Rochford District Council. Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Strategic Environmental Assessment And Sustainability Appraisal

Transcription

1 Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Strategic Environmental Assessment And Sustainability Appraisal Environmental Report Prepared for Rochford District Council By Essex County Council April 2006

2 Contents Chapter Page Non Technical Summary 3-9 Number Chapter 1 Methodology Chapter 2 Background Chapter 3 SEA Objectives and Baseline Context Chapter 4 SPD Policy Appraisal Chapter 5 SPD Issues and Alternatives Chapter 6 Monitoring Implementation of the SPD Appendices Appendix 1 Review of Plans and Programmes Appendix 2 - Summary of the SPD Policies Appraised

3 Non Technical Summary 3

4 Non Technical Summary Non Technical Summary Chapter 1 - Methodology Introduction to Sustainable Development Sustainable development is defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The UK Government has adopted 5 principles of for sustainable development they include; Living within environmental limits, Ensuring a strong, healthy and just society, Achieving a sustainable economy, Promoting good governance, Using sound science. Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment The European Directive 2001/42/EC (EC, 2001) ensures that a Strategic Environmental Assessment of a wide range of plans and programmes shall be conducted. The Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document therefore requires a Strategic Appraisal that incorporates the dual statutory requirement of both Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). This report has been prepared in accordance with the following Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) guidance; A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (September, 2005). Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks (November, 2005) 4

5 Methodology Adopted in the SEA The Scoping stage of the SEA/SA involves investigation into the relevant plans, programmes and environmental protection objectives. The Scoping Report also outlines the baseline information which provides the basis for predicting and monitoring environmental effects, aids in the interpretation of environmental problems and allows identification of possible mitigation measures. A list of Sustainability objectives is also outlined in the Scoping Report. The Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document was consulted for a 5 week period. The second part of the SEA approach involves the development and refinement of alternatives and assessing the effects of the plan. The third stage is the development of the Environmental Report. The structure of the Environmental Report is very similar to the suggested structure outlined in A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (September, 2005). Chapter 2 - Background The Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document aims to set out the key elements of the planning framework for the area. The Plan outlines the following principle objectives; Reference Objective 1 Ensure adequate provision of playing pitches throughout the District that seek to meet local needs. 2 To ensure that new development does not adversely affect existing sports fields Chapter 3 - SEA Objectives and Baseline and Context 5

6 Review of the Plans and Programmes The relationship between various plans and programmes and sustainability objectives may influence the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document in various ways. The relationships are analysed to; Identify any external social, environmental or economic objectives that should be reflected in the SA process; Identify external factors that may have influenced the preparation of the plan; and Determine whether the policies in other plans and programmes might lead to cumulative effects when combined with policies in the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Baseline Characteristics The SEA Directive requires an analysis of the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan (Annex 1b) and the environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected (Annex 1c). The baseline data for the SEA/SA of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document includes existing environmental and sustainability information from a range of sources. SEA Objectives, Targets and Indicators Sustainability Objectives The utilisation of sustainability objectives is a recognised methodology for considering the environmental effects of a plan and programme and comparing the effects of the alternatives. The sustainability objectives are utilised to show whether the objectives of the plan and programme are beneficial for the environment, to compare the environmental effects of the alternatives or to suggest improvements. 6

7 Chapter 4 - Plan Policy Appraisal Significant Social, Environmental and Economic Effects of the Preferred Policies The SEA Directive states that where an Environmental Assessment is required under Article 3 (1), and Environmental Report shall be prepared in which the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the plan and programme, and reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated (SEA Directive, Article 5). This chapter seeks to outline a summary of the significant social, environmental and economic effects and the recommendations arising from the Appraising Plan Policy assessment for the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. The summary reflects the SEA Directive Annex 1(f). The table below highlights the outcome of the assessment. Rochford District Replacement Local Plan (2004) LT2 Synthetic Sports Pitch Objective Recommendation (1) Provide improved access The level of standard would need to be subject to and opportunities for all to open ongoing review to take account of changes in the space, sports and recreation. demographic profile of areas and capacity of provision. Appraising Plans Policy 1 (1) Provide improved access and opportunities for all to open space, sports and recreation. It is recommended that monetary obligations are sought from both allocated and windfall sites, including sites of residential development of less than 10 dwellings. Appraising Plans Policy 2 - Greenbelt (2) Improve quality of public It is recommended that the SPD provides further realm and open spaces in urban detail as to what is considered a significant club and rural areas. house. Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design (2) Improve quality of public That the policy states that only in exceptional 7

8 realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines would not be applicable. (4) To ensure that new development contributes to enhancing the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. (5) To promote efficient use of land and re-use of previously developed sites. (6) To preserve and enhance the historic environment. (7) To preserve and enhance the cultural environment. Appraising Plans Policy 6 Drainage (2) Improve quality of public realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. In order to address facilities with insufficient drainage priority should be given to the pitches highlighted in table 12.3 of the Assessment of the Playing Pitches in the Rochford District (2002) document. Chapter 5 - SPD Issues and Alternative The SEA Directive states that where an Environmental Assessment is required under Article 3 (1), and Environmental Report shall be prepared in which the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the plan and programme, and reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated (SEA Directive, Article 5). This chapter outlines the appraisal of the alternatives within the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Chapter 6 - Monitoring Implementation of the SPD The SEA Directive states that Member States shall monitor the significant environmental effects of the implementation of plans and programmes in order, inter alia, to identify at an early stage unforeseen adverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial action (Article.10.1). Furthermore the 8

9 Environmental Report shall include a description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring (Annex 1 (i)). This Chapter aims to outline the monitoring framework for the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document The monitoring of the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document allows the actual significant environmental effects of implementing the plan or programme to be tested against those predicted (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, 39). The monitoring of the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document will aid in the identification of any problems that may arise during the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Documents implementation. 9

10 Chapter 1 - Methodology 10

11 Chapter 1 Methodology Introduction to Sustainable Development The widely utilised international definition for sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). In 1992 at the Rio Summit Government s worldwide committed themselves to the delivery of sustainable development. Following this convention the UK Government formulated the first national Sustainable Development Framework in In the UK Sustainable Development Framework (1999) the UK Government clearly outlined the meaning of Sustainable Development placing greater emphasis on attaining a better quality of life for everyone now and for the future. The UK Government updated the Sustainable Development Strategy in 2005, and adopted 5 principles for sustainable development they include; * Living within environmental limits, * Ensuring a strong, healthy and Just Society, * Achieving a sustainable economy, * Promoting good governance, * Using sound science. An important component of sustainable development is weighing up the environmental, social and economic factors, and this is fundamental to Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment. Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment The European Directive 2001/42/EC (EC, 2001) ensures that a Strategic Environmental Assessment of a wide range of plans and programmes shall be conducted. The Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document therefore requires a Strategic Appraisal that incorporates the dual statutory requirement of both Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The purpose of SEA/SA is to promote 11

12 environmental protection and contribute to the integration of environmental, social and economic considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans, with a view to promote sustainable development. This report has been prepared in accordance with the following Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) guidance: A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (September 2005) Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks (November 2005) The requirement for SEA/SA emanates from a high level of international and national commitment to sustainable development and this has been incorporated into EC Directives, laws, guidance, advice and policy. The purpose of this sustainability appraisal is to promote sustainable development through better integration of sustainability considerations into the adoption of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. The requirements to undertake a SA and SEA are distinct. The principle difference between SEA and SA is that SEA is baseline led, focusing primarily on environmental effects, whereas SA is objectives led. The SEA directive defines the environment in a broad context and includes: Biodiversity Population Human Health Fauna Flora Soil Water Air Climatic factors Material Assets Cultural Heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage 12

13 Landscape SA goes further by examining all the sustainability-related effects of plans, whether they are social environmental or economic. Despite these differences it is possible to meet both requirements through a single appraisal process. In order to minimise duplication and time, ECC has applied this approach. Throughout the remainder of this document where reference is made to sustainability appraisal (SA) it should be taken to include the requirements of the SEA Directive (2001/42/EC) as incorporated into English Law by virtue of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programme Regulations (2004). This report and SA process has been led by Essex County Council s environmental assessment team. Diverse expertise has been drawn upon across the County Council s service areas and appropriate partnership forums. This arrangement conforms to guidance recommendations in respect of a need for taking a balanced view; a good understanding of the local circumstances; understanding the issues, and drawing on good practice elsewhere to evaluate the full range of sustainability issues. Scope of the Report The final Environment Report comprises of; Non-Technical Summary; An outline of the methodology adopted; Background setting out the purpose of the SEA and the objectives of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document; SEA objectives and the sustainability issues throughout Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document and the key issues that need to be addressed; Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document options considered and environmental effects of the alternatives outlined; An assessment of the contribution of the plan policies to social, economic and environmental objectives within the district; 13

14 An outline of the proposed mitigation measures, for those where these impacts are negative. Methodology Adopted in the SEA The approach adopted in this Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document is based on the process outlined in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister Guidance A Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (September 2005). The methodology adopted seeks to meet the requirements of both SA and SEA for the environmental assessment of plans. The SA Framework is based on the initial criteria and proposed approaches set out in the scoping report produced in November The aim of the scoping report is to ensure a focused yet comprehensive SA, addressing all relevant issues, objectives and allow input from consultation bodies at an early stage of the process. The scoping stage of the SEA/SA involves investigation into the relevant plans, programmes and environmental protection objectives. The scoping report also sets out the baseline information which provides the basis for predicting and monitoring environmental effects, aids in the interpretation of environmental problems and allows identification of possible methods for mitigation. A range of information aids in the identification of potential environmental problems including, earlier issues identified in other plans and programmes, baseline information, tensions between current and future baseline information and consultation with the consultation bodies. The scoping report also contains a list of SEA objectives. SEA objectives are not a specific requirement of the Directive but they are recognised as a method for considering the environmental effects of a plan and comparing the effects of alternatives. The Directive creates the following requirements for consultation; Authorities which, because of their environmental responsibilities, are likely to be concerned by the effects of implementing the plan or programme, must be consulted on the scope and level of detail of the information to be included in the Environmental Report. These 14

15 authorities are designated in the SEA Regulations as the Consultation Bodies. The public and the Consultation Bodies must be consulted on the draft plan or programme and the Environmental Report, and must be given an early effective opportunity within appropriate time frames to express their opinions (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, 16). The Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document was consulted for a 5 week period, whereby the statutory Consultation Bodies and other relevant persons were consulted. The statutory Consultation Bodies include; Countryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature, And the Environment Agency. The second part of the SEA approach involves the development and refinement of alternatives and assessing the effects of the plan. The objectives of the plan are therefore tested against the SEA objectives identified at the scoping stage. The third stage of the process is the development of the Environmental Report. The SEA Directive states that the environmental report shall include information that may reasonably be required taking into account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan or programme, (and) its stage in the decision-making process (Article 5.2). The structure for the Environmental Report is very similar to the suggested structure outlined in A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (September, 2005). 15

