Options NLR1 - NLR5

Infrastructure improvements listed are:-
1. local highway capacity and infrastructure improvements
2. improvements to public transport service and infrastructure
3. enhancement and links to pedestrian, cycle and bridleway network.

There is local concern that Rayleigh town centre cannot cope with the traffic which is already flowing to and through it. The additional housing will place an increased demand on these routes and car parking. There does not appear to be any potential to increase the capacity of these so congestion and its associated pollution will increase. This development site is quite simply unsustainable from the highway and traffic point of view. It's not the immediate locality that's the problem but the town centre. It is not realistic to expect all residents and their family members to travel to and through the town centre by bus and bicycle. It is strongly recommended that proper, transparent traffic modelling is carried out to assess the impact on Rayleigh town centre and environs and appropriate mitigation measures must be implemented as part of any planning permission. There must be nil detriment to the highway infrastructure in the town centre area since it is already over capacity and it must not be allowed to get worse.

Attention is drawn to Section 10.9 of the Core Strategy which states "It is important that new development be accompanied by the requisite highway infrastructure improvements to mitigate their impact on the existing network". Mitigation must be carried out to achieve nil detriment to the existing town, roads and car parks, if it's possible. If it's not possible then the scheme must proceed.

It is suggested that this proposal is in breach of the Core Strategy Environmental Issue Objective 8.

It is further suggested that this proposal could be contrary to the Traffic Manager's duty to reduce congestion under the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Increased traffic congestion around Rayleigh town centre will be contrary to Objective 4, bullet point 1 of Section 03 of the Rayleigh Area Action Plan (Make the town centre easier to reach by all modes of transport (Walking, cycling, bus and by car)). Notice that it says that it should be easier to reach by car.

I assume that the argument over the stress that will be placed on water supply, energy supply and health providers has already been lost since these are generally not regarded as being planning matters? These are issues however which appear to be constantly overlooked while there is felt to be a need to keep providing housing. If there is still an opportunity for these issues to be fully considered in this process then I think they ought to be.

The document states "The site has sufficient capacity to deliver significant community benefit to the nearby town of Rayleigh . . ." What benefit does it deliver? This is not explained or believable.

The argument that taking this green belt for housing would have the advantage of providing a strong, defensible green belt boundary is illogical. The existing boundary could easily have been defended if it was expedient to do so.