UPDATED 7th June: Stambridge Mill, Coombes Farm, Core Strategy update

I'm conscious that there hasn't been a post for a while. This Blog is definitely still live. In brief, the challenge to Rochford's Core Strategy by Cogent, the Developers behind the Coombes Farm scheme has now been heard at the High Court in Cardiff. The Judge has "reserved Judgment" which basically means he will consider the evidence presented and make a written Judgment in 6/7 weeks.  If the ruling goes against Rochford the ramifications could be significant, as Cogent will be encouraged to appeal the Council's decision to refuse the second attempt to build on Coombes Farm at a recent Development Committee.

The redevelopment of Stambridge Mill seemed to have stalled until a couple of weeks ago, when an application for the demolition of this historic and famous local structure was put to the Parish Council.  It seems the Diggers will be moving in shortly after all...

D-Day for Hall Road

Plans to build 600 houses on land adjacent to Hall Road and Oak Road will go before Council on 18th January 2012.

In addition to the new homes, Bellway Homes have included a new primary school, new cycle and footpaths and a public "open space" - whatever that means.

There will be two access points to the new estate, one involving the construction of a new roundabout along Hall Road.

This is a preferred development site and is included in the Council's recently Government sanctioned Development plan or "core strategy".

But the land is green belt, and coupled with the prospect of increased traffic congestion and the increased strain on local infrastructure, this will not be welcome news for many residents.

More details can be found on the Council's website, including how you can attend the Council meeting where this application will be decided. You can access this by clicking on the title of this post.

With "Christmas Tree Farm" in Hawkwell being decided just before christmas (see post below) and Hall Road just after, you have to wonder at the timing of two of the District's most significant, and substantial, new housing schemes - both on greenbelt - for many years.

Christmas Tree Farm's Last Christmas (Updated 7th & 16th December)

Plans to build an estate of 176 houses in Hawkwell on land near Rectory Road and Main Road will go before Council on 15th December (UPDATE: Planning Officers are recommending approval). A slightly larger scheme was rejected last year, but this area has been earmarked as a site for development in the Council's core strategy, despite it being designated green belt.

Click on title to read Officers' recommendation in full.

UPDATE: 16th December - Councillors refused the planning application, largely due to concerns over design including garden size. Expect to see a revised application in the new year.

The Concreting Over of Rochford

I'm very worried about how Rochford will look in just a few years time as Developers line up with immediate plans for well over 1000 houses in the area, many of which will be on green belt.

The Government has failed to allay fears that new planning legislation will retain protection for the Green Belt, as it contains an overriding "presumption in favour of growth".

It's increasingly obvious that this is the Government's plan to stimulate growth. Build. Build. Build. Who can afford to buy all these homes, and what mortage funding will be available appears to be a question that will be addressed at a later date.

Within Rochford area the following schemes look likely to go before Planning Commitee within the next few months;

Hall Road - 600 houses
Rectory Road/Thorpe Road, Hawkwell - 175 houses
Stambridge Mill - 100 homes
Brays Lane - 100 houses (already agreed provisionally)
Coombes Farm (Stambridge Rd) - 260 houses

All these sites, except Stambridge Mill, are green belt designated.

The Council is an invidious position. Central Government forces Local Councils to produce Local Development Plans that demonstrate that a supposed future demand for housing can be met.

Rochford has extremely limited land left for development, and has been forced to surrender some green belt to comply with Government demands. Of course, Developers also prefer green belt as it provides a blank canvas and avoids expensive demolition and redevelopment costs.

Yet, if the Council doesn't produce a plan, it leaves itself open to Developers taking control of the planning agenda. With deep pockets for top ranking Barristers, costs which Local Authorities can ill afford to match, Developers can often successfully use the Legal System to get the outcome they want, a new housing estate of ticky tacky houses on land which was often previously cherished by the neighbourhood.

I learn today that the Council's Core Strategy (its Local Development Plan) has finally been approved by the Government and will formally be adopted by the Council in December.

This should help to defend against development schemes not forming part of the Council's plans, however most of the schemes listed above ARE included in the Development Plan.

I wish I could conclude this post on a positive note, but right now I can't help but think of a future where Southend and Rochford increasingly merge into one urbanised mass.

Another new bar for Rochford and planning news (Updated 30th Sept)

With the pub trade suffering, and many of Rochford's bars empty through the week, it may be surprising to learn that two new bars/restaurants are likely to open before christmas.

At 68-72 West Street, opposite the Marlborough Head, and at the corner of Union Lane, a Government Inspector has recently overturned local Councillors' refusal to grant permission to convert the existing disused car showroom into a bar/restaurant (The Councillors went against the Council's planning officers, who recommended approval back in April 2011).

