adopted later this year, establishes the principle of expanding Hullbridge to provide 500 new homes. The Council is currently consulting on four potential options to accommodate this level of strategic growth to the south-west of the village.

4.2 This report presents the representations of H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson, who contend that Option Three is the most favourable option to deliver the identified need for strategic housing growth. This proposal will have the least impact on the character of the settlement as a whole, is well located to support and expand the range of services offered in the village centre and is most likely to enable the village to grow in cohesive manner, preserving its identity as a single community.

4.3 The Councils Option Three has a number of positive benefits for the village, which we reinforce below based on our assessment of the options undertaken to date:

Quality new housing to meet the needs of the area.
Additional affordable housing.
Links to future attractive riverside walk.
Introduction of new large areas of public open space.
Support for local community facilities as part of planning obligations.
Sustainable construction and energy generation on site.
Excellent linkage to local facilities and the school.
Opportunities for attractive development to adjoin high quality open space with opportunities to walk to the centre for new residents and local community.

1 Introduction

1.1 This report sets out representations submitted on behalf of H R Philpot and Sons Ltd and P W Robinson to Rochford District Council's public consultation on its emerging Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD)

1.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson are local landowners with land interests to the west of Hullbridge. Bidwells has previously submitted representations on their behalf in respect of previous consultations on the Council's emerging Core Strategy, as explained in the following section.

1.3 The Council is currently consulting on its Issues and Options draft Allocations DPD. The document identifies four potential options for the expansion of Hullbridge to accommodate 500 new homes. This report sets out a critique of each option in respect of their suitability, opportunity and constraints for development.

1.4 Our client wishes to express support for the Council's emerging strategy of new housing locations as highlighted in the Core Strategy Submissions. New development focused on larger villages such as Hullbridge has the potential to provide the following significant benefits:

New first time buyer and family homes.
New local affordable housing.
Public open space.
Improvements to the wider road network.
Enhancement to local community facilities and schools as part of planning contributions.
Enhanced access to the water side by introducing new footpaths and cycle routes.
Sustainable homes using modern methods of construction and sustainable energy.

2 Background to Representations

2.1 The Council's Core Strategy, which was submitted to the Secretary of State in September 2009 and is due to be examined this summer, identifies South West Hullbridge as a growth location for 250 homes over the period 2015-2021 and a further 250 post-2021 (500 homes in total - see Figure One below). The document is likely to be adopted by the Council if it is found to be 'sound' by an Inspector following the examination.

2.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson have submitted representations as part of the Core Strategy drafting process over the last three years, including the most recent consultation on the submission draft in October 2009. Whilst the proposed expansion at Hullbridge as whole is supported, these representations identified only if South West Hullbridge as a specific location for growth. H R Philpot and P W Robinson contend that, to be found sound, the Core Strategy should not identify site specific locations for growth and should simply identify Hullbridge as a growth settlement, leaving more scope for the Site Allocations DPD to identify the most suitable sites to facilitate the strategic growth of the town and to allow the testing of these options. We await a further opportunity to present to the appointed Inspector on these points later in 2010.

3 Critique of Rochford District Council's Options for Growth

3.1 In accordance with the scope of the Core Strategy, the four options for growth have been put forward and these are all located to the south west of Hullbridge. The options presented by the Council, as shown below, illustrate that various parcels of land being considered for development over the Core Strategy Plan period. This section of the report sets out H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson's critique of each and provides the Council with our clients' thoughts on specific development options including opportunities and constraints.


Option One - SWH1

3.2 Option One would lead to the development of the field immediately north of Lower Road, with development extending further to the north and west, joining up with existing development along Windermere Avenue. It would surround Malyon's Farm.

3.3 Lower Road currently presents a highly attractive approach to the village from the west (see Figures Two and Three below). A high quality hedgerow marks the boundary of the highway with the open countryside to the north. Grassland and paddocks frame the village and add to its character as a settlement. This option for development would significantly increase the sense of urbanisation on the approach to the village and have a considerable impact on visual amenity in this highly sensitive area should part or all of this option be taken forward then landscape impact and enhancement measures would need to be reconsidered.

