Found this old photo, approx 50 years old. No date set yet for planning application for Stambridge Mill's demolition and replacement with ticky tacky houses and flats.
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Stambridge Mill 1955
Found this old photo, approx 50 years old. No date set yet for planning application for Stambridge Mill's demolition and replacement with ticky tacky houses and flats.
Autumn walk across Coombes Farm and Stambridge
Those, like us, who live close to Coombes Farm are so fortunate to have green, open countryside on our doorstep. Which is exactly the way we want to keep it of course. Oddly, it's at this time of year, as winter approaches, that I appreciate it all the more. I suppose the frequency of sunny "walkable" days diminishes so you try to grab any opportunity that comes along. Today was such a day. A mild hangover to contend with, so what better cure than an invigorating and restorative walk across Coombes Farm, down Little Stambridge Hall Lane and across to the Royal Oak. It was so sunny and settled that we were able to sit outside the pub and enjoy a "hair of the dog" pint of Guinness. And then back, slightly different route, which (by sheer coincidence of course) brought us alongside The Cherry Tree. We had just enough loose change for one more drink before heading home across Coombes Farm. Our new friend, which we'd met on the way out, had been repatriated with his siblings by now but I guess he enjoyed the freedom while it lasted.
Saturday, 9 October 2010
Stambridge Mill ancient photo
I came across this old photo, it must be over a hundred years old. Amazing how wide the Roach was then.
Saturday, 4 September 2010
Coombes Farm to go to Judicial Review? UPDATE 15th September
Colonnade's last throw of the dice? Full info on campaign website (click on title of this post)
Now the application for 163 houses at Stambridge Mill has been submitted and, given the location is on brownfield and has Council support, is likely to get approval, the nightmare scenario of nearly 500 new homes in a small area moves another step to becoming reality.
But stepping back from a moment I have to remind myself what the judicial review process involves. It's not about questioning the decision the Planning Inspector made when refusing development at Coombes Farm, it's about the process she followed to get there.
Therefore if you accept that the decision was correct - basically, refusal due to there being no exceptional circumstances allowing re-classification of Coombes Farm as green belt - and it is only process that is found at be at fault then the judicial review is far from guaranteeing Colonnade, the developer, success.
It may be that the process has to be reviewed, but the same decision is reached.
It may be that this is indeed Colonnade's last throw of the dice and the Judge throws out their application for review.
It may of course be the first step towards Coombes Farm being concreted over but I remain optimistic, but frustrated and disappointed that Stambridge and Rochford residents, who have been united in their opposition to these plans, have to endure the agony of a further protracted period of uncertainty.
In the meantime the Council continues with its attempts to get its "core strategy" signed off by a Government Inspector, and other planning applications such as Stambridge Mill and Brays Lane will no doubt be shortly decided upon.
For Coombes Farm, perhaps the longer the application for Judicial Review takes, the better. Much time in the Planning Inquiry was devoted to affordable housing, or rather Rochford's lack of. This was presented by Colonnade as a strong reason for agreeing the development. If other developments come forward, in sites which are less controversial, which address the affordable and overall housing targets this may help to defend Coombes Farm if a further Court hearing has to take place.
The ifs and buts continue...
UPDATE 15th September
22nd October could be a key date for the Coombes Farm saga. A completely separate housebuilder, Cala Homes, has succeeded in obtaining a fast tracked judicial review hearing in respect of their plans to build a few thousand homes in Winchester. Their plans were refused partly because Eric Pickles wrote to Councils advising that they no longer were bound by the previous Government's house building targets. Whilst the Government plans to reinforce this with a new Act of Parliament probably in 2011 (the "localism bill")the issue at stake is whether Eric Pickles' letter can be given "material weight", ie can it be relied upon in a legal sense when planning decisions are made by Councils, Government Planning Inspectors, etc. The Government has sought legal advice and believes it can, but Cala Homes' legal advice is obviously different which is perhaps hardly surprising since they are represented by the same QC as Colonnade, Peter Village.
The relevance to Coombes Farm? Given the Inspector based her decison largely on green belt legislation you would think very little. However, as I've mentioned earlier in this post, the application for Judicial Review isn't about the decision it's about the process to get to the decision. In the Grounds for Appeal, Colonnade cite the Inspector's reference to Eric Pickles letter. They reckon the letter is unlawful and the Inspector should not have even referred to it in her decision making. If Colonnade are right, the Cala Homes Hearing will, if it succeeds, give them the precedent they need. But as I've stated at the beginning of this post they're still a long way away from getting the decison changed.
Now the application for 163 houses at Stambridge Mill has been submitted and, given the location is on brownfield and has Council support, is likely to get approval, the nightmare scenario of nearly 500 new homes in a small area moves another step to becoming reality.
But stepping back from a moment I have to remind myself what the judicial review process involves. It's not about questioning the decision the Planning Inspector made when refusing development at Coombes Farm, it's about the process she followed to get there.
Therefore if you accept that the decision was correct - basically, refusal due to there being no exceptional circumstances allowing re-classification of Coombes Farm as green belt - and it is only process that is found at be at fault then the judicial review is far from guaranteeing Colonnade, the developer, success.
It may be that the process has to be reviewed, but the same decision is reached.
It may be that this is indeed Colonnade's last throw of the dice and the Judge throws out their application for review.
It may of course be the first step towards Coombes Farm being concreted over but I remain optimistic, but frustrated and disappointed that Stambridge and Rochford residents, who have been united in their opposition to these plans, have to endure the agony of a further protracted period of uncertainty.
In the meantime the Council continues with its attempts to get its "core strategy" signed off by a Government Inspector, and other planning applications such as Stambridge Mill and Brays Lane will no doubt be shortly decided upon.
