As John Mason has already reported on his site, the District Council has just released a list of sites that landowners and developers have suggested could be used for development. The Head of Planning and Transportation , Shaun Scrutton, explains it as follows:
Dear Councillor
Rochford District Allocations DPD – Call for sites
In January, the Council put out a ‘call for sites’ with the aim of gathering information from landowners and developers about land that might be allocated for development in the Allocations Development Plan Document.
For your information, please find enclosed a schedule listing the details of the sites received, together with maps showing their location within the district.
I should stress that the schedule of sites is for information only and no decisions or commitments have been given about the likelihood of any of the sites being eventually included in the Allocations DPD. The information will be reported to a meeting of the LDF Sub-committee later in the year.
In the meantime, if you have any comments on the information please let me know.
Yours sincerely
Shaun Scrutton
Head of Planning & Transportation
So- to be clear – this is a list of sites suggested by landowners and developers. At the moment these sites do NOT have any definite council support. It’s also possible that landowners will come forward later on with other sites
The “LDF sub-committtee” that Mr Scrutton mentions is the Local Development Framework Sub-Committee. It consists of 5 Conservatives and Chris Black. To protect Chris’ impartiality we are NOT going to discuss whether these sites are ‘good’ or ‘bad’ but simply try to explain where they are. Tonight let’s start off with the sites around Rayleigh. (by the way, 1 hectare is about 2 1/2 acres)
Within Rayleigh’s boundaries:
North-West
Lubards Farm 3.2 hectares employment land, 15.7 hectares housing/ community land (some of which might be in Rawreth)
North of 206 London Road
North-East
15-16 Bull Lane – just 2 plots
North of Bull Lane, East of Albert Road/ Blower Close 4.5 hectares
South of Wellington Road – 6.5 hectares
Off Hambro Hill/ Hambro Close 3 acres
Sandhill Road 0.6 hectares
South-East
North of Wren Close, Eastwood – 2.6 hectares
340-370 Eastwood Road – 1 acre
259 Daws Heath road – 2 acres
South of South View Close 3.7 hectares
Daws Heath Road – 0.9 hectares
South-West
Great Wheatley’s , by Western Road – 11 acres
Land off Poyntens – 0.9 hectares
Disraeli Road – 3 plots
Poyntens Lane Rayleigh (not clear whether this is Poyntens, Rayleigh , or Poynters Lane Great Wakering)
Just over into Hullbridge:
Lords Golf Club (used to be Hanover Golf Club) – 21.4 hectares
Just over into Hockley :
Land off Hambro Hill 3.5 hectares
Land in Rawreth:
Rawreth Garage Chelmsford Road – 1 hectare
Rawreth Lane (not clear where) -2 acres
Church Road (not specified where)
Trenders Avenue 5.8 hectares
Hambro Nursery, Church Road 3.9 hectares
Land on borders of Wickford – 7 hectares residential. 4.3 hectares open space.
You can see a map on John Mason’s site here. We understand that it will be on the council website soon.
The land proposed within Rayleigh’s boundaries is roughly 39-42 hectares. If you reckon on densities of between 30-50 dwellings per hectare , that produces 1170 – 2100 homes – so the 1800 so far suggested by the District Council fits in if building is done towards the top end of the density range and every site suggested in Rayleigh is accepted.
The District Council so far is suggesting 400 homes for Hockley and Hawkwell combined.
The District Council so far is suggesting 500 homes for Hullbridge, Canewdon and Great Wakering combined.
The District Council so far is suggesting no housing for Rawreth.
So, if all the land proposed by landowners recently within the Rayleigh boundaries is used it could account for 1700/2100 houses (30/50 per hectare), effectively the 1800 houses proposed.
However, this includes quite a considerable amount of land listed in Rawreth – but – the last sentence above states that District so far is suggesting no housing for Rawreth.
How can you reconcile these two statements? Can someone explain this for me please?
Hi Lyn, the 39-42 hectares we’ve quoted as a rough figure is strictly that within Rayleigh’s parish boundaries. We’ve not included any land close by in Hullbridge, Rawreth or Hockley.
Despite a lot of rumours circulating about development in Rawreth, the document that is out now for consultation doesn’t allocate any housing development there.
So unless the council decides to change its policy for places like Rawreth, Stambridge, Paglesham and Barling there shouldn’t be any significant development there. And the strong stand that Rawreth people have taken in recent weeks and months helps to make any change in policy more unlikely. But stay vigilant!