3.4 The suggestion of expanding the village to the south-west as proposed by Option One would locate new development close to the main highway at Lower Road, however, many of the new homes would be located further from the centre of the village and the hub of essential services provided on Ferry Road and the leisure opportunities on offer closer to the River Crouch. You would need to drive from these locations to the centre of the village. More need for car usage for groups living on new development.

3.5 The suggested arrangement may engender the creation of a separate 'dormitory' annexe to the village that bears little relation to the main settlement. With easy access to Lower Road and the higher order settlements surrounding Hullbridge, many residents may not need to enter the village centre, pass via the High Street or provide passing trade for local facilities. To this end, Option One would reduce the current cohesiveness of the settlement and provide less support for its facilities than could be the case if developing further north.

Option One Opportunities

Good access onto Lower Road.
Potential for limited development to the west of the village.

Option One Constraints

Impact on immediate landscape as you enter village.
Development could drift further to the west as unconstrained.
Potential for local flooding.
No direct access to waterfront and access to large areas of open space.

Option Two - SWH2

3.6 Option Two would have a similar impact on the character of the village by extending development further west along Watery Lane, however this does illustrate increased growth to the west along Watery Lane which we consider is unacceptable. Malyons Farm remains surrounded by development.

3.7 A new access from Lower Road or Watery Lane would be required. The most favourable solution in highway engineering terms would appear to be a roundabout at the junction of the two roads, but this may not be feasible given the location of existing development north of the junction.

3.8 There is significant local concern about the impact of flooding along Watery Lane and this does not yet appear to have been fully investigated by the District Council in relation to the southern element of the site.

Option Two Opportunities

Access to Lower Road good in highway terms.
Limited development adjacent access road.

Option Two Constraints

Increased built form along Lower Road and Watery Lane.
Identified flooding on Watery Lane/potential on site flooding.
Impact on wider landscape when viewed from highway.

Option Three - SWH3

3.9 Option Three proposes growth of Malyons Farm and a number of roads abutting land further to the north.

3.10 Option Three is the most deliverable option for preserving the rural character of the village. It will have significantly less impact on visual amenity when approaching the village from the west and should cause less harm to the character of the settlement as a whole.

3.11 Removing new development from the edge of Lower Road and Watery Lane will make it less prominent for the majority of residents and reduce perceived urbanisation of the village. Whilst there may be implications for the views enjoyed by some properties at the ends of Riverview Gardens and Grasmere and Windermere Avenues, the impact on the village as a whole should be significantly reduced. To mitigate the concerns of the residents' better planting could be introduced as strategic planting. However we consider a new access would need to be located on Lower Road and there may be opportunities for landscape enhancement to the north-west and south-west of the village by incorporating open space or recreational land in these areas. A growth option plan attached at Appendix 2 illustrates options for maintaining development abutting the western boundary with a new access road acting as a defensible boundary with strategic planting and open space. An attractive
avenue of trees and shrubs would be introduced to enhance the local area.

3.12 This option is likely to enable the village to be expanded in a more cohesive manner. The dwellings would be located close to the centre of the village and the range of essential services available on Ferry Road, including the Cooperative market, Post Office, opticians and pharmacy (see Figure Five below). The development would form a more integrated part of Hullbridge given that access to some of the new homes could be provided from existing streets leading off the main thoroughfare of the village such as Ferry Road. Utilising these roads, some of which are in a poor state of repair and not maintainable at public expense, may present an opportunity to support their enhancement, to the benefit of existing residents. There would be no need to use motor cars as there are strong links on foot with good linkage with the introduction of shared surface.

Option Three Opportunities

Reduced impact on wider landscape to the west.
Delivery of considerable amount of open space for wider village use.
Access to beauty riverside walk for local residents.
Permeable access to facilities including local shops and school.
Opportunity to enhance adjoining access roads.
Attractive balancing ponds for water run off.

Option Three Constraints

Impact of development to the south of the village in landscape terms. Enhancement required.
Careful consideration will be required for linkages to the waterside area.

Option Four - SWH4

3.13 Option Four appears to be the least favourable of all the proposals put forward by the Council. Not only would it lead to the development of open fields to the north of Lower Road and Watery Lane, with all the drawbacks highlighted in relation to Options One and Two, it would also extend development south of Lower Road (see Figure Six). This is currently a defensible, physical barrier to the expansion of the settlement that should be maintained.