16 Chapter 2 - Background 16

17 Chapter 2 Background Purpose of this Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment This Environment Report has been devised to meet European Directive 2001/42/EC which requires a formal strategic assessment of certain plans and programmes which are likely to have a significant effect on the environment. The Directive has been incorporated into English Law by virtue of the Environment Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations (2004). In accordance with the provisions set out in the SEA Directive and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004), a SA/SEA of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document must be undertaken and consulted on prior to the adoption. This Environment Report outlines the appraisal methodology, sustainability objectives, review of plans and programmes, baseline information used in the appraisal process, and the assessment of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document and the Objectives The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) introduced alterations to the planning system; the fundamental aim of these changes was to promote a proactive and positive approach to managing development. The Local Development Framework forms a fundamental element in the new planning system. Local Development Frameworks will be comprised of Local Development Documents, which include Development Plan Documents, that are part of the statutory development plan and Supplementary Planning Documents which expand on policies set out in a development plan document or provide additional detail. Assessment of Playing Pitches in Rochford District is a Supplementary Planning Document and is therefore one of the fundamental documents that form an integral part of the Local Development Framework. 17

18 The Assessment of Playing Pitches in Rochford District Supplementary Planning Document is an approach adopted by Rochford District Council towards a more sustainable to the development of pitch sports and the provision of sports pitches within Rochford District. The Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document objectives are demonstrated in table 1. Table 1 Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Objectives Reference Objective 1 Ensure adequate provision of playing pitches throughout the District that seek to meet local needs. 2 To ensure that new development does not adversely affect existing sports fields An important part of the assessment involves the testing of the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Objectives against the sustainability objectives. 18

19 Chapter 3 - SEA Objectives and Baseline Context 19

20 Chapter 3 SEA Objectives and Baseline Context Review of the Plans and Programmes The relationship between various plans and programmes and sustainability objectives may influence the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document in various ways. The relationships are analysed to; identify any external social, environmental or economic objectives that should be reflected in the SA process; identify external factors that may have influenced the preparation of the plan; and Determine whether the policies in other plans and programmes might lead to cumulative effects when combined with policies in the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Engaging in this process enables Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document to take advantage of any potential synergies and to attend to any inconsistencies and constraints. The plans and programmes that need to be considered include those at an international, national, regional and local scale. The preparatory work for the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document has considered a number of planning policies and guidance documents, however to meet the SA s requirements a broader range were considered, in particular those outlining issues of environmental protection and sustainability objectives. Table 2 shows a summary list of plans and programmes that were reviewed as part of the SA. Appendix 1 contains the outcome of the review. 20

21 Table 2 Plans and Programmes Considered as part of the Review International European and International Sustainability Development Strategy European Spatial Development Perspective (May, 1999) European Community Biodiversity Strategy Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice National Planning Policy Statement 1; Creating Sustainable Communities (2005) Planning Policy Guidance 2 Greenbelt (1995) Planning Policy Guidance Note 3; Housing (2000) Planning Policy Statement 6; Planning for Town Centres (2005) Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Planning Policy Guidance Statement 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (2006) Planning Policy Statement 12; Local Development Frameworks Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport (1994) Planning Policy Guidance Note 14; Development on Unstable Land (1990) Planning Policy Guidance Note 15; Planning and Historic Environment (1994) Planning Policy Guidance Note 16; Archaeology and Planning (1990) 21

22 Planning Policy Guidance Note 17; Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (1991) Planning Policy Guidance Note 20; Coastal Planning (1992) Planning Policy Guidance Note 24; Planning and Noise (1994) Planning Policy Guidance Note 25; Development and Flood Risk (2001) Securing the Future Delivering the UK Sustainable Development Strategy (2005) Regional Regional Planning Guidance 9; Regional Guidance for the South East (1994) Draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the East of England Plan (RSS14) (December, 2004) County Essex and Southend-on-Sea Replacement Structure Plan (Adopted April, 2001) Local Rochford District Local Plan First Review, Rochford District Second Deposit Replacement Local Plan, 2004 The plans and programmes reviewed provided the following: A basis for establishing sustainability objectives as part of the SA process. 22

23 An influence over the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document preparation and a higher level policy context. A basis for identifying potential cumulative effects of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Baseline Characteristics The SEA Directive requires an analysis of the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan (Annex 1b) and the environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected (Annex 1c). The baseline information will form the basis for predicting and monitoring the effects of the adoption of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Furthermore the baseline data allows sustainability problems to be identified and aids the formulation of appropriate mitigation measures and/or proposals for suitable alternatives. The baseline data for the SA/SEA of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document includes existing environmental and sustainability information from a range of sources, including national Government, agency websites, the 2001 Census, Rochford District Council and Essex County Council. The information the baseline data aimed to highlight is outlined below; the latest data for Rochford District Council, comparators: national, regional, sub-regional, and local level data against which the status of the Rochford District Council may be evaluated; identified targets; established trends; and Environmental or sustainability problems. Table 3 outlines the comprehensive list of the baseline data sources for both the quantitative and the qualitative information. 23

24 The baseline data topics and whether they are of economic, social or environmental significance are outlined in table 3. Table 3 Illustrating the Baseline Topics and whether they are of Economic, Environmental and Social Significance Topic Theme Social Economic Environmental Population Crime Health Education Deprivation Economic Activity Income Commercial Floorspace Cultural Heritage and Material Assets Listed Buildings Conservation Areas Land Utilisation Water 24

25 Agricultural Land Classification Air Quality Road Traffic Biodiversity Flora and Fauna Key Trends and Predicting Future Baseline The following section describes fundamental social, economic and environmental elements of the Rochford District Council. Location Rochford District is situated to the south of Essex, and covers an area of sq km (65 square miles). The district of Rochford is situated within a peninsula between the River Thames and Crouch, and is bounded by the North Sea. The district has land boundaries with Basildon, Castle Point and Southend on Sea Districts and Marine Boundaries with Maldon and Chelmsford Districts. Rochford District is predominately rural with many surrounding villages; the main urban centres in the district include the historic towns of Rochford and Rayleigh. Map 1 illustrates the location of the Rochford District. 25

26 Map 1 Illustrating the Location of the Rochford District (Sources; Rochford District Council Online, 2005 and National Statistics Online, 2005) Population The resident population of Rochford district, as measured in the 2001 Census, was 78,489 of which 49 per cent were male and 51 per cent were female. The sex composition of Rochford District is similar to that of Essex County Council in 2001 with 48.8% of the Essex population male and 51.2% female. In 2001, 20 per cent of the resident population were aged under 16, 57 per cent were aged between 16 and 59, and 23 per cent were aged 60 and over. The mean average age was 40. This compared with an average age of 39 within England and Wales. In analysing the social, economic and environmental characteristics of the Rochford District it is important to be aware of the projected population change anticipated for the district. This will provide an understanding as to the amount of population change likely to be experienced within the district of Rochford. Graph one illustrates the 2001 and the future projected population change for the District of Rochford. 26

27 Graph 1 Graph Illustrating the 2001 and Projected Population Change for the Borough of Rochford Population Total Year Source; Total Regional Planning Guidance 14 Submission, 29 th March 2005 (Note the population projection assumes dwelling provision will be implemented at the annual average rate of provision set out in policy H2 of the Regional Spatial Strategy 14.) Graph 1 demonstrates the population within the Rochford District in 2001 and the projected alterations in the population size assuming the dwelling provision outlined in the Draft East of England Plan (2004) will be implemented within Rochford. In 2001 the population of Rochford was 78, 400 persons, it is anticipated that by 2021 the population within the District will be 81, 000 persons. The total population within Rochford District is therefore expected to increase by 3.2% throughout the period Graph two illustrates the total population change anticipated for Essex allowing comparison between the total growth rate for Essex and that of the District of Rochford. 27

28 Graph 2 Graph Illustrating the Total Population and Projected Population for Essex County in 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016 and Number of Persons Year Source; Total Regional Planning Guidance 14 Submission, 29 th March 2005 (Note the population projection assumes dwelling provision will be implemented at the annual average rate of provision set out in policy H2 of the Regional Spatial Strategy 14.) Graph 2 demonstrates that the population within the County of Essex in 2001 was 161, 4400 persons and is anticipated to increase by 2021 to 172, 9400 persons. The total population increase for Essex from is 6.6%, therefore the projected population increase for the District of Rochford is 50.1% less than the anticipated rise in population throughout Essex. Population Age Composition The age composition of the population within the District of Rochford is important as it will facilitate in measuring the demand for educational institutions, most notably primary and secondary schools. Graph 3 outlines the percentage age composition of the persons in 2001 and 2021 within the District of Rochford compared to the County of Essex and the East of England region. 28

29 Graph Graph Illustrating the 2001 and 2021 Percentage Total Age Composition for the District of Rochford, Essex County and East of England Region Rochford 2001 Rochford 2021 Percentage Total Essex County (inc Unitary Authorities) 2001 Essex County (inc Unitary Authorities) 2021 East of England Region 2001 East of England Region 2021 Age Cohort Source; Total Regional Planning Guidance 14 Submission, 29 th March 2005 (Note the population projection assumes dwelling provision will be implemented at the annual average rate of provision set out in policy H2 of the Regional Spatial Strategy 14.) Graph 3 demonstrates that the proportion of persons aged 0-19 years in 2001 within the District of Rochford, and the comparators will be less in Furthermore the percentage of persons in Rochford aged years in 2021 is anticipated to decline most substantially from the 2001 rate. Within the district of Rochford there is likely to be an increase in the number of retired people in 2021, most notably for persons 70 and above. Thames Gateway South Essex Sub Regional The Thames Gateway South Essex sub-region comprises of the five authorities of Basildon, Castle Point, Rochford, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock and it forms the largest urban area within the East of England. It comprises of a mix of urban and natural environments and at 2001 the population total for the sub region was 633,800 representing approximately 12% of the East of England regional total. Graph 3 illustrates the population within the local authorities that comprise the Thames Gateway South Essex and the projected population growth from