Work is already underway, and the Owners expect to be trading before Christmas.

There is only so much spare cash to go round, so it will be interesting to see if this new venue can differentiate its offering without sucking the limited business away from nearby pubs.

Separately, the New Ship's refurbishment (East Street, Rochford, opposite the "Taste of Raj") appears complete and I'm told more news about opening date, and offering will be available within the next month.

UPDATE: I walked past the New Ship this morning and a notice in the window invites applications for Bar Staff, Waiting Staff, Cleaners, and Commis Chefs - drop a CV in or telephone 01702 544797.

Turning to other planning news, this month the Council gave outline permission for 100 houses at Brays Lane, Rochford. This scheme is likely to proceed quickly unless the Government decides to intervene.

No news yet when Stambridge Mill will go before Planning Committee, but full demolition of the existing structures could take place very soon.

Rochford's revised core strategy (its development plan for the area for the next 10 - 15 years) is now likely to submitted to a Government Planning Inspector in October and, assuming no final hitches, could well be in place by Christmas. Rochford's approach contrasts starkly with nearby Castle Point, which has decided, for now, to abandon attempts to get a development plan in place.

The point of the Core Strategy is that it provides a Council with control over where development in its locality will take place, as controversial as some upcoming schemes may be. Castle Point's approach means that housing schemes will be decided on a case by case basis, and Developers will undoubtedly exploit what they see as a weakness in the decision not to get a plan in place.

Call me a cynic, but Castle Points' decision may well be politically motivated. When Government Planning Inspectors overrule a planning refusal to tarmac greenbelt land at Daws Heath, local Councillors can pin the blame at Whitehall.

I'm glad Rochford hasn't adopted this approach with the core strategy, although I have little doubt there are a number of individual schemes which Councillors refuse in the knowledge they are likely to be agreed on appeal. In fact, the new West Street bar/diner mentioned above is perhaps such an example.

Brays lane - 100 houses planned

The Council is holding an extra planning meeting next week to vote on plans for a housing development near The King Edmund School at Brays Lane. Full info can be viewed by clicking on the Title Post. An application for 150 homes was submitted last year, but withdrawn. The site is on green belt, but the Council believes there are exceptional reasons why planning permission should be granted. See also my post from 9th July 2010.
EDIT: This Application has since been approved

Rochford forced to build more houses more quickly?

The Government Inspector's refusal this week to the Council's request to suspend its core strategy until December places Rochford under greater pressure to agree more house building schemes.

When the Coalition Government announced its Localism Bill, it gave Councils the opportunity to review the annual housing targets foisted upon them by central Government. Rochford reduced its annual requirement from 250 units to 190 (though the total numbers remained the same as the annual build was spread over a longer period). Unfortunately for Rochford, and other Councils, various legal actions have found that it was illegal to change annual house building targets until the Localism Bill becomes fully effective. Coupled with the Coalitions's desire to free up the planning process, and for the country to "plan for growth" it is looking increasingly likely that Rochford will be under pressure to build more, not less.

Rochford's core strategy, its development plan for the district, which includes its housing commitments, has been significantly delayed due to the change of Government and advice from central Government which was successfully challenged in the High Court (above). It decided recently to suspend the Core Strategy until December when, it believed, it could take advantage of new legislation (the Localism Bill) which would free it from centrally imposed targets. The Government Inspector, overseeing the progess of the Core Strategy has, however, declined the Council's request to delay and she has given it two choices, either to withdraw its Strategy altogether or to continue but make a firm and early commitment to address the housing shortfall. In effect, if choosing the latter path, the Council may feel it has a "get out of jail card" because it can get its Core Strategy in place with the lower annual housing numbers. They will then look to the Localism Bill to enable them, in the early review required by the Inspector, to try to avoid making any changes to its plans. However, the same Bill, whilst apparently giving Council more freedom, will also give Developers more ammunition to challenge Councils if planning schemes are refused under the planning for growth clauses.

The Council will meet on 31st August to discuss their preferred route forward.

It looks as though Rochford's green belt will be under continuing and increasing threat with the Coalition, surely not what the Electorate thought when casting their vote. The Coalition promised, in their campaigning literature, to return decison making to local Councils as they were in the best position to know what the local area wanted. The reality is looking to be something quite different.