3.14 Access would be required to the north from Lower Road/Watery Lane, a further highway junction would be required to the south, to serve the southern parcel of development. This would need to be in the vicinity of the existing junction with Watery Lane, which is on a sharp bend, and the new access to development land to the north. This could be to the detriment of highway safety.

3.15 Option Four would increase the urbanisation of the approach to the village, affecting the character of the whole settlement, and, again, engender a more fragmented form of development that may not encourage a cohesive community. Whilst the views of the few properties overlooking open fields on Windermere Avenue, Ambleside Gardens and Elm Grove would be less affected than by Options

One to Three, the wider relationship of development as a whole should be considered. To this end, Option Four is not considered to be a favourable solution.

Option Four Opportunities

Provision of open space at entrance to village.
Opportunity to provide much needed housing for village
.
Option Four Constraints

The site is divided by Lower Road which divorces the site from the village.
Development proposed to the south of the village does not provide suitable access to the village facilities.
Need for use of car little ability to walk to centre.

4 Conclusions

4.1 The emerging Rochford District Core Strategy, which has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is due to be examined and adopted later this year, establishes the principle of expanding Hullbridge to provide 500 new homes. The Council is currently consulting on four potential options to accommodate this level of strategic growth to the south-west of the village.

4.2 This report presents the representations of H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson, who contend that Option Three is the most favourable option to deliver the identified need for strategic housing growth. This proposal will have the least impact on the character of the settlement as a whole, is well located to support and expand the range of services offered in the village centre and is most likely to enable the village to grow in cohesive manner, preserving its identity as a single community.

4.3 The Councils Option Three has a number of positive benefits for the village, which we reinforce below based on our assessment of the options undertaken to date:

Quality new housing to meet the needs of the area.
Additional affordable housing.
Links to future attractive riverside walk.
Introduction of new large areas of public open space.
Support for local community facilities as part of planning obligations.
Sustainable construction and energy generation on site.
Excellent linkage to local facilities and the school.
Opportunities for attractive development to adjoin high quality open space with opportunities to walk to the centre for new residents and local community.

1 Introduction

1.1 This report sets out representations submitted on behalf of H R Philpot and Sons Ltd and P W Robinson to Rochford District Council's public consultation on its emerging Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD)

1.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson are local landowners with land interests to the west of Hullbridge. Bidwells has previously submitted representations on their behalf in respect of previous consultations on the Council's emerging Core Strategy, as explained in the following section.

1.3 The Council is currently consulting on its Issues and Options draft Allocations DPD. The document identifies four potential options for the expansion of Hullbridge to accommodate 500 new homes. This report sets out a critique of each option in respect of their suitability, opportunity and constraints for development.

1.4 Our client wishes to express support for the Council's emerging strategy of new housing locations as highlighted in the Core Strategy Submissions. New development focused on larger villages such as Hullbridge has the potential to provide the following significant benefits:

New first time buyer and family homes.
New local affordable housing.
Public open space.
Improvements to the wider road network.
Enhancement to local community facilities and schools as part of planning contributions.
Enhanced access to the water side by introducing new footpaths and cycle routes.
Sustainable homes using modern methods of construction and sustainable energy.

2 Background to Representations

2.1 The Council's Core Strategy, which was submitted to the Secretary of State in September 2009 and is due to be examined this summer, identifies South West Hullbridge as a growth location for 250 homes over the period 2015-2021 and a further 250 post-2021 (500 homes in total - see Figure One below). The document is likely to be adopted by the Council if it is found to be 'sound' by an Inspector following the examination.

2.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson have submitted representations as part of the Core Strategy drafting process over the last three years, including the most recent consultation on the submission draft in October 2009. Whilst the proposed expansion at Hullbridge as whole is supported, these representations identified only if South West Hullbridge as a specific location for growth. H R Philpot and P W Robinson contend that, to be found sound, the Core Strategy should not identify site specific locations for growth and should simply identify Hullbridge as a growth settlement, leaving more scope for the Site Allocations DPD to identify the most suitable sites to facilitate the strategic growth of the town and to allow the testing of these options. We await a further opportunity to present to the appointed Inspector on these points later in 2010.

