I would like to express my objections and concerns around the proposed development plans for the west end of Rayleigh. I appreciate that there is a need for new housing and that your proposals form part of a central government initiative, but there has already been a significant amount of development in this area over the past few years, and there are other brownfield sites in other parts of the district that would more than satisfy the initiative.



Rawreth Industrial Site Development



With regard to the 220 proposed homes being built on what is currently the Rawreth Industrial Estate, I can see the reasoning for considering this site, the fact that it is already developed land means that there will be little impact to the appearance and traffic flow in the area, however, it is obvious that the strain on an already stretched local infrastructure will only be made worse with all the additional residents. Currently as you will be aware the local secondary school (Sweyne Park) is oversubscribed at every annual in-take, and this will only become more of an issue as more people move into the area.



If these properties are built on the Rawreth Industrial Estate, I suggest the only site in the area that should be considered for an alternative employment site would be the area of land at the corner of the A127 and the A1245. This area is perfectly positioned for access to the A127, A1245 and the A130, and will therefore ensure that the majority of industrial traffic is kept away from the already busy A129 and Rayleigh High Street.



Development of additional 550 Homes



I vehemently object to the proposal to develop 550 properties in the area between London Road and Rawreth Lane, which your document has labelled as NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 & NLR5 for a number of reasons:



West Rayleigh has had its fair share of development over the past few years with the development of the Victoria Grange Estate, the Birds Estate, the Little Wheatley Estate, as well as some other smaller developments off the London Road and Louis Drive areas. There have been no new schools, doctor's surgeries etc built to support these developments to date, where as I understand they were promised, so past experience would suggest that the same will apply this time around. This would not be acceptable as the current infrastructure is already stretched.



This development would result in an unnecessary loss of agricultural land.



Part of the area is flood plain, which currently acts as a natural defence for the properties currently on and around London Road, so if this land is built on these properties will inevitably be at greater risk of flooding.



The A129 London Road and Rayleigh High Street are already busy, and at peak times traffic barely moves. Any further development will only make this worse.



The NLR3 and NLR5 sites are on the land currently occupied by the Rayleigh Town Sports and Social Club, and has been on the current site since 1972 as a lessee of Rochford Council. The club has sports pitches currently used by 8 adult football teams, junior mini soccer teams, 4 adult and three junior cricket teams. Having been involved in junior football myself, I know that there are already insufficient sports facilities in the local area, so losing this facility as well would be nothing short of scandalous.

The club also has its own clubhouse which is used by the local community for various social, family and fundraising events, this will be a great loss to the community, which will probably never be replaced.



There is currently a clear green belt boundary which will need to be moved. Once development has taken hold, the boundaries will be increasingly difficult to defend. So my fear is that the whole area will eventually become one huge housing estate. At the moment, as you come into Rayleigh from the Carpenters Arms roundabout you get the sense of countryside which is easy on the eye, this will all be gone if development takes place in this area.



Gipsy and Traveller Sites



I strongly object to the proposal to accommodate Gipsies and Travellers in the West Rayleigh area, there is no real reason to do so as there are other sites, such as the area on the A1245 north of Rayleigh, which are currently occupied that can be legalised. This will bring Rochford district up to quota without creating any further sites.



The GT3 area should not even be given consideration, as once this area becomes occupied and accessible, the surrounding area will inevitably become illegally occupied creating a much larger than intended site. The point mentioned in the document about Gipsies and Travellers being able to integrate with the local community is completely invalid, as they will never want to, and neither will they ever be accepted by the local community. This has been evidenced by the experience of other sites around Essex. The only way integration will ever take place is if the Gipsies and Travellers are situated on single plot sites with reasonable distance between them, and not on larger sites where they will form their own exclusive community.



Therefore I propose that if you do intend to create (unnecessary) additional sites, then you do make them small single plot sites at a number of different locations around the Rochford district.



Finally I wish to express my utter disgust at the lack of information supplied by the council regarding the above issues, no doubt you have fulfilled any legal obligation by putting some sort of notice in the corner of a local paper somewhere knowing full well it would go unnoticed by the majority of the district. These are important issues for the people of Rayleigh and our consideration should be foremost in any proposals or decisions made. The fact that I and many others were made aware of all this by the good work of a local residents association as little as 2 weeks ago, is quite frankly disgraceful. I urge you to take steps to improve this matter in the future.