30 The population growth figures are based on the number of housing anticipated to be constructed as outlined in the Draft East of England Plan (2004). Graph 4 Graph Illustrating the Population within the Local Authorities that Comprise the Thames Gateway South Essex in 2001 and the Projected Population Totals Number of Persons Basildon Castle Point Rochford Southend-on-Sea Thurrock Local Authority Source; Total Regional Planning Guidance 14 Submission, 29 th March 2005 (Note the population projection assumes dwelling provision will be implemented at the annual average rate of provision set out in policy H2 of the Regional Spatial Strategy 14.) Graph 4 demonstrates that the District of Rochford is anticipated to continue to have the lowest population total of all the Thames Gateway South Essex districts. Furthermore the increase in population throughout this period is expected to remain fairly constant as the total population is predicted to increase by 3.2%. Clearly Thurrock is expected to experience the greatest increase in population throughout this period. Graph 5 illustrates the proportion of the population within Thames Gateway South Essex that live within each district authority. 30

31 Graph 5 Graph Illustrating the Percentage of the Total Population Composition in 2001 of the Local Authorities within Thames Gateway South Essex Thurrock 23% Basildon 26% Southend-on- Sea 25% Rochford 12% Castle Point 14% Source; Adapted from Total Regional Planning Guidance 14 Submission, 29 th March 2005 (Note the population projection assumes dwelling provision will be implemented at the annual average rate of provision set out in policy H2 of the Regional Spatial Strategy 14.) Graph 5 illustrates that in 2001 Rochford (12%) contains the least proportion of the population within Thames Gateway South Essex, whilst the neighbouring authorities of Basildon (26%) and Southend-on-Sea (25%) have the greatest proportion of the population in the sub region. Population Density Table 4 shows the number of persons per hectare and the average household size within the District of Rochford, Essex County, the East of England region and England and Wales in

32 Table 4 Table Illustrating the Population Density within Rochford District, the County of Essex, the east of England region and England and Wales in 2001 Density Rochford District Essex County East of England England & Wales Region Number of People Per Hectare Average Household Size Source: Office for National Statistics, 2001 Table 4 clearly demonstrates that the District of Rochford contains more persons per hectare than the County of Essex (3.8 persons), the East of England region (2.8 persons) and England and Wales (3.4 persons). The average number of persons per hectare within the East of England region is of greatest divergence to the trend displayed by the District of Rochford in Table 4 also outlines the average household size and indicates that in 2001 the District of Rochford contained a marginally greater average household size than Essex County, the East of England Region and England and Wales. Deprivation The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004 (IMD 2004) is a measure of multiple deprivation at the small area level, known as the Lower Super Output Areas. The IMD 2004 is based on the idea that there are clear dimensions of deprivation which are recognisable and may be measured. The deprivation is therefore measured in terms of the domain. The IMD 2004 comprises of seven domains including; Income deprivation; Employment deprivation; Health deprivation & disability; Education, skills and training deprivation; Barriers to housing and services; 32

33 Crime; and the Living environment deprivation. There are also 6 measures that comprise the large area level these are available for district and unitary council level areas. The large area measure for IMD 2004 is an important source of information for interpreting the overall level of deprivation experienced within the Rochford District. The large area measures include; Four are formulated from the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for small area; Average Score overall deprivation measure, retains range of scores; Average Rank - overall deprivation measure, dampens the impact of areas with extreme scores; Extent Score - proportion of people living in serious deprived small areas. Local Concentration Score - represents the severity of deprivation in hotspots (average IMD rank of worst-off areas with 10% of people) Two are absolute numbers, drawn from data underlying the IMD: o Income Scale - number of income employment deprived people; o Employment Scale - number of employment deprived people. (Essex County Council, 2004) Table 5 illustrates the large area Index of Multiple Deprivation scores for all the Districts within Essex. 33

34 Table 5 Rank Essex Average Score Average Rank Extent Local Concentration 1 Tendering 103 Tendering 98 Basildon 106 Tendering Harlow 120 Harlow 101 Tendering 127 Basildon Basildon 132 Basildon 142 Harlow 180 Colchester Colchester 217 Colchester 221 Colchester 193 Harlow Epping Forest Braintree 228 Braintree 263 Epping Forest Braintree 237 Epping Forest Epping Forest Braintree Castle Point Castle Point 243 Castle Point 273 Castle Point Maldon 280 Maldon 280 Rochford 271 Chelmsford Brentwood 312 Brentwood 312 Maldon 298 Rochford Rochford 316 Rochford 319 Brentwood 295 Maldon Chelmsford 320 Chelmsford 321 Chelmsford 274 Brentwood Uttlesford 341 Uttlesford 342 Uttlesford 298 Uttlesford 352 Source; Essex County Council, 2004 Table 5 demonstrates that out of the 12 Essex local authorities Rochford performs well compared to the remaining Essex Authorities, as the index of deprivation is predominately within the lower quartile. 34

35 Chelmsford, Rochford and Brentwood score fairly low in terms of overall deprivation, in the 88-91% most deprived range (Essex County Council, 2004, 8). The Extent Scores for the Essex Districts are outlined below; * Basildon - 18% * Tendering - 14% * Harlow - 5% * Colchester - 4% * Braintree, Castle Point, Epping Forest, Rochford - all 1% * Brentwood, Chelmsford, Maldon, Uttlesford - all 0% (Source; Essex County Council, 2004, 9) Clearly the results demonstrate that the District of Rochford has relatively few people living in serious deprivation compared to the majority of the Essex Districts. Essex contains 40 Super Output Areas in the most deprived 20% in England. These seriously deprived areas are in Basildon, Clacton, Harwich, Colchester (5 areas) and Harlow. Rochford does not contain any Super Output Areas in the most deprived 20%. To fully understand the character of the deprivation it is essential to outline the domain scores. Table 6 shows the percentage of small areas that are seriously deprived on each domain score for Rochford District, the County of Essex and the average for the Essex Districts. Table 6 Authority IMD Income Employment Health and Disability Education, Skills and Training Barriers to Housing and Services Living Environment Crime No of Small Areas Rochford Essex Essex District Average Source, National Statistics Online, 2004 Indices of Multiple Deprivation 35

36 To aid interpretation of the results graph 8 has been formulated, highlighting the percentage score for the small areas that are seriously deprived in the Rochford District and the average for the Essex districts. Graph 6 Proportion of Small Areas Graph Illustrating the Proportion of Small Areas that are 'Seriously Deprived' within the District of Rochford, the County of Essex and the Average for the Essex Districts Rochford Essex Essex District Average IMD Income Employment Health and Disability Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain Barriers to Housing and Services Living Environment Crime Source, National Statistics Online, 2004 Indices of Multiple Deprivation Graph 6 clearly demonstrates that the District of Rochford has less deprivation than the average for the Essex Districts, and Essex County. However similarly to the trend displayed by Essex and the average for the Essex Districts the greatest small areas deprivation experienced within the District of Rochford is related to Barriers to Housing and Services. The Indices of Deprivation domains that are of particular importance to Open Space include the Living Environment and Health Deprivation and Disability domains. The Living Environment domain focuses on deprivation with respect to the characteristics of the living environment. It comprises two sub-domains: the indoor living environment which measures the quality of housing and the outdoor which contains two measures about air quality and road traffic accidents (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004, 4). Graph 6 illustrates that there are no small areas 36

37 within the District of Rochford that experience serious living environment deprivation, however the average for the Essex districts and the County total marginally exceeds Rochford. It is important that the District of Rochford continues to display a good quality living environment. This Domain comprises two sub-domains: the 'indoors' living environment which measures the quality of housing and the 'outdoors' living environment which contains two measures about air quality and road traffic accidents. Sub-Domain: The 'indoors' living environment Social and private housing in poor condition (2001) Houses without central heating (2001) Sub-Domain: The 'outdoors' living environment Air quality (2001) Road traffic accidents involving injury to pedestrians and cyclists ( ) Within each sub-domain the indicators were standardised, transformed to the normal distribution and combined with equal weights. Then the two sub-domains were standardised, transformed to the exponential distribution and combined into the domain using a weight of 66.6% for indoors living environment and 33.3% for outdoors living environment to reflect the time people spend in each arena. The second Indices of Deprivation domain that is of particular importance to the Open Space Standards Supplementary Planning Document is the Health Deprivation and Disability domain. This domain identifies areas with relatively high rates of people who die prematurely or whose quality of life is impaired by poor health or who are disabled (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004, 3). This domain identifies areas with relatively high rates of people who die prematurely or whose quality of life is impaired by poor health or who are disabled, across the whole population. Indicators include: Years of Potential Life Lost ( ) Comparative Illness and Disability Ratio (2001) Measures of emergency admissions to hospital ( ) Adults under 60 suffering from mood or anxiety disorders ( ) 37

38 Shrinkage is used on the indicators, and then they are combined using factor weights. Similarly to the trends displayed by the Living Environment domain there are no small areas within the District of Rochford that experience serious health deprivation, while the Essex District average (1.4) and Essex County (2.0) marginally exceeds this. Health The 2001 Census invited collected information regarding the respondents general state of health. Graph 7 illustrates the health of persons within England and Wales, the East of England region and the District of Rochford. Graph 7 Percentage of Persons Graph Illustrating the Health of the Population within Rochford District, East of England Region and England and Wales Limiting Long Term Illness General Health 'not good' Perception of Health People Providing Unpaid Care Providing Unpaid Care 50 or More Hours/Work England and Wales East of England Rochford Source, National Statistics Online, 2004 Graph 7 demonstrates that within the District of Rochford 15.8% of people have a limiting or long term illness, this level of persons is marginally lower than the regional proportion of 16.2% and the national level (18.2%). Similarly to the percentage of persons that have a limiting long term illness the proportion of the population that are generally not in good health within the District of Rochford (7.2%) is similar to the regional proportion (7.6%), but differs more greatly from the national level (9.2%). The proportion of persons classified as providing unpaid care within Rochford is similar to the regional and national proportions. 38

39 Health measures can provide valuable indicators of the general health of the population and the prevalence of illness within it. As can be seen in graph 8, the vast majority of Rochford District residents (71.1%) class themselves as being in good health. Graph 8 Perception of Health in Resident Population Percentage of Resident Population Rochford East of England England and Wales 10 0 Health: Good Health: Fairly good Health: Not good People with a limiting long-term illness Peception of General Health People of working age with a limiting longterm illness Households with one or more person with a limiting long-term illness Source: National Statistic Online

40 Table 7 Perception of Health Rochford East of England England and Wales General health: Good General health: Fairly good General health: Not good People with a limiting long-term illness People of working age with a limiting longterm illness Households with one or more person with a limiting long-term illness Source: National Statistic Online 2001 Essex residents class themselves as being healthy (see graph 8 and table 7 above), a higher percentage than the average for England and Wales. Very few members of the population regard themselves as having poor health; however there is a high level of households in both Rochford and Essex that have more than one person with a long term illness; however this is still lower than the England and Wales average percentage. Primary Care Trust (PCT) Castle Point and Rochford Primary Care Trust (PCT) delivers healthcare services to approximately 170,000 people in the borough of Castle Point and district of Rochford. Together with GPs, dentists, pharmacist and opticians, they steer the planning and provision of these services for the population. They directly provide services from 10 health clinics and they employ approximately 360 staff including district nurses, 40