3 Critique of Rochford District Council's Options for Growth

3.1 In accordance with the scope of the Core Strategy, the four options for growth have been put forward and these are all located to the south west of Hullbridge. The options presented by the Council, as shown below, illustrate that various parcels of land being considered for development over the Core Strategy Plan period. This section of the report sets out H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson's critique of each and provides the Council with our clients' thoughts on specific development options including opportunities and constraints.


Option One - SWH1

3.2 Option One would lead to the development of the field immediately north of Lower Road, with development extending further to the north and west, joining up with existing development along Windermere Avenue. It would surround Malyon's Farm.

3.3 Lower Road currently presents a highly attractive approach to the village from the west (see Figures Two and Three below). A high quality hedgerow marks the boundary of the highway with the open countryside to the north. Grassland and paddocks frame the village and add to its character as a settlement. This option for development would significantly increase the sense of urbanisation on the approach to the village and have a considerable impact on visual amenity in this highly sensitive area should part or all of this option be taken forward then landscape impact and enhancement measures would need to be reconsidered.

3.4 The suggestion of expanding the village to the south-west as proposed by Option One would locate new development close to the main highway at Lower Road, however, many of the new homes would be located further from the centre of the village and the hub of essential services provided on Ferry Road and the leisure opportunities on offer closer to the River Crouch. You would need to drive from these locations to the centre of the village. More need for car usage for groups living on new development.

3.5 The suggested arrangement may engender the creation of a separate 'dormitory' annexe to the village that bears little relation to the main settlement. With easy access to Lower Road and the higher order settlements surrounding Hullbridge, many residents may not need to enter the village centre, pass via the High Street or provide passing trade for local facilities. To this end, Option One would reduce the current cohesiveness of the settlement and provide less support for its facilities than could be the case if developing further north.

Option One Opportunities

Good access onto Lower Road.
Potential for limited development to the west of the village.

Option One Constraints

Impact on immediate landscape as you enter village.
Development could drift further to the west as unconstrained.
Potential for local flooding.
No direct access to waterfront and access to large areas of open space.

Option Two - SWH2

3.6 Option Two would have a similar impact on the character of the village by extending development further west along Watery Lane, however this does illustrate increased growth to the west along Watery Lane which we consider is unacceptable. Malyons Farm remains surrounded by development.

3.7 A new access from Lower Road or Watery Lane would be required. The most favourable solution in highway engineering terms would appear to be a roundabout at the junction of the two roads, but this may not be feasible given the location of existing development north of the junction.

3.8 There is significant local concern about the impact of flooding along Watery Lane and this does not yet appear to have been fully investigated by the District Council in relation to the southern element of the site.

Option Two Opportunities

Access to Lower Road good in highway terms.
Limited development adjacent access road.

Option Two Constraints

Increased built form along Lower Road and Watery Lane.
Identified flooding on Watery Lane/potential on site flooding.
Impact on wider landscape when viewed from highway.

Option Three - SWH3

3.9 Option Three proposes growth of Malyons Farm and a number of roads abutting land further to the north.

3.10 Option Three is the most deliverable option for preserving the rural character of the village. It will have significantly less impact on visual amenity when approaching the village from the west and should cause less harm to the character of the settlement as a whole.

3.11 Removing new development from the edge of Lower Road and Watery Lane will make it less prominent for the majority of residents and reduce perceived urbanisation of the village. Whilst there may be implications for the views enjoyed by some properties at the ends of Riverview Gardens and Grasmere and Windermere Avenues, the impact on the village as a whole should be significantly reduced. To mitigate the concerns of the residents' better planting could be introduced as strategic planting. However we consider a new access would need to be located on Lower Road and there may be opportunities for landscape enhancement to the north-west and south-west of the village by incorporating open space or recreational land in these areas. A growth option plan attached at Appendix 2 illustrates options for maintaining development abutting the western boundary with a new access road acting as a defensible boundary with strategic planting and open space. An attractive
avenue of trees and shrubs would be introduced to enhance the local area.

3.12 This option is likely to enable the village to be expanded in a more cohesive manner. The dwellings would be located close to the centre of the village and the range of essential services available on Ferry Road, including the Cooperative market, Post Office, opticians and pharmacy (see Figure Five below). The development would form a more integrated part of Hullbridge given that access to some of the new homes could be provided from existing streets leading off the main thoroughfare of the village such as Ferry Road. Utilising these roads, some of which are in a poor state of repair and not maintainable at public expense, may present an opportunity to support their enhancement, to the benefit of existing residents. There would be no need to use motor cars as there are strong links on foot with good linkage with the introduction of shared surface.

