THE DISTRICT COUNCIL’S DETAILED IDEAS 3- “West Rochford”

There is a West Rochford Action Group which has been running since last year. But my guess is that they won’t like any of these !! http://wrags.org/

Hi Brian

I understand and recognise the point that you are raising and it is not just about Hawkwell but the whole District. As you know, I have already made a strong representation to the Planning Inspector, Laura Graham, that she include this concern in the Schedule of Matters and Issues that will set out the subjects to be discussed at the Hearings.

I am hoping that other organisations such as your Hockley Residents’ Association, Lib Dem Group and Rawreth Parish Council as readers of this site will also now write to the Planning Inspector, via the Programme Officer at RDC, to press the case to see this included hence this long and detailed posting. [I hope that Chris and Ron don’t mind this approach.]

As a draft of this paper will be made available at the Pre-Hearing Meeting on 24 March we will know pretty soon whether this is to be ignored or not. My current view is that it will not be included unless more organisations of influence raise the issue. But I would like let residents to know that I have personally, as a district councillor, tried my dammedness to raise this on behalf of the whole district (and not just my Ward of Hawkwell West).

My stance is as follows:

“There is no current Local Transport Plan (over arching policy for Essex, the responsibility of ECC) which takes into account the overall highway infrastructure needs of the developments in Locations set out in the Core Strategy. As far as I can see there no statement from ECC that, notwithstanding that there is no current LTP which assesses the overall infrastructural needs of the CS, the consolidated and overall effect requires no other infrastructural changes other than those defined looking at each Location independently. With, for example, the ECC assessment of the B1013 being at 72% capacity already will the remaining capacity meet the traffic flows created by the CS without any other infrastructural changes? In the absence of such assessment and assurance from ECC the CS is UNSOUND.”

My evidence is that ECC have raised this issue and whilst RDC has responded I feel that the basis and content of the RDC argument against the concern does not fulfil a SOUND position in response to ECC concern.

Here is the evidence; tell me if you disagree because it might save me a lot of grief fighting with the Planning Inspector if I am wrong.

RDC Consultation Statement at Submission of Core Strategy for Rochford District

Appendix 3 – Summary of issues raised Pre-Submission consultation and initial officer comments

Page 169 – Issue raised by Essex County Council as Highways Authority

http://www.rochford.gov.uk/PDF/planning_cs_consultation_statement.pdf

The Highways Authority is concerned that any proposed redevelopment of Green Belt sites could result in development in areas with limited access to sustainable transport modes therefore resulting in higher levels of car usage and subsequent impact on the SRN (strategic road network). Although the Highways Authority recognises that new public transport hubs that would facilitate the use of non-car modes could be developed over time, this process is likely to require very substantial investment.

It is therefore important that an appropriate assessment of infrastructure requirements is performed for development sites on Green Belt land. Funding towards the necessary public transport infrastructure improvements must be sought and secured prior to occupation of any new development on Green Belt land.

Furthermore, the occupation of such developments should be phased in line with necessary transport infrastructure.

RDC Response

The evidence base confirms that not all of the District’s housing requirement can be accommodated on land outside of the Green Belt.

The Sustainability Appraisal recognises that “The actual locations for growth proposed in the policy are considered to be the most sustainable options available, within the context of the overall high levels of population growth being proposed in the East of England Plan” (paragraph 5.17).

The importance of ensuring infrastructure is provided alongside development is recognised in the Core Strategy, and extensions to the residential envelope will be phased as set out in policy H2 and H3. Appendix H1 identifies infrastructure requirements for each general location. The issue of highways is addressed within policy T1 and T2, and public transport is addressed in policy T3. Appendix CLT1 identifies funding for both highways and public infrastructure improvements.