41 health visitors, specialist nurses (such as continence and diabetes), therapists and support staff. Table 8 Health Services within Rochford District and surrounding area Health Services Rochford District Surrounding District s under same PCT (Benfleet, Canvey, Rayleigh and Hadleigh.) Doctor 4 32 Dentist 1 22 Optician 1 16 Pharmacist 2 32 Source: Disability The 2001 Census of Population provides data on the number of households with at least one person with a limiting long-term illness for Essex in table 30. Rochford is in line with Essex in that roughly one-third of households have one or more people with a limiting long-term illness. Table 9 Households with one or more person with a limiting long term illness As % of all households All households Basildon 33% 69,207 Braintree 29% 54,332 Brentwood 28% 28,767 Castle Point 33% 35,279 Chelmsford 27% 64,564 Colchester 31% 63,706 Epping Forest 30% 50,590 Harlow 31% 33,185 Maldon 30% 24,189 41

42 Rochford 31% 31,952 Southend 34% 70,978 Tendering 41% 61,411 Thurrock 32% 58,485 Uttlesford 27% 27,519 Essex 32% 674,164 Source: 2001 Census of Population, Office for National Statistics When analysing Rochford 31,952 (31%) of all the households has a person with a limiting long term illness, this is lower then the Essex figure of 674,164 and considerably lower than districts such as Tendering. Material Assets and Cultural Heritage Conservation Areas Details on Conservation areas are set out in Appendix 3. Participation in Sport Figures are available for the participation in sport across the government regions, however there is no information on participation figures for Essex County, or Rochford District as no data has been collected. 42

43 Table 10 Top five sports, games and physical activities: participation rates in the 4 weeks before interview by Government Office Region Source: National Statistics Online, 2002 As can be seen in table 10, adults living in the South West were more likely than those in other regions to have participated in at least one activity excluding walking (50% compared with 37% to 46% for other regions in England). The East of England percentages were similar to those of England as a whole. The percentage of those who participated in walking is 35%, whilst the England average is 34%. However percentages for swimming, keep fit/yoga and snooker/pool/billiards are all 1% lower than the England percentage. However, the East of England had the highest percentage of cycling any government region within England with 12%, as can be seen in graph 9 below. However, is unfortunate that there are no figures available on a local or county scale to compare with this data; as a result we are unable to look at it in any greater detail. 43

44 Graph 9 'Top five' sports, games and physical activities: participation rates Percentage North East North West Yorkshire and Humber East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West England Walking swimming Keep Fit/Yoga Snooker/Pool /Billiards Cycling Government Office Region Source: National Statistics Online, 2002 Table 11 illustrates the use of different types of facility across the country. Nearly a quarter of adults in the East of England (22%) had used an indoor facility which was mainly used for sport (for example, a sports centre or indoor swimming pool) and 13% had used an outdoor facility which was mainly used for sport (e.g. playing field or outdoor swimming pool). Sporting activities also took place in indoor facilities not mainly used for sport such as community facilities, like village halls (12%) and at home (4%). 44

45 Table 11 Use of different types of facility by Government Office Region Source: National Statistics Online, 2002 When compared to the average percentages for England, the East of England percentage for indoor mainly for sport and indoor other community facility are slightly lower. However, The percentages for outdoor mainly used for sport, outdoor natural setting and other including roads and pathways are all higher than the average percentage for England. 45

46 Table 12 Planning Applications Relating to Playing Fields Year 2002/ /04 Total number of applications Number of applications resulting in net gain to, or no loss of, playing fields Number of applications resulting in no change to playing fields (and withdrawn or rejected applications) % % % % Number of applications which were deemed to be detrimental to playing fields and would result in a non-sporting 76 6 % 52 4% development or one of little sporting benefit Applications yet to be decided % % Total % % Source: Department for Culture, Media and Sport, July 2005 Table 12 explores the total number of planning applications across the country relating to playing fields. As can be seen, there has been an increase in the number of applications resulting in either a net gain or net loss of playing fields from 36% of the applications relating to playing fields in 2002/03 to 42% in 2003/04. Fewer applications were regarded as having a detrimental effect upon playing fields, with a drop from 6% in 2002/03 to 4% in 2003/04. 46

47 Table 13 Approved applications involving redevelopment Year 2002/ /04 Number of sites where approved % % applications will involve redevelopment to provide new or improved sports facilities Applications that will improve the use of % % playing fields through new or refurbished changing rooms added floodlighting or improved access to the site. Playing fields provided as like for like % % replacements. Cases where the site was too small or % % the wrong shape to accommodate a playing pitch. Cases where a careful assessment of 2 1 % 3 1 % supply and demand against a playing field strategy showed that there was a strong case for releasing the land for a different use. Cases where Sport England maintained 36 5 % 31 3 % an objection, but where the Deputy Prime Minister's Office concluded that national planning considerations had not been overlooked. Applications where Sport England is 40 5% 21 2% statutory consultee but where the provisions of the 1998 Direction does not apply (privately owned fields) Total % % Note: '%' figures in this table refer to the percentage of total approved applications) Source: Department for Culture, Media and Sport, July 2005 The statistics in table 13 show that of the 959 applications that were approved for development, 590 involved projects that would greatly improve the quality of sport on offer at the site. These included new sports centres, tennis courts, athletics tracks 47

48 and Astroturf pitches as well as changing rooms and floodlights. They also include 132 cases where like-for-like replacement playing fields were provided. Of the 959 approved applications, just 52 (4%) were deemed to be detrimental to sporting provision 31 of which were owned by local authorities and 21 owned privately. This is against a backdrop of some 44,000 playing pitches across 21,000 sites in England, and the creation in of 72 additional new playing fields. 314 applications were approved for development on sites, which were too small to accommodate playing pitches. In two cases was there a complete loss of a playing field. Playing Pitches Table 14 Playing pitches within Rochford District: Name/location of facilities Ashingdon Playing Field Ashingdon Road, Ashingdon, Essex SS4 3HF Great Wakering Recreation Ground, High Street, Great Wakering, Essex SS3 0HX Cupids Country Club, Cupids Chase, Great Wakering, Essex, SS3 0AX Rochford Recreation Ground, Stambridge Road, Rochford, Essex SS4 3JA Type of Provision 6 Football pitches (adult) Basketball ring Play space 4 Football pitches (2 adult, 2 mini) 2 basketball rings Licking wall Cycle speedway track Play space 5 Football pitches (adult) 3 Football pitches (2 adult, 1 mini) 1 Hockey pitch Bowling green 2 Basketball rings 5-a-side football Play space 48

49 Rawreth Recreation Ground, Rawreth Lane, Rawreth, Essex Rayleigh Town Sports and Social Club Castle Point and Rochford Adult Community College, Roche Way, Rochford Essex, SS14 2EQ Fairview Playing Fields Victoria Road, Rayleigh Grove Road Playing space, Grove Road, Rayleigh, Essex King Georges Playing Field, Websters Way, Rayleigh, Essex Pooles Lane Recreation Ground, Pooles Lane, Hullbridge, Essex, SS5 6PU Hullbridge Sports and Social Club Canewdon Recreation Ground, Althorne Way, Canewdon, Essex SS4 3PS Laburnham Grove 4 Football pitches (4 adult) 3 Football pitches (3 adult) 4 Football pitches (1 adult, 1 junior and 2 mini pitches) 4 Football pitches (adult) 4 Tennis courts (hard surface) 5-a-side football Basketball court Play space 4 Football pitches ( 1 adult, 2 junior, 2 mini) 2 Play spaces, BMX track 3 Football pitches (1 adult, 1 junior, 1 mini) Bowling green Play space BMX/Skateboarding area 1 Football pitch (adult) BMX track 2 Basketball rings 5-a-side football Play space Skateboarding area 6 Football pitches (4 adult, 2 junior) 1 Football pitch (adult) 2 Basketball rings Play space Skateboarding area 1 Basketball ring 49

50 Magnolia Road Playing Space Morrins Close, Great Wakering John Fisher Playing Field Hockley Community Centre, Westminster Drive, Hockley, Essex BMX track Basketball Ring Play space 2 Basketball rings Play space 2 Football pitches (adult) 1 Football pitch (junior) School/College Football Pitches: Canewdon Endowed Primary School (1 junior) Doggetts County Primary School, Rochford (1 junior) Downhall County Primary School, Rayleigh (1 junior) Great Wakering Primary School (2 junior) Hockley Primary School (1 junior) Holt Farm Infants & Junior School, Rochford (1 junior) Plumberow Primary School, Hockley (2 junior) Rayleigh County Primary School (1 junior) Rochford Adult Community College (1 adult; 1 junior; 2 mini) St Nicholas C of E Primary School, Rawreth (1 mini) Westerings Primary School, Hockley (1 junior) As can be seen in table 6, Rochford District has a large supply of football pitches, both adult and junior. The data available does not give any details on the provision of rugby pitches/facilities. The local planning authority has adopted a general policy of providing 2.5 hectares of open space per 1000 population, and in all urban settlements all residential areas should be within half a kilometre of a large open space (at least 2 hectares) or within one-fifth of a kilometre of a small open space (at least 0.4 hectares. 50

51 Attention will also be paid to the National Playing Fields standard for the provision of playing pitches which is approximately 1.8 heactares of pitches, courts, greens etc. per 1000 population, including at least 1.2 hectares of pitches. Table 15 Source: Rochford District Council, 2002 A user survey of recreation grounds and playing fields was undertaken by the grounds maintenance contractors, Service team in summer 2005 with results are expected in mid There are currently 3 leisure or sports centres operating within Rochford District. 2 of these 3 leisure centres are owned by Rochford District Council, and run by Holmes Places Leisure Management this includes Great Wakering Sports Centre and Clements Hall Leisure Centre. Rayleigh Leisure Centre, currently under construction is being built on a disused school site of 3.2 acres. This will also under local authority control with Holmes place running it and it is due to open in May The Warehouse Centre is run by a charitable Christian organisation. Leisure Centres within Rochford District: Great Wakering Sports Centre, High Street, Great Wakering, Essex, SS3 0HX 51