Option Three Opportunities

Reduced impact on wider landscape to the west.
Delivery of considerable amount of open space for wider village use.
Access to beauty riverside walk for local residents.
Permeable access to facilities including local shops and school.
Opportunity to enhance adjoining access roads.
Attractive balancing ponds for water run off.

Option Three Constraints

Impact of development to the south of the village in landscape terms. Enhancement required.
Careful consideration will be required for linkages to the waterside area.

Option Four - SWH4

3.13 Option Four appears to be the least favourable of all the proposals put forward by the Council. Not only would it lead to the development of open fields to the north of Lower Road and Watery Lane, with all the drawbacks highlighted in relation to Options One and Two, it would also extend development south of Lower Road (see Figure Six). This is currently a defensible, physical barrier to the expansion of the settlement that should be maintained.

3.14 Access would be required to the north from Lower Road/Watery Lane, a further highway junction would be required to the south, to serve the southern parcel of development. This would need to be in the vicinity of the existing junction with Watery Lane, which is on a sharp bend, and the new access to development land to the north. This could be to the detriment of highway safety.

3.15 Option Four would increase the urbanisation of the approach to the village, affecting the character of the whole settlement, and, again, engender a more fragmented form of development that may not encourage a cohesive community. Whilst the views of the few properties overlooking open fields on Windermere Avenue, Ambleside Gardens and Elm Grove would be less affected than by Options

One to Three, the wider relationship of development as a whole should be considered. To this end, Option Four is not considered to be a favourable solution.

Option Four Opportunities

Provision of open space at entrance to village.
Opportunity to provide much needed housing for village
.
Option Four Constraints

The site is divided by Lower Road which divorces the site from the village.
Development proposed to the south of the village does not provide suitable access to the village facilities.
Need for use of car little ability to walk to centre.

4 Conclusions

4.1 The emerging Rochford District Core Strategy, which has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is due to be examined and adopted later this year, establishes the principle of expanding Hullbridge to provide 500 new homes. The Council is currently consulting on four potential options to accommodate this level of strategic growth to the south-west of the village.

4.2 This report presents the representations of H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson, who contend that Option Three is the most favourable option to deliver the identified need for strategic housing growth. This proposal will have the least impact on the character of the settlement as a whole, is well located to support and expand the range of services offered in the village centre and is most likely to enable the village to grow in cohesive manner, preserving its identity as a single community.

4.3 The Councils Option Three has a number of positive benefits for the village, which we reinforce below based on our assessment of the options undertaken to date:

Quality new housing to meet the needs of the area.
Additional affordable housing.
Links to future attractive riverside walk.
Introduction of new large areas of public open space.
Support for local community facilities as part of planning obligations.
Sustainable construction and energy generation on site.
Excellent linkage to local facilities and the school.
Opportunities for attractive development to adjoin high quality open space with opportunities to walk to the centre for new residents and local community.

1 Introduction

1.1 This report sets out representations submitted on behalf of H R Philpot and Sons Ltd and P W Robinson to Rochford District Council's public consultation on its emerging Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD)

1.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson are local landowners with land interests to the west of Hullbridge. Bidwells has previously submitted representations on their behalf in respect of previous consultations on the Council's emerging Core Strategy, as explained in the following section.

1.3 The Council is currently consulting on its Issues and Options draft Allocations DPD. The document identifies four potential options for the expansion of Hullbridge to accommodate 500 new homes. This report sets out a critique of each option in respect of their suitability, opportunity and constraints for development.

1.4 Our client wishes to express support for the Council's emerging strategy of new housing locations as highlighted in the Core Strategy Submissions. New development focused on larger villages such as Hullbridge has the potential to provide the following significant benefits:

New first time buyer and family homes.
New local affordable housing.
Public open space.
Improvements to the wider road network.
Enhancement to local community facilities and schools as part of planning contributions.
Enhanced access to the water side by introducing new footpaths and cycle routes.
Sustainable homes using modern methods of construction and sustainable energy.