UPDATE 23rd August 2011
Council Officers have recommended that Rochford Council reverts to an earlier version of the core strategy, and submits this for Government approval. Whilst this will force the Government to build more houses more quickly - 250 pa instead of the 190 pa proposed in the later version - the rationale is that the Council will have more control over new housing sites. By having a development plan in place, sanctioned by Government, Developers will have less likelihood of succeeding in legal challenges to build on non preferred sites (eg Coombes Farm). Click on the title to see the Officers' Proposals for debate at a full Council meeting on 31st August.

UPDATE 1st September 2011
Majority vote to revert to earlier version of core strategy.

Castle Point's core strategy is flawed

Click on title to see article from Evening Echo.
In a worrying development, with ramifications for Rochford, a Planning Inspector has asked Castle Point to go back to the drawing board and effectively come up with more green belt land to be released, to meet house building targets over the next 15 years. These targets were laid down by the East of England Plan, a Regional Strategy, which will be abolished by soon to be introduced legislation. Green Belt land in Daws Heath is looking particularly vulnerable. If the Council doesn't quickly come up with revised plans which are acceptable to the Planning Inspectorate it runs the risk of losing control of which sites are developed to pushy house builders, who will use their considerable financial muscle to push their projects through with legal action if necessary. Either way, it looks as though Castle Point will have to sacrifice land we all thought was protected to avoid such over development. Rochford is facing the same dilemma and the next few months will potentially see planning decisions made which will significantly alter the make up of the District forever.

Planning and green belt development in Rochford

We are in a genuine "quiet before the storm" period for new development in Rochford, but the largest and most controversial schemes have not gone away. Coombes Farm's potential developers have applied for judicial review against the Government's planning refusal a few months ago and it's likely it will be early 2011 before there is any further news, although another, separate, developer has taken it's case to the High Court and the outcome could have some bearing on the outcome for Coombes Farm. Cala Homes are trying to build new homes at Barton Farm in Winchester and yesterday went to the High Court to challenge the Government over its abolition of regional strategies, which included house building targets. Eric Pickles, in doing this, passed responsibility for setting numbers of new homes to local Councils. Not having a regional strategy to support them, Cala's plans were somewhat undermined and they are contesting that the Government acted illegally in abolishing Regional Strategies without an Act of Parliament being passed. The Government's reply is that existing legislation empowers them to "revocate" Regional Strategies. The High Court will consider the arguments and a Judgment will be issued in the near future. The QC representing Cala Homes was Peter Village who also acted for Colonnade and the Government's refusal to allow building at Coombes Farm included a reference to the abolition of regional strategies, hence the Judgment on Cala versus HM Government could set as a precedent for many other potential developments in England.

Inner London Group, the owners of Stambridge Mill, have finally submitted their planning application for redevelopment of the site. They will also shoulder the cost of repairs to flood defences in the vicinity but this will still be a controversial development, not least because the Mill, as forlorn and ravaged as it now remains, has been a landmark in the area for hundreds of years. Many people have fond memories of the site, indeed people were working there until the 1990s. Even now, many people enjoy the footpath leading past this vast hulk of a decayed building where birds and other wildlife have taken up residence, so quiet and peaceful compared to the industrial noise that once could be heard miles away.

And what is happening along Hall Road? Bellway's plans to build 600 homes on green belt between Ironwell Lane and Hall Road are still very much alive, and under a planning agreement between the developer and Rochford Council a decison will need to be reached in early 2011. This, if it's allowed to proceed, will surely be the most major redevelopment in Rochford since the Hospital site? Apart from the assault on the environment it will not do wonders for the senses either. The green fields and attractive properties along Hall Road are a pleasing welcome to Rochford, a horrible ticky tacky estate of toy town houses will destroy the essential character of this part of Rochford and the scheme should be rejected outright.

We're seemingly bombarded with preaching about how we need new homes and that everywhere needs to take its share but I wonder if that's really true. People are under the misconception that we're running out of land in this country but that's simply not the case. Because of the density of house building, basically the majority of us are all tightly packed in together, 85% of the population lives on approximately 15% of the land. Take a drive up past Chelmsford, into Suffolk and Norfolk and you will see my point. South Essex has been appallingly over developed; it's highly urbanised and any relatively rural, historic, towns and villages - such as Rochford, should be protected from any further desecration.

Rochford Council are continuing with their plans to complete their core strategy, a further questionnaire has been sent out to households this week. They tell us by adopting a structured approach to planning and house building they can control where houses will go and how many. This way the Council will be protected against "rogue" developments such as Colonnade's obscene plans for Coombes Farm. But does Rochford need any large scale developments on green belt at all??? In my view it would save time, money, and bureaucracy to simply adopt a no development on green belt policy. If you share my views, I would urge you to respond to the Council's core strategy Questionnaire accordingly and then we can see whether our concerns are acted upon.