52 Clements Hall Leisure Centre, Clements Hall Way, Hawkwell, Essex, SS5 4LN The Warehouse Centre, 7 Brook Road, Rayleigh, Essex, SS6 7UT. There are currently no usage figures available for private sports centres such as The Warehouse Centre. However, figures for Great Wakering Sports Centre show that visitor numbers have increased with a two year period from 12,385 in 2003/04 to 17,895 in 2004/05; an increase on 42%. The sports centre had previously been vandalised repeatedly, and the introduction of better security measures may have helped increase usage. Figures for Clements Hall show that in 2003/04 the leisure centre received 536,012 visitors and in 2004/05 this increased to 581,196, a rise of 8%. Land Utilisation Planning Policy Guidance note 3 entitled Housing outlines that central Government is committed to maximising the re-use of previously developed land and empty properties and the conversion of non- residential buildings for housing (Office of Deputy Prime Minister, 2000, 8.) The objective of the government s aim is to promote regeneration and minimise the amount of Greenfield land being utilised for development. The Planning Policy Guidance note 3 sets out a national target that by 2008, 60% of additional housing should be provided on previously developed land and through conversions of existing buildings (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, ). The target allows the assessment of Local Authority Performance to development on previously developed land. A service level agreement between Essex County Council and Rochford District Council exists whereby the County Council undertakes residential and nonresidential land monitoring. The information formulated by the County Council is further verified by Rochford District Council. Graph 10 utilises this information and illustrates the percentage of residential development that has occurred on previously developed land from in the Rochford District and throughout Essex. 52

53 Graph 10 Graph Illustrating the Prportion of Residential Dwellings Constructed on Brownfield Land Percentage of Residential Development on Brownfield Land 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Year Rochford Essex Source; Essex County Council Monitoring Statistics, Graph 10 illustrates that since the District of Rochford has achieved the Government s target of 60% of new residential developments upon previously developed land. However Essex County (excluding Southend-on- Sea and Thurrock) has continually exceeded the number of residential development constructed on previously developed land. The intensification of existing and future development is an important aspect of residential dwelling design and may impact on the quantity of Greenfield land required for development. Windfall Sites A total of 199 windfall developments have become available between 2001 and of these were built on Greenfield sites, whilst the vast majority (183) were built on previously developed land. 2002/2003 saw the highest number of small site developments build on previously developed land 64, whilst there were 15 developments on Greenfield sites, compared to 26 on previously developed land in 2003/2004. By 2004/2005, 46 small scale developments were built on previously developed land, with no development of Greenfield sites at all (Rochford District Statement of Land Availability April 2005). 53

54 Flooding Appendix 4 illustrates flood risk with Rochford District. Air Quality The quality of our air affects both human health and life quality, and the natural environment. Poor air quality can also affect the health of our ecosystems, and can adversely affect our built cultural heritage. Local air quality is affected by emissions from industrial activity, airports, power stations and natural sources, but road transport accounts for around 40% of UK Nitrogen dioxide emissions. Additionally, diesel vehicles are a significant source of the emissions of fine particulates. The implementation of Air Quality Review and Assessment requirements by the Environmental Health department at Rochford District Council has led to the identification of 7 potentially significant junctions with a daily flow of greater than 10,000 vehicles. These are as follows: 1) A129/A127 Rayleigh Weir Underpass 2) A127/A130 Junction 3) Rawreth Lane/A130 Chelmsford Road Junction 4) High Street/Eastwood Road Junction, Rayleigh 5) Hockley Road/High Street A129 Junction, Rayleigh 6) Hall Road/West Street Junction, Rochford 7) Southend Road/Sutton Road Junction, Rochford At all of these junctions the predicted 2005 annual mean Nitrogen dioxide concentration, 2004 PM 10 concentration and exceedence all meet the National Air Quality Strategy (2000) standards (Rochford District Council: Local Air Quality Management Updating and Screening Assessment, October 2003). The highest predicted Nitrogen dioxide concentration in 2005 is at the High Street/Eastwood Road junction, with a predicted annual mean concentration of 39.3 μg/m 3. However, this is only a modelled prediction. The maximum predicted annual mean PM 10 concentration in 2004 is 30.5 μg/m 3, at the aforementioned junction, which is below 54

55 the annual average objective of 40 μg/m 3. The estimated number of exceedence of the daily mean objective is 30, which is below the 35 exceedence allowed in a year. As a result of this the High Street/Eastwood Road junction has become a site for Nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube monitoring. The actual 2004 and 2005 Nitrogen dioxide concentrations at 3 roadside sites have been found to exceed or almost exceed the annual mean objective value of 40 μg/m 3. These measurements range from 38.1 μg/m 3 to 42.8 μg/m 3. The other diffusion tube monitoring sites, at Rochford Market Square and Bedloes Corner have been found to have Nitrogen dioxide concentrations well below the annual mean objective in 2004 and 2005, ranging from 27.4 μg/m 3 to 30.9 μg/m 3. PM 10 monitoring was undertaken from May to August 2004 at the Rawreth Industrial Estate. The site chosen was to the east of the estate in closest proximity to the T J Cottis site, which has been the main source of reported dust complaints. Monitoring was undertaken under worse case conditions during the summer months. During the 3 months of monitoring, there were 7 days where the 24-hour mean objective of 50 μg/m 3 was exceeded. The range of concentrations measured during the monitoring period was 11.3 μg/m 3 to 57.6 μg/m 3, with a period mean of 31.4 μg/m 3 (Rochford District Council: Local Air Quality Management Detailed Assessment Report, November 2004). This site is due to be monitored for PM 10 in the summer of

56 Map 2 - Potentially Significant Junctions in Rochford District

57 57

58 Rochford District has one road of concern regarding congestion (with a ratio of congestion reference flow of <0.79), the A130. flow to Compliance with targets National Air Quality Strategy (2000) objectives are predicted to be met at all significant junctions identified within the District. The actual 2004 and 2005 Nitrogen dioxide concentration at 3 roadside sites at the High Street/Eastwood Road junction has been found to exceed or almost exceed the annual mean objective value of 40 μg/m 3. At the Rochford Market Square and Bedloes Corner, Nitrogen dioxide concentrations have been found to be well below the annual mean objective in 2004 and 2005, ranging from 27.4 μg/m 3 to 30.9 μg/m 3. During the monitoring of Rawreth Industrial Estate for PM 10 in summer 2004, there were 7 days where the 24-hour mean objective of 50 μg/m 3 was exceeded. It is therefore necessary that the District of Rochford continues to monitor the air quality throughout the area, and seek to promote the utilisation of more sustainable transportation modes. 58

59 SEA Objectives, Targets and Indicators Sustainability Objectives: The utilisation of sustainability objectives is a recognised methodology for considering the environmental effects of a plan and programme and comparing the effects of the alternatives. They serve a different purpose to the objectives of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. The sustainability objectives are utilised to show whether the objectives of the plan and programme are beneficial for the environment, to compare the environmental effects of the alternatives or to suggest improvements. The sustainability objectives have been derived from a review of the plans and programme at the European, national, regional, county and local scale and a strategic analysis of the baseline information. The assessment of the baseline data allows the current state of the environment to be evaluated to determine if significant effects are evident. Annex 1 (f) of the SEA Directive states that the likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors should be analysed. The sustainability objectives identified for the assessment of the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document are outlined in table 16. Table 16 also highlights the relationship with the SEA Directive, the source of the objectives and the related issues. 59

60 Table 16 SEA Directive Significant Effects Population Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage SEA/SA Objective (1) Provide improved access and opportunities for all to open space, sport and recreation. Source Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Statement 1 Delivering Sustainable Development, 2005 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 3 Housing, 2000 Population Human Health (2) Improve quality of public realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 17 Planning for Open Space and Recreation, 1991 Planning Policy Statement 6 Town centres, 60

61 Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape 2005 Rochford District Council, Replacement Local Plan, 2004 Biodiversity inc, Fauna/Flora Population Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape (3) To deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Statement 1 Delivering Sustainable Development, 2005 Fauna/Flora Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Biodiversity inc, Fauna/Flora Population Human Health (4) To ensure that new development contributes to enhancing the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. (5) To support the promotion of health and wellbeing. East of England Regional Assembly, Draft East of England Regional Plan, Regional Spatial Strategy 14, 2004 East of England Regional Assembly, Draft 61

62 Material Assets Cultural Heritage East of England Regional Plan, Regional Spatial Strategy 14, 2004 Landscape Fauna/Flora Population Material Assets Landscape Biodiversity inc Fauna/Flora Population Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape (6) To promote efficient use of land and re-use of previously-developed sites. (7) To preserve and enhance the historic environment. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 3 Housing, 2000 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 15, Planning and the Historic Environment, 1994 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 16, Archaeology and Planning, 62

63 Population Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Fauna/Flora (8) To preserve and enhance the cultural environment Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 15, Planning and the Historic Environment, 1994 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guidance 16, Archaeology and Planning, 1990 Assessing the Compatibility of the Objectives A balance of social, economic and environmental objectives has been selected. To test the internal compatibility of the sustainability objectives a compatibility assessment was undertaken to identify any potential tensions between the objectives. Matrix 1 illustrates the compatibility appraisal of the sustainability objectives. 63

64 Matrix 1 Matrix Illustrating the Compatibility Appraisal of the Sustainability Objectives 2 VC Sustainability Objectives 3 VC VC 4 VC VC VC 5 VC VC VC VC 6 C C C VC C 7 C VC VC VC C C 8 C VC VC VC C C VC Sustainability Objectives Key Very Compatible Compatible No Impact Incompatible Very Incompatible Uncertain Symbol VC C N I VI U A second compatibility test was undertaken to determine whether the aims of the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Documents were compatible with the sustainability objectives. Matrix 2 outlines the compatibility of the sustainability objectives and the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document aims. Prior to conducting the Appraisal of the Plans Policies it was decided that objective 5 related to health would be adequately addressed using objective 3, therefore this objective was deleted from the appraisal. 64

65 Matrix 2 - Compatibility of the Sustainability Objectives and the Core Strategy Aims Rochford District SEA Objectives Playing Pitches SPD 1 VC VC VC VC VC C VC VC Objectives 2 VC VC VC VC C VC VC VC Key Very Compatible Compatible No Impact Incompatible Very Incompatible Uncertain Symbol VC C N I VI U 65

