Changes To Look At Carefully !

One part of the District Council’s Local Development  Framework is the “Development Management Plan”. This is the document that sets out the day-to-day policy for determining planning applications.

The document has already been to an government inspector, the inspector asked for some changes, and the council officers have now amended the document.

Cllr Keith Gordon has been the portfolio holder for planning (at least until a few days ago). He has now agreed that the revised document should go out for public consultation over an 8 week period, with the consultation responses going straight to the inspector.

However there is still time for any 3 councillors to call this in to Full Council, or for the Review Committee to call it in. The deadline for calling it in is 5 working days after July 18th.

So where can you see the document and what are the changes? Well, you can download the document here (2mb)

Here are a few of the changes:

  • The density across a site should be a minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare, unless exceptional circumstances can be satisfactorily demonstrated.
  • Instead of just refusing ‘tandem development’ ‘, which has been council policy for 30 years, tandem development would be allowed when ‘overlooking, privacy and amenity issues’ can be overcome (tandem development is when one house is built directly behind another in a ‘tandem’ arrangement)
  • Instead of sticking to minimum floorspace standards, a smaller floorspace would be allowed if compliance with the standards would be unviable or undeliverable.

But there is a lot more for councillors to study. It’s surprising that this hasn’t gone to the Local Development Framework Sub-Committee

 

19 Comments

  1. Jim Cripps

    CHRIS -!I’m told the deadline for calling this in is tomorrow , so it needs to be done ASAP. , if only to create some time to analyse and understand it – seems a bit of a back door move to me so call it in anyway…..JIM.

    Reply
  2. admin (Post author)

    Jim, the notice was issued on July 18th, we have 5 working days, so we have a little time to study this document..

    Reply
  3. Jim Cripps

    The 475 North of London Rd will grow , don’t forget they have cancelled the Primary School so ( as they always intended ) the housing numbers will grow via this ruse –
    and all the promised Infrastructure is disappearing already ie:-
    No new RTSSC
    No new Primary School
    No Community & Youth Facility shown on Countryside Plan
    No Local highway upgrading planned by ECC Highways
    Are there any of the ‘facilities’ told to the Inspector left on the table – nope.
    Call it in Chris.

    Reply
  4. James

    So Chris so you intend to call this in if you can get support of other councillors?

    Reply
  5. richard lambourne

    I have refferred the matter to my two Tory Councillors Messrs Smith nd Dray, but dont expect any answer or action, its down to the Lib Dems and independants at least to ctrate a storm of protest This is what Linda Kendal and many others have been fighting agaist

    Reply
  6. Gordon Toal

    Again our elected council are acting in an arrogant and foolhardy manner.
    The changes to the Development Management Plan illustrates that they intend to build as many units as they can to fulfil their need in one fell swoop to satisfy government edicts on housing with a complete disregard to local residents concerns and to try to push this through as hastily and unobtrusively as they can.
    Where are the promises to improve surrounding road connections and provide social facilities for this significant increase in residencies?
    To my mind this council are not serving their electors and should be booted from office but of course by dumping this massive housing scheme in west Rayleigh they can sit comfortable in their own wards.
    But local residents will know the true colours if this council and with a general election looming on the horizon will be able to show their discontent there. Watch out Mr Francois!

    Reply
  7. The Mighty Oz

    Folks, not the correct place for this post ( sorry ) but just in case you are unaware the road works have started in Watery Lane, last night the rush hour traffic was queuing from the A1245 turn into Rawreth Lane to the roundabout at Hambro….happy days……

    Reply
  8. richard lambourne

    What we are missing here is the avoricious need to suck in the “New Homes Bonus” which is being used by RDC to balance their budgets

    “The New Homes Bonus is a grant paid by central government to local councils for increasing the number of homes and their use.
    The New Homes Bonus is paid each year for 6 years. It’s based on the amount of extra Council Tax revenue raised for new-build homes, conversions and long-term empty homes brought back into use. There is also an extra payment for providing affordable homes.”

    see https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/increasing-the-number-of-available-homes/supporting-pages/new-homes-bonus

    Maybe they should be honest about their motives

    Reply
  9. Jim Cripps

    Spot on mate – and did you know the most profitable premium rate is applied to each ‘pitch’ on a travellers site ( fact ) let alone house building plots rate.

