New Local Plan: Spatial Options Document 2021

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Please see below our response to the above consultation; an acknowledgement of safe receipt would be appreciated, thank you.

Page 22 Strategic Priority 4 Objective 15: we note the objective and broadly agree with its content; however, we would prefer to see ‘access for all’ embedded into the strategic objectives of the new Plan and this followed throughout the lower levels. We suggest that it is amended to read: 'To protect and enhance leisure, sport, recreation and community facilities and to support the delivery of a fully accessible multi-functional green infrastructure network’.
Page 38 Place-Making Charter for Rochford: whilst we broadly agree with this Charter, we ask that again access for all is embedded within it. We suggest that the fourth bullet point is amended to read: ‘Improve health and wellbeing by encouraging active travel and securing access to multi-functional, connected green and blue spaces, including parks and coastal areas, which is accessible to ALL user groups – walkers, cyclists, equestrians and the less mobile’.
Page 54 Green and Blue Infrastructure: the main issue which appears not to be included is accessibility for all users. We broadly agree with the options, but it is vitally important that ALL user groups are catered for within the green infrastructure particularly, as the usual default option is to cater for walkers and cyclists only. We would ask that equestrians are also included within this default when green infrastructure is considered.
Public rights of way networks and other accessible green infrastructure is frequently fragmented and this Plan needs to be bold and aspirational to enhance the connectivity of existing and new open spaces so that the network becomes a useable active travel option for all users, both for utility and leisure.
Page 58 Open Spaces and Recreation: Similarly, the need for open spaces to include full accessibility is also very important – and where new open spaces are proposed that access for ALL user groups is the default so that equestrians are not omitted.
Page 67 Transport and Connectivity: we are very pleased to see equestrians being included in the transport hierarchy diagram but we are disappointed that further on reference is made to preparing a Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan to identify further need for improvement. We ask that this is a ‘Sustainable Travel’ Plan which includes all modes of transport – walking, cycling and horse riding (bearing in mind that the Government has confirmed that horse riding is absolutely a form of active travel) otherwise equestrians could lose out on any potential access opportunities on an enhanced network. We suggest that this aspiration is amended to include equestrians.
Potential Site Allocations: we note the various sites that have come forward under the Call for Sites in preparation for this Plan and we are not intending to comment on the suitability or otherwise of specific sites at this stage. We ask though that when a site is considered, any existing public rights of way network is both protected and enhanced, and the opportunity is taken to upgrade footpaths to bridleway status where possible within new developments, thereby ensuring access by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.