66 Chapter 4 - SPD Policy Appraisal 66

67 Chapter 4 SPD Policy Appraisal Significant Social, Environmental and Economic Effects of the Preferred Policies Annex 1 (f) of the SEA Directive (2001) states that information should be provided on the likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic, material assets including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors (Annex 1(f). It is recommended in the guidance by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that the significance of the effect of a policy or plan needs to consider the probability, duration, frequency and reversibility of the effects. To aid in this evaluation the SA Framework adopted is comparable to that delineated in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister s Guidance entitled Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents (November, 2005). The SA Framework aims to ensure that the policies outlined in the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Issues and Options are beneficial to the community and sustainable (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005). A comprehensive assessment of all policies against all SA/SEA objectives has been undertaken and is a technical annex to this report. Furthermore a summary of the policies appraised is outlined in Appendix 2. A summary of the significant social, environmental and economic effects, spatial extent, temporal extent and recommendations arising from the Appraising Plan Policy assessment is outlined below. The assessment is of potential positive, negative, direct and indirect effects. The summary outlines the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Documents performance against the sustainability objectives. The objectives have been subdivided to reflect the specific social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability as outlined in the SEA Directive Annex 1(f). 67

68 Relationship with SEA Directive Population Human Health SEA Objective (1) Provide improved access and opportunities for all to open space, sport and recreation. Material Assets Cultural Heritage Rochford District Council Replacement Local Plan (2004) LT2 Public Playing Pitch Provision Significant Effect Minor negative in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification Accessibility of playing pitches throughout the District of Rochford is dependent upon location. Table 6.3 which is also set out in the SPD (table 1) outlines the suggested local standards for playing pitches throughout the districts sub areas, including; Rayleigh, Hockley, Hullbridge, Canewdon, Rochford and Great Wakering. These areas have varying standards of provision some exceeding the National Playing Field Association standard of 1.20ha per thousand of the population for instance Great Wakering 1.77ha, Canewdon 1.68ha, Rochford 1.36ha and Hullbridge 1.34ha per thousand of the population. Other sub areas throughout the district have a level of playing pitch accessibility that is below the minimum standard including Rayleigh 1.15ha and most notably Hockley 0.7ha per thousand of the population. The justification for the lower standards is because of the demographic profile of the local population and the surplus capacity. Recommendation The level of standard would need to be subject to ongoing review to take account of changes in the demographic profile of areas and capacity of provision. 68

69 Appraising Plans Policy 1 Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford, and more specifically communities that are in close proximity to new residential development. Justification Improved access and opportunities to open space, sport and recreation will be improved however it does not take account of cumulative demands generated by developments of less than 10 units. The baseline evidence from the number of windfall residential dwellings that have been granted planning permission from 2001 to present day suggests that there were a total of 199 dwellings (including Greenfield and brownfield land). This therefore indicates that the threshold of 10 dwellings may be detrimental to accessibility to open space, sport and recreation. Planning Obligations Circular 2005/05 states that local planning obligations policies should cover both allocated and windfall sites as well as setting out the principles for general application (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, Para B28). The approach adopted seeks to promote the utilisation/enhancement of existing playing pitch provision. It also takes into account local community demand for improved access to sports and recreational facilities. It is therefore considered that the overall impact is positive. Recommendation It is recommended that monetary obligations are sought from both allocated and windfall sites, including sites of residential development of less than 10 dwellings. Appraising Plans Policy 2 Greenbelt Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Communities throughout the District of Rochford, but most notably existing and new persons in close proximity to the greenbelt. 69

70 Justification The Essex and Southend Replacement Structure Plan (2001) Policy C2 entitled Development Within the Metropolitan Greenbelt and the provisions set out in Planning Policy Guidance 2 Greenbelt, state that the construction of new buildings inside a Greenbelt is inappropriate unless it is for the essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation which preserve the openness of the Greenbelt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land in it (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 1995, Para 3.4). It is therefore considered that the criterion within this policy is adequate to ensure the appropriate access to open space, sport and recreational facilities for communities within the greenbelt. Recommendation Not relevant. Appraising Plans Policy 5 Transport Infrastructure Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Appraising Plans Policy 6 (APP6) Significant Effect Major positive effect in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification: Through ensuring that provision is well drained and suitable for use will increase the opportunity that it provides for use. Drainage mechanisms need to be considered because well drained soil encourages grass growth which will lead to the possibility of the pitch being more heavily utilised. For example, many poorly drained grass pitches can only accommodate under 2 hours of adult use per week compared to 3-6 hours for pipe and silt drained pitches (Rochford District Council, 2002 [supporting text]). Recommendation: Not relevant. 70

71 Relationship with SEA Directive Population Human Health SEA Objective (2) Improve quality of public realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Biodiversity inc, Fauna/Flora Appraising Plans Policy 2 (APP2) Greenbelt Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Communities throughout the District of Rochford, but most notably existing and new persons in close proximity to the greenbelt. Justification The policy aims to ensure that where development on the greenbelt is required it should be of the appropriate scale and type. To ensure high quality public realm and open spaces within the greenbelt it is deemed appropriate that the SPD defines what is meant by a significant club house. Planning Policy Guidance 17 defines core facilities as those facilities that require large, bulky buildings and are intended to generate high levels of use, this groups includes swimming pools, indoor sports halls and leisure facilities, indoor bowls centres, indoor tennis centres and ice rinks (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 1991, Para 2.9). The parameters for development outlined by Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines are deemed appropriate for outlining the appropriate size for development within the greenbelt. Central Government 71

72 guidance suggests that where appropriate local authorities may develop typologies (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 1991). Recommendation - It is recommended that the SPD provides further detail as to what is considered a significant club house. Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification Quality depends on two things: the needs and expectations of users, on the one hand, and design, management and maintenance on the other many open spaces are in practice multi-functional. Most grass pitches are probably used for the purposes of children s play, kite flying, exercising dogs or jogging as well as sport. This can create problems when analysing an audit of provision and determining whether local needs are satisfied. PPG 17. The policy positively contributes to this objective and overall the requirement to assess provision against Sport England Guidance will ensure improved quality of public realm and open spaces. However the policy statement that proposed schemes will normally be assessed reduces certainty over the standards being adhered to. Recommendation That the policy states that only in exceptional circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines would not be applicable. Appraising Plans Policy 5 Transportation Infrastructure Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. 72

73 Justification Quality public realm will be delivered by the implementation of this policy. Access by a range of sustainable transportation modes is a significant determinant in the quality of the open space provision. Recommendation Not relevant. Appraising Plans Policy 6 Drainage Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification: Sufficient drainage facilities will improve the quality of the facilities. Recommendation In order address facilities with insufficient drainage priority should be given to the pitches highlighted in table 12.3 of the An Assessment of the Playing Pitches in Rochford District October 2002 document. Relationship with SEA Directive Population SEA Objective (3) To deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live. Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Fauna/Flora Appraising Plans Policy 1 73

74 Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford, and more specifically communities that are in close proximity to new residential development. Justification To ensure the delivery of sustainable communities throughout the Rochford District an important component is that it is active, inclusive and safe (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005). The offering of opportunities for cultural, leisure, sport and other activities throughout the District is deemed adequate to achieve an active, inclusive and safe community (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005). It is also important that the District of Rochford features a quality built natural environment (Office of the Deputy Prime Minster, 2005). APP3 (Design) addresses this. Recommendation Not relevant. Appraising Plans Policy 5 Transportation Infrastructure Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical scope Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification Access by a range of sustainable transportation modes is a significant determinant in the delivery of safe, health and attractive places to live. Recommendation Not relevant. Relationship with SEA Directive Material Assets Cultural Heritage SEA Objective (4) To ensure that new development contributes to enhancing the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. Landscape 74

75 Biodiversity inc, Fauna/Flora Rochford District Council Replacement Rochford Local Plan (2004) Policy LT2 Public Playing Pitch Provision Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification - The policy seeks to ensure that the effect on the amenity of the surrounding area and nature conservation interests is taken into consideration. Recommendation Not relevant. Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification The policy positively contributes to this objective and overall the requirement to assess provision against Sport England Guidance will ensure that new development contributes to enhancing the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. However the policy statement that proposed schemes will normally be assessed reduces certainty over the standards being adhered to. Recommendation That the policy states that only in exceptional circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines. 75

76 Relationship with SEA Directive Population Material Assets SEA Objective (5) To promote efficient use of land and re-use of previouslydeveloped sites. Landscape Biodiversity inc Fauna/Flora Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification The policy positively contributes to this objective and overall the requirement to assess provision against Sport England Guidance will ensure that efficient use is made of land, with regard to the layout and design of facilities. However the policy statement that proposed schemes will normally be assessed reduces certainty over the standards being adhered to. Recommendation That the policy states that only in exceptional circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines would not be applicable. Appraising Plans Policy 4 Size of Pitches Significant Effect Major positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Rochford District. Justification Through setting standards the policy will ensure that land is used efficiently in accordance with the land area needed for different types of sporting activity. 76

77 Recommendation Not relevant. Relationship with SEA Directive Population SEA Objective (6) To preserve and enhance the historic environment. Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification The policy positively contributes to this objective and overall the requirement to assess provision against Sport England Guidance will ensure the preservation and enhancement of the historic environment. However the policy statement that proposed schemes will normally be assessed reduces certainty over the standards being adhered to. Recommendation That the policy states that only in exceptional circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines would not be applicable. 77

78 Relationship with SEA Directive Population SEA Objective (7) To preserve and enhance the cultural environment. Human Health Material Assets Cultural Heritage Landscape Fauna/Flora Appraising Plans Policy 3 Design Significant Effect Minor positive in the short long term. Geographical Spatial Extent Throughout the District of Rochford. Justification The policy positively contributes to this objective and overall the requirement to assess provision against Sport England Guidance will ensure the preservation and enhancement of the cultural environment... However the policy statement that proposed schemes will normally be assessed reduces certainty over the standards being adhered to. Recommendation That the policy states that only in exceptional circumstances Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines would not be applicable. 78

79 Chapter 5 - SPD Issues and Alternatives 79

80 Chapter 5 SPD Issues and Alternatives The SEA Directive states that where an Environmental Assessment is required under Article 3 (1), and Environmental Report shall be prepared in which the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the plan and programme, and reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated (SEA Directive, Article 5). Outlined below are the main options that have been subject to assessment. These are as follows: Playing Pitch Provision options: Option 1 No Policy within the Local Plan outlining a strategy towards playing pitch provision. Option 2 Policy in the Local Plan (LT2) outlining the approach for playing pitch provision throughout the District of Rochford. Option 3 Policy in the Local Plan (LT2) outlining the approach for playing pitch provision throughout the District of Rochford and a Supplementary Planning Document elaborating on the detail of the policy. 80