    Reply
  10. Jim Cripps

    CHRIS – running out of time , is it being called in ?, I’ve written to the Inspector direct with my views on the document already…..JIM.

    Reply
  11. John Mason

    @Jim Cripps 10

    I have asked Chris to find out whether the notable changes referred to in his article were required by the Inspector or were made by the Council independently of the Inspector’s wishes.

    This is an important question. On the one side the Council might have made these themselves but on the other the Inspector may have “requested” the changes on an Arm Behind The Back basis.

    If it were the latter then although the Council should have challenged the Inspector more vigorously perhaps the villain of the piece is the Inspector.

    So, Jim, your strategy of writing to the Inspector in the Public Consultation might have already been the most likely to be effective.

    We have until 25 July to get the information. Just wanted to let you know, Jim.

    Reply
  12. Jim Cripps

    The essence of this development ( and my letter ) is they (RDC) only appear to be dealing with crossing the T’s and dotting the i’s – as recommended by the Inspector , so that the document cannot be challenged as unsound or unsustainable.
    My letter says why are material changes already made not major amendments ie:-
    No new enhanced facility for RTSSC
    No new Primary School
    No apparent place on Countryside plan for the Community& Youth facility
    No planned ECC Highway upgrading of the local roads

    If you add all this to the mass objections already kicked into touch by the Inspector it
    would seem the drive to achieve ” Government Quotas’ is the be all and end all criteria for the “Government Inspector” – a done deal indeed.

    Reply
  13. admin (Post author)

    Jim. , deadline is midnight Friday, will probably send a call-in request tonight.

    Reply
  14. 123

    I understand that the 3 councillors required to call this in has now happened.

    Is there any hard evidence of either the council/coucillors or the inspector having pre-determined views therefore making them unfit to act?????

    Reply
  15. Jim Cripps

    West Rayleigh / Rawreth people unite and help the cause by sending a simple e-mail to the Planning Inspector , address and headings as follows :-
    Planning.Officer@Rochford.gov.uk
    FAO Mr David Smith ( Inspector )
    Re: Modifications to the Rochford Submission Document ( DMD ).

    Up to you what you write of course but a pincer movement would be either –
    Re- occurring flooding adjacent to the proposed North of London Rd site or
    Infrastructure aspects of the plan already cancelled by RDC .

    You must finish with your name and address.

    Reply
  16. Jim Cripps

    So , I read in the Echo that the planning review meeting is now end of January 2015 (was Oct / Nov 2014 ) – what are they up to ?, giving the Developer time to work up
    their ‘response spin ‘ to the Parish / Town / MP and residents opposition!!!!!!!.
    You can still continue to log opposition comments on the website as there are only
    600 + so far – PLEASE do your bit and GET SOMETHING ON THERE ASAP.

    Reply
  17. Jim Cripps

    Are they winding us up deliberately ?- Watery Lane closed for 12 weeks, then Hambro Corner traffic lights for two weeks and now traffic lights half way down Rawreth Lane is the latest . getting us used to it before 10 years of construction starts…….😱.

    Reply
  18. Jim Cripps

    Oh and both Hambro Hill and Downhall Rd subject to temporary lights as well today – it has to be deliberate….

    Reply
  19. Linda Kendall

    Jim. RDC are simply helping the Rayleigh Action Group to attract more local and not so local , drivers to our cause. The message details on our huge posters are more easily read when drivers are delayed. It seems some posters have been removed! Not to worry we have bigger and better ones coming for our sites. If any on-line focus reader has a prominent roadside location Main road or rat run, anywhere in Rayleigh, Rawreth or Hullbridge do get in touch. We aim to continue the pressure on RDC so they finally listen to common sense.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


+ 6 = twelve

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.