2 Background to Representations

2.1 The Council's Core Strategy, which was submitted to the Secretary of State in September 2009 and is due to be examined this summer, identifies South West Hullbridge as a growth location for 250 homes over the period 2015-2021 and a further 250 post-2021 (500 homes in total - see Figure One below). The document is likely to be adopted by the Council if it is found to be 'sound' by an Inspector following the examination.

2.2 H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson have submitted representations as part of the Core Strategy drafting process over the last three years, including the most recent consultation on the submission draft in October 2009. Whilst the proposed expansion at Hullbridge as whole is supported, these representations identified only if South West Hullbridge as a specific location for growth. H R Philpot and P W Robinson contend that, to be found sound, the Core Strategy should not identify site specific locations for growth and should simply identify Hullbridge as a growth settlement, leaving more scope for the Site Allocations DPD to identify the most suitable sites to facilitate the strategic growth of the town and to allow the testing of these options. We await a further opportunity to present to the appointed Inspector on these points later in 2010.

3 Critique of Rochford District Council's Options for Growth

3.1 In accordance with the scope of the Core Strategy, the four options for growth have been put forward and these are all located to the south west of Hullbridge. The options presented by the Council, as shown below, illustrate that various parcels of land being considered for development over the Core Strategy Plan period. This section of the report sets out H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson's critique of each and provides the Council with our clients' thoughts on specific development options including opportunities and constraints.


Option One - SWH1

3.2 Option One would lead to the development of the field immediately north of Lower Road, with development extending further to the north and west, joining up with existing development along Windermere Avenue. It would surround Malyon's Farm.

3.3 Lower Road currently presents a highly attractive approach to the village from the west (see Figures Two and Three below). A high quality hedgerow marks the boundary of the highway with the open countryside to the north. Grassland and paddocks frame the village and add to its character as a settlement. This option for development would significantly increase the sense of urbanisation on the approach to the village and have a considerable impact on visual amenity in this highly sensitive area should part or all of this option be taken forward then landscape impact and enhancement measures would need to be reconsidered.

3.4 The suggestion of expanding the village to the south-west as proposed by Option One would locate new development close to the main highway at Lower Road, however, many of the new homes would be located further from the centre of the village and the hub of essential services provided on Ferry Road and the leisure opportunities on offer closer to the River Crouch. You would need to drive from these locations to the centre of the village. More need for car usage for groups living on new development.

3.5 The suggested arrangement may engender the creation of a separate 'dormitory' annexe to the village that bears little relation to the main settlement. With easy access to Lower Road and the higher order settlements surrounding Hullbridge, many residents may not need to enter the village centre, pass via the High Street or provide passing trade for local facilities. To this end, Option One would reduce the current cohesiveness of the settlement and provide less support for its facilities than could be the case if developing further north.

Option One Opportunities

Good access onto Lower Road.
Potential for limited development to the west of the village.

Option One Constraints

Impact on immediate landscape as you enter village.
Development could drift further to the west as unconstrained.
Potential for local flooding.
No direct access to waterfront and access to large areas of open space.

Option Two - SWH2

3.6 Option Two would have a similar impact on the character of the village by extending development further west along Watery Lane, however this does illustrate increased growth to the west along Watery Lane which we consider is unacceptable. Malyons Farm remains surrounded by development.

3.7 A new access from Lower Road or Watery Lane would be required. The most favourable solution in highway engineering terms would appear to be a roundabout at the junction of the two roads, but this may not be feasible given the location of existing development north of the junction.

3.8 There is significant local concern about the impact of flooding along Watery Lane and this does not yet appear to have been fully investigated by the District Council in relation to the southern element of the site.

Option Two Opportunities

Access to Lower Road good in highway terms.
Limited development adjacent access road.

Option Two Constraints

Increased built form along Lower Road and Watery Lane.
Identified flooding on Watery Lane/potential on site flooding.
Impact on wider landscape when viewed from highway.

Option Three - SWH3

3.9 Option Three proposes growth of Malyons Farm and a number of roads abutting land further to the north.

3.10 Option Three is the most deliverable option for preserving the rural character of the village. It will have significantly less impact on visual amenity when approaching the village from the west and should cause less harm to the character of the settlement as a whole.