81 Rochford District Council Supplementary Planning Document Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document (2006) Comparison of the Options Table 17 SEA Objective 1) Provide improved access and opportunities for all to open space, sport and Option 1 No Policy within the Local Plan outlining a strategy towards playing pitch provision. Performance Commentary/ Short, Explanation Medium and Long Term??? Without a policy there would be no local statutory mechanism to ensure that there is an adequate and sustainable provision of playing pitches throughout the District of Rochford. It is important that a coherent approach to playing pitch provision is developed and adhered to, to ensure that the Option 2 Policy in the Local Plan (LT2) outlining the approach for playing pitch provision throughout the District of Rochford. Performance Commentary/ Short, Medium Explanation and Long Term??? Without SPD the following would be unclear: Where obligations would be required for playing pitch provision; The design measures deemed appropriate for playing pitches. 81

82 recreation. 2) Improve quality of public realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. 3) To deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live. existing and future generation have adequate access to playing pitches locally within the District of Rochford. Furthermore it is considered that the quality of design may be poorer due to a lack of framework. It is therefore concluded that the impact would be uncertain. The expected size of playing pitches. Infrastructure required for playing pitches. Without a clear framework to inform negotiations this would result in less certainty in enhancing and proving playing pitches to meet the needs of the resident community and therefore could impact upon capacity and the ability of the population to access playing pitches. 4) To ensure that new development contributes to enhancing the 82

83 character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. 5) To promote efficient use of land and the re-use of previouslydeveloped sites. 6) To preserve and enhance the historic environment. 83

84 7) To preserve and enhance the cultural environment. SEA Objective 1) Provide improved access and opportunities for all to open space, Option 3 Policy in the Local Plan (LT2) outlines the approach for playing pitch provision throughout the District of Rochford and a Supplementary Planning Document elaborating on the detail of the policy. Performance Commentary/ Short, Explanation Medium and Long Term The combination of the policy with supplementary planning document provides the clearest framework for ensuring that the need of the existing and future community is met. 84

85 sport and recreation. 2) Improve quality of public realm and open spaces in urban and rural areas. However it is considered that the draft SPD could be improved see appraising policies section. 3) To deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live. 4) To ensure that new development contributes to enhancing 85

86 the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value. 5) To promote efficient use of land and the re-use of previouslydeveloped sites. 6) To preserve and enhance the historic environment. 86

87 7) To preserve and enhance the cultural environment. 87

88 Chapter 6 - Monitoring Implementation of Core Strategy

89 Chapter 6 Monitoring Implementation of Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document The SEA Directive states that Member States shall monitor the significant environmental effects of the implementation of plans and programmes in order, inter alia, to identify at an early stage unforeseen adverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial action (Article.10.1). Furthermore the Environmental Report shall include a description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring (Annex 1 (i)). This Chapter aims to outline the monitoring framework for the Rochford District Council Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document The monitoring of the Plan allows the actual significant environmental effects of implementing the plan or programme to be tested against those predicted (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, 39). The monitoring of the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document will aid in the identification of any problems that may arise during the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Documents implementation. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents (November, 2005). This guidance demonstrates that the monitoring framework should consider the following; the time, frequency and geographical extent of monitoring (e.g. link to timeframes for targets, and monitoring whether the effects is predicted to be short, medium or long term); Who is responsible for the different monitoring tasks, including the collection processing and evaluation of social, environmental and economic information; and How to present the monitoring information with regard to its purpose and the expertise of those who will have to act upon the information (e.g. 89

90 information may have to be presented in a form accessible to nonenvironmental specialists). (Source; Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, 149) The table 18 outlines the SEA monitoring framework for the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Documents significant effects. Table 18 Monitoring Targets Responsible Temporal Presentation Any Issues Activity Authority Extent Format with the (Frequency Monitoring of Monitoring) To monitor Context Rochford Annual Tabulated May not be playing pitch District currently sizes to Council monitored. determine whether they comply with the criterion outlined in policy LT2 and table 1 of the SPD. To monitor Context Rochford Annual Tabulated May not be the number District currently of playing Council monitored. pitch planning applications with conditions related to 90

91 the Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines. To monitor Context Rochford Annual Tabulated/mapped May not be the number District currently of playing Council monitored. pitch planning applications within the Greenbelt. To monitor Context Rochford Annual Tabulated May not be planning District currently obligations Council monitored. sought for playing pitches and related facilities throughout the District of Rochford. To monitor Context Rochford Annual Tabulated None the extent to District which Council priorities for drainage outlined in table 12.3 (Assessment of Playing Pitches 91

92 October 2002) are being addressed. The following information highlights contextual effects that may be monitored to provide an indication of the general state of the environment and determine the effect the Playing Pitch Strategy Supplementary Planning Document is having upon the Rochford District Council as a whole. 92

93 Appendices 93

94 Appendix 1 94

95 Appendix 1 Review of the Plans and Programmes Assessment of Playing Pitches in Rochford District Plan/ Key objectives relevant to the plan and Key targets and indictors relevant to Implications for SA Programme SA plan and SA International European and Limit climate change and increase Each of the objectives has a set Need to address human health. International the use of clean energy. of headline objectives and also Sustainability Development Strategy Address threats to public health. Manage natural resources more responsibly. measures at the EU level. Headline Objectives; Access to playing pitches in terms of opportunity and transportation accessibility. Improve the transport system and land use management. The EU will meet its Kyoto commitment. Thereafter, the EU should aim to reduce atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 1% per year over 1990 levels up to By 2020, ensure that chemicals are only produced and used in ways that do not pose significant threats to human 95

96 European Spatial Development Perspective (May, 1999) European Community Biodiversity Strategy Spatial development policies promote sustainable development of the EU through a balanced spatial structure; Development of a balanced and polycentric urban system and a new urban-rural relationship; Securing parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge; and Sustainable development, prudent management and protection of nature and cultural heritage. Anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity at the source. health and the environment. Protect and restore habitats and natural systems and halt the loss of biodiversity by Accessibility of playing pitches in terms of transportation and location. No relevant targets. Preserve the biodiversity. 96

97 Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice The Sixth Environment Action Programme of the European Community Tackle climate change, Protect nature and wildlife, Address environment and health issues, Preserve natural resources and manage waste. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8% compared with 1990 levels by (as agreed at Kyoto); Reduce global emissions by approximately 20-40% on 1990 levels 2020; Tackle the long term goal of a 70% reduction in emissions set by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Need to address human health. Reduce the quantity of waste going to final disposal by 20% on 2000 levels by 2010 and in the order of 50% by National PPS1; Delivering Development plans should promote Indicator; Ensure opportunity and accessibility for all Sustainable development that creates socially Accessibility for all members of persons throughout the District of Rochford Development inclusive communities, including the community to jobs, health, to playing pitches. suitable mixes of housing. Plan housing, education, shops, policies should: leisure and community facilities. Ensure that playing pitches are designed to a high quality promoting a safe and address accessibility (both in Target; attractive environment. 97

98 terms of location and physical access) for all members of the community to jobs, health, housing, education, shops, leisure and community facilities deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live Development policies should avoid unnecessary detail and should concentrate on guiding overall scale, density, massing, height, landscape, layout and access of new development in relation to neighbouring buildings. Encourage healthy living through the provision of opportunities to playing pitches. support the promotion of health and well being by making provision for physical activity. Planning should seek to maintain and improve the local environment and help to mitigate the effects of declining environmental quality through positive policies on issues such as design, conservation and the provision of public space Development plan policies should take account of environmental issues such as: 98

99 the need to improve the built and natural environment in and around urban areas and rural settlements, including the provision of good quality open space; High quality and inclusive design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process and should create wellmixed and integrated developments which avoid segregation and have wellplanned public spaces that bring people together and provide opportunities for physical activity and recreation PPG2; Green Belt Once Green Belts have been defined, the use of land in them has a positive role to play in Role of the greenbelt regarding sports provision and facilities. 99

100 providing opportunities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation near urban areas. The construction of new buildings inside a Green Belt is inappropriate unless it is providing essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation, for cemeteries, and for other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the purposes of including land in it. Possible examples of such facilities include small changing rooms or unobtrusive spectator accommodation for outdoor sport, or small stables for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation PPG3; Housing Local planning authorities should have clear policies for the protection and creation of open space and playing fields, and new National Playing Fields standard for the provision of playing pitches which is approximately 1.8 hectares of Standards for playing pitch provision. 100

101 housing developments should incorporate sufficient provision where such spaces are not already adequately provided within easy access of the new housing. pitches, courts, greens etc. per 1000 population, including at least 1.2 hectares of pitches. PPS 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Planning authorities should aim to secure environmental improvements and maximise a range of beneficial uses of land, whilst reducing potential conflicts between neighbouring land uses. This should include improvement of public access (e.g. through support for country parks and community forests) and facilitating the provision of appropriate sport and recreation facilities Accessibility and provision of playing pitches and sporting facilities within rural environments. Regional planning bodies and local planning authorities should recognise through RSS and LDDs that tourism and leisure activities 101

102 are vital to many rural economies. As well as sustaining many rural businesses PPS 9; To promote sustainable The location of designated sites Maintenance and enhancement of biological Biodiversity and development by ensuring that of importance for biodiversity and diversity. Geological biological and geological diversity geodiversity, making clear Conservation are conserved and enhanced as distinctions between the hierarchy The contribution that playing pitches can an integral part of social, of international, national, regional make towards rural renewal and urban environmental and economic and locally designated sites; renaissance. development; Identify areas or sites for To contribute to rural renewal and restoration or creation of new urban renaissance, ensuring that priority habitats which contribute developments take account of the to regional targets; role and value of biodiversity in Quantity of use of previously supporting economic developed land for new diversification and contributing to development (previously a high quality environment; and developed land makes a major Plan policies should promote contribution to sustainable opportunities for the incorporation development by reducing the of beneficial biodiversity and amount of courtside and geological features within the undeveloped land that needs to design of development. be used); and Number of planning obligations 102

103 used to building-in beneficial biodiversity or geological features as part of good design. PPS 12; Local Development *Objectives not relevant to SEA/SA No relevant targets. Provides an understanding as to the important role planning plays in the delivery Frameworks of sustainable development. PPG 13; Transport New development should help to create places that connect with National parking standards are outlined. Accessibility by a choice of mode of transportation. each other sustainably, providing the right conditions to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport. People should come before traffic; and Reduce the need to travel, especially by car. PPG 14; Development on Unstable Land Ensure that development is suitable and that the physical constraints on the land are taken No relevant targets. into account. PPG 15; Planning and the Historic Environment Local planning authorities should protect registered parks and gardens in preparing development plans and in No relevant targets. Maintenance and protection of the historic environment. 103

