Object

Allocations: Schedule of modifications

Representation ID: 32819

Received: 20/12/2013

Respondent: Mr J Cripps

Representation Summary:

The original proposal of 550 +5% will clearly adversely impact the traffic flow both during years of construction and the subsequent ongoing domestic usage.

I therefore object to the Inspector's proposal to remove the 5% cap on units as it is clearly going to make the vehicle loading even worse and is unsustainable because:-

A. The existing roads will be gridlocked at rush hour periods.
B. Tailbacks will create highway hazards at the junctions with the A1245.
C. The local infrastructure (in all respects) will not be able to cope with an effectively undefined number increase in loading, namely - Schools/Doctors/Public Services and shrinking Emergency Services.
D. The proposed site already contains 3.1 hectares of land designated as Flood Plain thus limiting the number of 'legally built' unit locations - any increase in numbers will inevitably encroach on that unsuitable zone.
E. The RDC plan as it stood is a vague conceptual outline, I see no meaningful study work on the various impacts - to remove the 5% cap (a modicum of control) is, in my view, quite negligent of the Inspector.

Full text:

Formal Objection to Allocations Document modification - Ref: MM20

Both Rawreth Lane and London Road will be the route of vehicle traffic to and from the proposed mass housing (550 units +5% in Rayleigh) and indirectly to/from the proposed mass housing in Hullbridge (500+) and in due course a further 200+ units on what is now Rawreth Industrial Estate.

Both these roads are already overloaded for the existing volume of traffic and are effectively at a crawl during morning and evening rush hour periods.

The original proposal of 550 +5% will clearly adversely impact the traffic flow both during years of construction and the subsequent ongoing domestic usage.

I therefore object to the Inspector's proposal to remove the 5% cap on units as it is clearly going to make the vehicle loading even worse and is unsustainable because:-

A. The existing roads will be gridlocked at rush hour periods.
B. Tailbacks will create highway hazards at the junctions with the A1245.
C. The local infrastructure (in all respects) will not be able to cope with an effectively undefined number increase in loading, namely - Schools/Doctors/Public Services and shrinking Emergency Services.
D. The proposed site already contains 3.1 hectares of land designated as Flood Plain thus limiting the number of 'legally built' unit locations - any increase in numbers will inevitably encroach on that unsuitable zone.
E. The RDC plan as it stood is a vague conceptual outline, I see no meaningful study work on the various impacts - to remove the 5% cap (a modicum of control) is, in my view, quite negligent of the Inspector.