Comment

Representation ID: 15806

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

The Local Plan should refer to ECC's role as the Waste Planning Authority and to the emerging Waste Local Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 15807

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

Provision of Industrial Land in Essex plays an important role in providing locations for waste management facilities and aggregate recycling plants. ECC considers the existing policies are too restrictive and the provision for "any associated employment generating sui generis uses" within these policies and respective employment areas should be permitted. ECC recommends the following Draft Local Plan Policy be amended accordingly: `Development for employment uses (Class B1, B2 or B8) and any associated employment generating sui generis uses will be encouraged provided the proposal'
Criterion d), this criterion is too restrictive and is not supported by ECC, as highway authority.

Comment

Representation ID: 15808

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

The draft Local Plan contains limited reference to waste management facilities, and in particular advice for their provision in the proposed Development Management Policies. In particular, ECC recommends reference is made in Policies 8.3 and 8.4 to enable the provision of waste management facilities in employment areas, by referring to ` any associated employment generating sui generis uses' in these policies.

In addition we recommend that cross reference is made to Policy 10.2 - Parking; and welcome reference to the ambition to achieve and retain a wide range of employment opportunities on employment sites.

Support

Representation ID: 15810

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

Supports positive policy approach.
Supports reference to renewable energy schemes and sustainable construction in Policy 10.3. ECC as Waste Planning Authority will continue to work with BBC to ensure closer working between the two local planning authorities on waste issues.

Comment

Representation ID: 15811

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

ECC acknowledges that the SA of the 6 reasonable options / alternatives identified, offer a very thorough and useful assessment of those options, and that the options selected for this part of the spatial strategy are comprehensive. However, it is noted that the SA seeks to develop `reasonable alternatives' for strategic level growth arising from the Strategic Growth Options/Dunton Garden Village consultations, rather than the overall SA process. Consequently, it is unclear what options have been considered regarding the level of proportionate growth in rural areas with regards scale of growth, as the Draft Plan does not allocate growth in rural areas. The council will need to ensure that it has considered such options moving forward.

Comment

Representation ID: 15812

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

The (Pre-) Submission SA will need to explore those spatial strategy options that were considered by the Council in 2009-2011 as part of their work towards a Core Strategy DPD (2009) and as stated in the Draft Local Plan 2016, paragraph 5.4, or at least offer some explanation as to why these alternatives are now not considered 'reasonable' if indeed this is considered the case. This could be explored (or re-explored) as part of a comprehensive audit trail of alternatives that have been considered and subject to SA throughout the plan-making process and should detail the reasons for rejecting and progressing alternatives at each stage. In addition, the cumulative assessment of the 'givens' (paras 6.3.5 - 6.3.7 of the Interim SA) for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of SA should be presented, alongside the cumulative impacts of these with the preferred strategic option.

Support

Representation ID: 15814

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

ECC supports the reference to flooding and surface water management issues, as well as the need for proposals to incorporate sustainable drainage systems. The approach and use of supporting evidence is considered to be consistent with ECC's requirements in its role as the Lead Local Flood Authority. ECC welcomes reference to the Brentwood Surface Water Management Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 15816

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

ECC has undertaken a high level assessment of the proposed sites identified in Figure 7.2 - Housing Land Allocations. Results for site:
Within Fooding Hotspot: No
Within EA UFMfSW: 001B YES
Number of Properties at Risk: N/A
The adopted SuDs Design Guide should be used with regards to appropriate standards for mitigation measures.
The north eastern portion of this site is shown to be at risk of flooding in both 1 in 30 and 1 in 100 events from surface water according to the EA Updated Flood Map for Surface Water. It is strongly recommended that any development actions on this site do not exacerbate the existing risk of surface water flooding on this site and flood management infrastructure should be installed to accommodate any additional development.

Comment

Representation ID: 15817

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

ECC has undertaken a high level assessment of the proposed sites identified in Figure 7.2 - Housing Land Allocations. Results for site:
Within Fooding Hotspot: No
Within EA UFMfSW: No
Number of Properties at Risk: N/A
The adopted SuDs Design Guide should be used with regards to appropriate standards for mitigation measures.

Comment

Representation ID: 15818

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Essex County Council

ECC has undertaken a high level assessment of the proposed sites identified in Figure 7.2 - Housing Land Allocations. Results for site:
Within Fooding Hotspot: Brent-H
Within EA UFMfSW: Yes
Number of Properties at Risk: 6
The adopted SuDs Design Guide should be used with regards to appropriate standards for mitigation measures.
The southern tip of this site is at risk of flooding in both 1 in 30 and 1 in 100 events from surface water according to the EA Updated Flood Map for Surface Water. In addition, this site falls entirely within the Brent-H flooding hotspot and 6 properties are at risk of internal flooding in a 1:20 year event. It is strongly recommended that any development actions on this site do not exacerbate the existing risk of surface water flooding on this site and flood management infrastructure should be installed to accommodate any additional development.