104 determining planning applications. Planning and highway authorities should also safeguard registered parks or gardens when themselves planning new developments or road schemes. The Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England is maintained by English Heritage, to whom all enquiries about its compilation should be made. Sites of exceptional historic interest are assessed as grade I, those of great historic interest as grade II* and those of special historic interest as grade II. The grading of these sites is independent of the grading of any listed building which falls within the area. The Register is under review, with the aim of extending its coverage of 104

105 parks and gardens deserving protection. PPG16; Archaeology and Planning Preserve, enhance and protect sites of archaeological interest. Useful source for baseline data, indicators and potential target formation Royal Commission Preserve, enhance and protect sites of archaeological interest. on the Historical Monuments of England (RCHME). PPG17; Planning for To ensure effective planning for open space, sport and recreation This is of significant importance to the SEA. Open, Space, it is essential that the needs of Sport and local communities are known. Recreation Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land should not be built on unless an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space or the buildings and land to be surplus to requirements. For open space, 'surplus to requirements' should include consideration of all the functions that open space can perform. Not 105

106 all open space, sport and recreational land and buildings are of equal merit and some may be available for alternative uses. The recreational quality of open spaces can be eroded by insensitive development or incremental loss of the site. In considering planning applications - either within or adjoining open space - local authorities should weigh any benefits being offered to the community against the loss of open space that will occur. In rural areas those sports and recreational facilities which are likely to attract significant numbers of participants or spectators should be located in, or on the edge of, country towns. Smaller scale facilities will be acceptable where they are 106

107 located in, or adjacent to villages to meet the needs of the local community. Planning obligations should be used as a means to remedy local deficiencies in the quantity or quality of open space, sports and recreational provision. Local authorities will be justified in seeking planning obligations where the quantity or quality of provision is inadequate or under threat, or where new development increases local needs. PPG20; Coastal Planning To facilitate and enhance the enjoyment, of heritage coasts by improving and extending opportunities for recreational, educational, sporting and tourist activities that draw on, and are consistent with conservation of their natural beauty and the protection of Baseline data regarding the amount of development within the coastline and size of coastal sites. No targets. 107

108 their heritage features; and Protect and enhance the natural character and landscape of the undeveloped coastline. PPG24; Minimise the impact of noise No targets. Noise impact and possible need for Planning and without placing unreasonable mitigation. Noise restrictions on development; Contains Noise Exposure Categories. planning conditions should be imposed to ensure that the effects of noise are mitigated as far as possible. For example, intervening buildings or structures (such -as garages) may be designed to serve as noise barriers. PPG 25; Reduce the risks to people and Contains baseline data for Appropriate development in areas of flood Development the developed and natural Britain. risk. and Flood Risk environment from flooding; Developers should fund the provision and maintenance of flood defences that are required because of the development; and 108

109 Development needs to be of a design and with an appropriate level of protection to ensure that the risk of damage from flooding is minimised, while not increasing the risk of flooding elsewhere. Securing the Guiding principles for the 2005 UK Very comprehensive list of Contribution that playing pitches and Future Sustainable Development Strategy; targets and indicators in sporting facilities may make towards Delivering UK chapter 7 of the document. ensuring a strong and healthy society. Sustainable Living within environmental Development limits; Strategy (March, 2005) Ensuring a strong, healthy and just society; Achieving a sustainable economy; Promoting good governance; and Using sound science responsibly. REGIONAL Regional The main principles that should govern Very comprehensive list of Promoting green corridors, and a healthy Planning the continuing development of the Region targets and indicators (Page community. Guidance for the are; ). South East 109

110 (RPG9) (March, 2001) the importance of maximise the essential contribution made by open spaces, green corridors and trees in urban and rural areas in terms of their benefits for wildlife habitats, recreational and cultural value and wider environmental and social benefits. That health is affected by a range of factors including the provision of a safe, secure and sustainable environment, reducing pollution, adequate housing provision, access to leisure and recreation, reducing social exclusion and increasing employment opportunities. That throughout the Region the countryside should fulfil a range of needs including recreation, farming, forestry, military uses and the local economy, while 110

111 safeguarding landscape and biodiversity. Draft Regional Need to provide sporting and recreational Spatial Strategy Objectives include community strategies Comprehensive list of targets facilities. for the East of to look at the role and function of a and indicators are set out in England settlement in a long-term context and appendix D (page 237). Ensuring that new development contributes (RSS14) identify opportunities for enhancing its positively to green space and the local (December, development in a sustainable way, with character, such as playing pitches. 2004) particular focus on: The provision of appropriate open space, sport and recreation use including the potential for the use of the area surrounding the settlement for formal and informal recreation. Ensuring that new development contributes to enhancing the character, appearance, recreational and biodiversity value of the urban fringe. 111

112 The design of such development will need to address any concerns over adverse impacts on traffic levels, social and community facilities. Areas of open space will need to be provided in new housing development, to meet recreational needs and to deliver biodiversity, health and visual amenity benefits. County Essex and Southend-on- Sea Replacement Structure Plan (Adopted April, 2001) Objectives : To promote a wide range of opportunities to take part in sport and recreation through the provision of adequate and accessible facilities, land and water resources. Accessibility and opportunities for sporting and recreational facilities. That sites for sport/leisure centres should be located within or adjoining urban areas identified in adopted local plans as such 112

113 locations minimising the need to travel, and provide access for travel modes other than car (e.g. cycling, walking etc.) Local Objective: Ensure adequate provision of sporting and To provide for and encourage the recreational facilities to meet community Rochford District provision of leisure and other community The local planning authority has needs. Local Plan (First facilities and to make good, where adopted a general policy of providing Review), 1995 possible, deficiencies that have arisen 2.5 hectares of open space per 1000 Playing pitch standards are outlined. from past high rates of housing population, and in all urban settlements development. all residential areas should be within half a kilometre of a large open space The local planning authority has adopted (at least 2 hectares) or within one-fifth a general policy of providing 2.5 hectares of a kilometre of a small open space (at of open space per 1000 population, and in least 0.4 hectares. all urban settlements all residential areas should be within half a kilometre of a large Attention will also be paid to the open space (at least 2 hectares) or within National Playing Fields standard for the one-fifth of a kilometre of a small open provision of playing pitches which is space (at least 0.4 hectares. approximately 1.8 hectares of pitches, courts, greens etc. per 1000 population, Attention will also be paid to the National including at least 1.2 hectares of 113

114 Playing Fields standard for the provision of playing pitches which is approximately 1.8 heactares of pitches, courts, greens etc. per 1000 population, including at least 1.2 hectares of pitches. pitches. The plan will seek to safeguard all existing areas of Public Open Space and include work sympathetic to nature conservation. In appropriate cases, the Council will be mindful of the possibility of transferring the area concerned to the NPFA to ensure it use as open space in perpetuity. Policy LT2 The local planning authority will encourage the retention of existing private playing fields, sports grounds and open spaces Policy LT3 The local planning authority will encourage proposals for indoor and outdoor sports clubs and similar facilities, 114

115 but will have regard to: The likely noise and disturbance resulting from the activities The need to limit the use of building and site in the interest of residential amenity The likely volume of traffic that would be generated The adequacy of the transport network and means of access to the site The adequacy of off-street parking The impact of the development on the visual amenities in the area The existence of similar facilities with the locality. Policy LT5 The local planning authority will encourage the joint provision and multiuse of recreation facilities in educational and other establishments. 115

116 116

117 Appendix 2 117

118 Playing Pitches Strategy Supplementary Planning Document Appraising Plans Policies Policy Summary Appraising Plans Policy 1 (APP1) The LPA will require contributions towards the provision of additional, or enhance existing playing pitches in cases of development comprising 10 or more dwellings. A contribution towards improvement or maintenance of existing facilities may be in some cases considered in preference to the provision of a new facility. Developer contributions will not be required when the proposed development incorporates the adequate provision of leisure facilities or playing pitches, providing that such leisure facilities can be secured for community use. The level of contribution required will be dependent on the level of additional playing pitch demand generated, together with the current costs of providing such playing pitches at the time of the allocation. Appraising Plans Policy 2 (APP2) Greenbelt The use of land as a sports pitch may be considered as an appropriate land use within the Green Belt. However, the construction of significant club houses or large scale car parks is likely to be considered inappropriate in the Green Belt (subject to the criteria set out in policy Lt2 of the Rochford Replacement District Local Plan). 118

119 Assessment of Playing Pitches Changing Areas In Areas of Green Belt, support buildings and changing facilities should not exceed the minimum space requirements set in the Sport England Design and Technical Guidelines. This recommended space per pitch should allow for two sports teams, officials and storage: Association Football - 40m² Cricket - 38m² Hockey - 40m² Rugby (League & Union) - 48m² Additional space for the provision of toilet and shower facilities may also be required. Appraising Plans Policy 3 (APP3) Design It is important that any facilities which are provided, whether as result of developer contributions or otherwise, are of sufficient quality to ensure they are of maximum benefit to the community. Proposed schemes will normally be assessed against the Sport England design and technical guidelines. 119

120 Appraising Plans Policy 4 (APP4) Size of Pitches Recommended Pitch Size for Association Football Suggested Suggested size of Pitch dimensions (meters) pitch size (meters) goal posts (meters) Length Width Length x Height x Width Width Max Min Max Min Youth U17 - U18 and seniors 101 x x Mini Soccer U7 - U8 46 x x Mini Soccer U9 - U10 55 x x Youth U11 U12 73 x x Youth U13 U14 82 x x Youth U15- U16 91 x x Cricket Any proposed cricket pitch in Rochford District should be a rectangular area of 22 yards/20.12m in length and 10ft/3.05m in width, with the boundary line 50 to 90 yards from the centre of the pitch, in accordance with the England Cricket Board and the Marylebone Cricket Club. Hockey A full size hockey pitch should measure 91.4 m in length and 55 m in width, with a mini hockey pitch measuring 55 m in length and 43 m in width in accordance with the England Hockey Association. However it is important to note that synthetic turf pitches are required for competitive level hockey. 120

121 Rugby It is recommended that Rugby pitches be no more than 100m long and 70m wide, with the possibility that they may also be used for association football. Appraising Plans Policy 5 (APP5) Transportation Infrastructure Any planning application for new playing pitch facilities should demonstrate an adequate level of infrastructure on the site by sustainable forms of transport. Appraising Plans Policy 6 (APP6) Drainage Any new playing pitch facilities should be designed to include good drainage. Developer contributions will also be required, when appropriate, to improve drainage of existing pitches in the district. Appraising Plans Policy 6 (APP6) Ensuring Pitches are Secured for Use by the Community Pitches and formal space is required by way of developer contributions and obligations, to be secured for community use by way of legal agreement. 121

122

123