For Coombes Farm, perhaps the longer the application for Judicial Review takes, the better. Much time in the Planning Inquiry was devoted to affordable housing, or rather Rochford's lack of. This was presented by Colonnade as a strong reason for agreeing the development. If other developments come forward, in sites which are less controversial, which address the affordable and overall housing targets this may help to defend Coombes Farm if a further Court hearing has to take place.
The ifs and buts continue...
UPDATE 15th September
22nd October could be a key date for the Coombes Farm saga. A completely separate housebuilder, Cala Homes, has succeeded in obtaining a fast tracked judicial review hearing in respect of their plans to build a few thousand homes in Winchester. Their plans were refused partly because Eric Pickles wrote to Councils advising that they no longer were bound by the previous Government's house building targets. Whilst the Government plans to reinforce this with a new Act of Parliament probably in 2011 (the "localism bill")the issue at stake is whether Eric Pickles' letter can be given "material weight", ie can it be relied upon in a legal sense when planning decisions are made by Councils, Government Planning Inspectors, etc. The Government has sought legal advice and believes it can, but Cala Homes' legal advice is obviously different which is perhaps hardly surprising since they are represented by the same QC as Colonnade, Peter Village.
The relevance to Coombes Farm? Given the Inspector based her decison largely on green belt legislation you would think very little. However, as I've mentioned earlier in this post, the application for Judicial Review isn't about the decision it's about the process to get to the decision. In the Grounds for Appeal, Colonnade cite the Inspector's reference to Eric Pickles letter. They reckon the letter is unlawful and the Inspector should not have even referred to it in her decision making. If Colonnade are right, the Cala Homes Hearing will, if it succeeds, give them the precedent they need. But as I've stated at the beginning of this post they're still a long way away from getting the decison changed.
Wednesday, 4 August 2010
The New Ship
Work seems to be progressing, albeit slowly, to refurbish the New Ship and restore the facade to its original 19th century glory when there was a central front entrance, and none of the strips of timber along the edges. The plan is for it reopen as a pub with a restaurant on the first floor, surely a welcome addition to the food and drink offerings in central Rochford.
More controversially, however, are plans by the New Ship owners to build flats on the former car park adjoining the pub, Old Ship Lane and East Street. You can view the planning application by inputting 10/00412/FUL into the planning application database on the Council's wesbite (clicking on the the Title to this post, and you will then be able to post comments about the application, etc.)
It does seem odd for a new business trying to attract new custom to sacrifice valuable parking places in this way. It's also a conservation area, whilst there has been new build on the south side there has been no precedent on this, west, side. I guess the Council will consider this application at Development Control Committee in September so watch this space.
UPDATE 20th August - Council recommending refusal of application.
Sunday, 1 August 2010
Stambridge Mill - UPDATE 15th September 2010
Work is taking place by the Environment Agency to shore up the sea defences at Stambridge Mill. At the same time, a formal planning application is due to be submitted shortly for approx 200 homes on this site. Whilst this will no doubt cause controversy, not least because of the added strain it will add to the ancient road system, something does need to happen at Stambridge Mill. The buildings are dilapidated and appear to be attracting vandalism. Whilst never exactly a beauty spot, there was something to appreciate in this post industrial landscape. Now it's just an eye sore. Inner London Group, who own the land, claim that they will invest in this river side location, improving public access and spending money to make it an atractive place for all to vist. I sincerely hope this is the case. A local resident told me she would like the area to become something akin to Battlesbridge. This is a wonderful idea, but harsh economic realities indicate this will not happen, though I wonder if it could be possible for the developers to set aside a couple of units for local artists or where antiques could be traded. I suspect any planning application will get an easier ride than Coombes Farm. After all the developers are contributing to essential sea defence work, and the land is not on green belt. But it should be possible to influence the final outcome...
UPDATE 19th August - Inner London Group are submitting an application for 163 units, a mix of flats and Exec houses. They plan to invest money in repairing the flood defences and generally upgrading the landscape for both future residents and visitors. My understanding is that the boundaries of the development will not stretch further than the existing site occupies but tbc - the full application is ready to view on the Council's website, which you can access by clicking on the title to this post and entering planning application reference 10/00553/FUL
UPDATE 15th September
It looks as though the EARLIEST this will be voted upon by Rochford Council is October and it may be later.
UPDATE 23rd October
Well it didn't go before the Council's Development Control Committee this month. I'll update as soon as I have a clearer idea of timing.
Rochford station rubbish - Update 5th August
I really don't want this blog to be a place for me to vent my spleen and act as evidence of me drifting into whingy miserable moany middle age. Perhaps it's too late for that! Anyhow, regardless, I will push on. What a mess Rochford station is, particularly the area of land adjacent to the west end of the Southend bound platform. Several times I've spotted rats there having a good munch. Anyhow, rather than simply moan about there is a terrific website where you can report problems such as this. It's called Fix My Street, and you can link to it by clicking the Title of this post. I'll let you know if it works!
UPDATE 5th August - Rochford District Council and National Express have both confirmed that Network Rail have responsibility for the land in question (I notice a mountain bike has been "left" there if anyone's interested) so I'll see if Network Rail will fulfill their responsibilities under the Environmental Protection Act, 1990!
UPDATE 8th October - I attended Rochford District Council's East Area Commitee meeting concerning the litter at Rochford, and recieved a lack lustre response. More successful has been my letters to Iain Coucher, Chief Executive of Network Rail. I have received a letter from Network Rail and a phone call confirming that a full scale litter clearance will take place, hopefully w/c 11th October 2010 or shortly thereafter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)