3.11 Removing new development from the edge of Lower Road and Watery Lane will make it less prominent for the majority of residents and reduce perceived urbanisation of the village. Whilst there may be implications for the views enjoyed by some properties at the ends of Riverview Gardens and Grasmere and Windermere Avenues, the impact on the village as a whole should be significantly reduced. To mitigate the concerns of the residents' better planting could be introduced as strategic planting. However we consider a new access would need to be located on Lower Road and there may be opportunities for landscape enhancement to the north-west and south-west of the village by incorporating open space or recreational land in these areas. A growth option plan attached at Appendix 2 illustrates options for maintaining development abutting the western boundary with a new access road acting as a defensible boundary with strategic planting and open space. An attractive
avenue of trees and shrubs would be introduced to enhance the local area.

3.12 This option is likely to enable the village to be expanded in a more cohesive manner. The dwellings would be located close to the centre of the village and the range of essential services available on Ferry Road, including the Cooperative market, Post Office, opticians and pharmacy (see Figure Five below). The development would form a more integrated part of Hullbridge given that access to some of the new homes could be provided from existing streets leading off the main thoroughfare of the village such as Ferry Road. Utilising these roads, some of which are in a poor state of repair and not maintainable at public expense, may present an opportunity to support their enhancement, to the benefit of existing residents. There would be no need to use motor cars as there are strong links on foot with good linkage with the introduction of shared surface.

Option Three Opportunities

Reduced impact on wider landscape to the west.
Delivery of considerable amount of open space for wider village use.
Access to beauty riverside walk for local residents.
Permeable access to facilities including local shops and school.
Opportunity to enhance adjoining access roads.
Attractive balancing ponds for water run off.

Option Three Constraints

Impact of development to the south of the village in landscape terms. Enhancement required.
Careful consideration will be required for linkages to the waterside area.

Option Four - SWH4

3.13 Option Four appears to be the least favourable of all the proposals put forward by the Council. Not only would it lead to the development of open fields to the north of Lower Road and Watery Lane, with all the drawbacks highlighted in relation to Options One and Two, it would also extend development south of Lower Road (see Figure Six). This is currently a defensible, physical barrier to the expansion of the settlement that should be maintained.

3.14 Access would be required to the north from Lower Road/Watery Lane, a further highway junction would be required to the south, to serve the southern parcel of development. This would need to be in the vicinity of the existing junction with Watery Lane, which is on a sharp bend, and the new access to development land to the north. This could be to the detriment of highway safety.

3.15 Option Four would increase the urbanisation of the approach to the village, affecting the character of the whole settlement, and, again, engender a more fragmented form of development that may not encourage a cohesive community. Whilst the views of the few properties overlooking open fields on Windermere Avenue, Ambleside Gardens and Elm Grove would be less affected than by Options

One to Three, the wider relationship of development as a whole should be considered. To this end, Option Four is not considered to be a favourable solution.

Option Four Opportunities

Provision of open space at entrance to village.
Opportunity to provide much needed housing for village
.
Option Four Constraints

The site is divided by Lower Road which divorces the site from the village.
Development proposed to the south of the village does not provide suitable access to the village facilities.
Need for use of car little ability to walk to centre.

4 Conclusions

4.1 The emerging Rochford District Core Strategy, which has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is due to be examined and adopted later this year, establishes the principle of expanding Hullbridge to provide 500 new homes. The Council is currently consulting on four potential options to accommodate this level of strategic growth to the south-west of the village.

4.2 This report presents the representations of H R Philpot and Sons and P W Robinson, who contend that Option Three is the most favourable option to deliver the identified need for strategic housing growth. This proposal will have the least impact on the character of the settlement as a whole, is well located to support and expand the range of services offered in the village centre and is most likely to enable the village to grow in cohesive manner, preserving its identity as a single community.

4.3 The Councils Option Three has a number of positive benefits for the village, which we reinforce below based on our assessment of the options undertaken to date:

Quality new housing to meet the needs of the area.
Additional affordable housing.
Links to future attractive riverside walk.
Introduction of new large areas of public open space.
Support for local community facilities as part of planning obligations.
Sustainable construction and energy generation on site.
Excellent linkage to local facilities and the school.
Opportunities for attractive development to adjoin high quality open space with opportunities to walk to the centre for new residents and local community.