Rochford Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Schedule of Changes

The key aim of the changes to the Core Strategy now proposed by the District Council is to respond to recent announcements of Government policy changes by providing a greater degree of certainty over a longer period and to reduce the amount of land released from the Green Belt for development. Essex County Council continues to support the approach taken by Rochford District Council throughout preparation of the Core Strategy to meet the development needs of the District whilst maintaining the quality of its environmental assets and respecting the distinctive qualities of the different settlements and parts of the District. The County Council fully supports the maintenance of a strong policy approach to protection of the Green Belt and of the quality of environmental assets in the District whilst making adequate housing and employment provision within the District.

The most important change to the Core Strategy arising from the Schedule of Changes is a reduction in the number of dwellings to be provided in the District from 250 to 190 per annum. The submitted Core Strategy was based on the requirement to be in conformity with the approved East of England Plan (May 2008) which required Rochford District to provide a minimum of 250 additional dwellings a year from 2006. In support of the District Council's now proposed rate of future housing provision of 190 dwellings a year between 2011 and 2031 the County Council notes that,

* it is the Government's firmly stated intention that the approved Regional Spatial Strategy will be revoked following enactment of the forthcoming Localism Bill - which would enable the District Council to prepare a review of the Core Strategy that proposes a provision 190 dwellings a year;
* the current proposal of the District Council to provide for 190 dwellings a year between 2011 and 2031 is in accord with the Draft Review of the Regional Spatial Strategy that was submitted to the Secretary of State by the former Regional Assembly in March 2010. This is in line with advice in the set of 'Frequently Asked Questions' that accompanied the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies in July 2010 that, 'Authorities may base revised housing targets on the level of provision submitted to the original Regional Spatial Strategy examination (Option 1 targets), supplemented by more recent information as appropriate.'
* the scale of housing provision now proposed by the District Council would:
o be sufficient to meet the District Council's assessment of future housing needs;
o recognise the need for future development in the District to respect the significant environmental designations and assets of the District;
o be in general accord with recent housebuilding rates in the District which have averaged 180 dwellings a year between 2001 and 2010.

The District Council also proposes other amendments to the treatment of future housing provision in the Core Strategy which,
* lengthen the plan period from 2026 to 2031;
* adopt a flexible 'plan, monitor, manage' approach to housing provision; and,
* treat housing provisions at named locations as maxima rather than minima.

Taken together this group of amendments should enable the housing provisions now being proposed by the District Council to continue into the long term. This will give the degree of certainty to both residents and the development industry that the Core Strategy is intended to provide. At the same time, the 'plan, monitor, manage' approach will allow for future development needs to be met in a flexible manner that allows for properly co-ordinated provision of development and infrastructure.

Within Policy H2 (Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing) and Policy H3 (Extension to residential envelopes post-2026) the District Council has generally retained unchanged the originally proposed locations and scales of development. Rather, the main effect of the proposed reduction in the District's overall scale of development is to amend the timing of anticipated release of locations on the edge of settlements - generally by not requiring their release as soon as previously anticipated.

The approach of the District Council in the Schedule of Changes retains the previous balanced distribution of additional housing locations through the District based on their accessibility to jobs, services and facilities (some of which lie outside the District) and the need to protect the valued environments within the District. The County Council continues to support this approach.

The proposed scale and phasing of development at each of the identified locations in Policy H2 and Policy H3 should be capable of being supported by County Council service groups, provided that adequate and timely funding is available. The proposed reduction in the overall housing provision of the Core Strategy, together with the now prospective later release of individual locations for housing development, should further assist accomplishment of this objective. This is particularly so in respect of the changes now proposed to the timing and scale of development at the proposed locations at North of London Road, Rayleigh and at South East Ashingdon. The County Council will continue to work with the District Council to ensure that future infrastructure and facilities would serve, and give benefit to, the existing adjoining community as well as to the new development.

Paragraph 10.1 of the submitted Core Strategy noted the regional transport policy context together with the role of the Local Transport Plan. With the proposed demise of the Regional Spatial Strategy, the District Council proposes deletion of the paragraph, apart from the final sentence that refers to the current LTP. In order to provide adequate long term guidance the County Council recommends that paragraph 10.1 should be further amended by,

Addition of a further sentence to Paragraph 10.1, to become the final sentence and to read,
'Essex County Council is currently developing a new Local Transport Plan (LTP3) that will take effect from 2011.'
Reason:
'To provide clarification of the future policy context for transport provision in Rochford District.'