Allocations Submission Document
Search representations
Results for The Hullbridge Village Community Group search
New searchObject
Allocations Submission Document
Policy SER6 - South West Hullbridge
Representation ID: 32010
Received: 24/01/2013
Respondent: The Hullbridge Village Community Group
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is legally compliant because
(i) it has been prepared without the proper consultation with local groups as was set out in the Statement of Community Involvement,
(ii) in particular, the Council has failed to carry out the extensive consultation in respect of Hullbridge, as was later set out in the Core Strategy document.
We do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is sound because the policy as set out is inconsistent with the aim of community cohesion, which the Council admits is particularly important in our village. We say this because the policy is written in terms of a standalone development sitting adjacent to the main residential community in Hullbridge, and calls for community enhancements for that specific site that are inconsistent with the needs of Hullbridge as a whole.
In addition, we do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is sound because we do not think that it is possible to proceed with the development of site SER6(a) (that part of the development envisaged prior to 2021) within the timescales set out in it. We say this because
(i) the policy fails to address the already existing traffic, flooding and waste problems in Hullbridge, which can only be exacerbated by the proposed policy.
(ii) The timetable as set out in policy SER6 is inconsistent with (a) timescales across other documents that have been issued by the Council in relation to this process, (b) information given in the past to residents and (c) indications given to Hullbridge's district councillors and others.
A detailed justification of this position is set out in an attached letter with annex.
We do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is legally compliant because
(i) it has been prepared without the proper consultation with local groups as was set out in the Statement of Community Involvement,
(ii) in particular, the Council has failed to carry out the extensive consultation in respect of Hullbridge, as was later set out in the Core Strategy document.
We do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is sound because the policy as set out is inconsistent with the aim of community cohesion, which the Council admits is particularly important in our village. We say this because the policy is written in terms of a standalone development sitting adjacent to the main residential community in Hullbridge, and calls for community enhancements for that specific site that are inconsistent with the needs of Hullbridge as a whole.
In addition, we do not believe that Policy SER6 of the ASD is sound because we do not think that it is possible to proceed with the development of site SER6(a) (that part of the development envisaged prior to 2021) within the timescales set out in it. We say this because
(i) the policy fails to address the already existing traffic, flooding and waste problems in Hullbridge, which can only be exacerbated by the proposed policy.
(ii) The timetable as set out in policy SER6 is inconsistent with (a) timescales across other documents that have been issued by the Council in relation to this process, (b) information given in the past to residents and (c) indications given to Hullbridge's district councillors and others.
A detailed justification of this position is set out in an attached letter with annex.
