Comment

Issues and Options Document

Representation ID: 34730

Received: 31/01/2018

Respondent: Mrs Janet Arrowsmith

Representation Summary:

The lung that was put in place along Cherry Orchard is being depleted by the ever increasing industrial building occurring to further add houses on map j from Ark Lane to the Cherry Orchard Country Park just makes a mockery of this so called lung. Adding houses around Mount Bovers Lane, Victor Gardens, Windsor Gardens, the Railway Bridge, Ironwell Lane just takes out any boundary between Southend and Hawkwell. Thereby diminishing the character of Hawkwell which used to be considered a semi rural area.

Full text:

Please note that I find the above plan of up to 7500 new houses within the area totally unacceptable on the basis of unsustainability. Unsustainability being there is a complete lack of surgeries, schools and certainly no plans for further roads to ease the already overburdened traffic situation, let alone the fact that it is becoming more and more impossible to get a doctors appointment for residents already in the area. How will the overstretched NHS cope with the ever increasing population based on the occupancy of the planned houses? It is not feasible based on the gross under funding of road and rail links, already underfunded by £11 billion.

The lung that was put in place along Cherry Orchard is being depleted by the ever increasing industrial building occurring to further add houses on map j from Ark Lane to the Cherry Orchard Country Park just makes a mockery of this so called lung. Adding houses around Mount Bovers Lane, Victor Gardens, Windsor Gardens, the Railway Bridge, Ironwell Lane just takes out any boundary between Southend and Hawkwell. Thereby diminishing the character of Hawkwell which used to be considered a semi rural area. Where are the schools, surgeries, extra police, roads, ambulances, fire services to cater for this development? How can this plan be justified by RDC as helping the residents of the area create a harmonious place to live or for that matter for any incoming residents into these new builds be considered an enhancement to living a life well?

How many of the hierachy of the RDC actually live in the Rochford area I wonder? I wonder whether the tax payers of the area actually get heard.

Will RDC inform the residents as to what the consensus is of the residents eventually?

Further to my e mail yesterday re the above I would like to ask just how many brownfield sites are being considered before looking at agricultural land, e.g. field by Mount Bovers? As I understand it part of this field was once ocupied by Hockley Woods (even further back I recall reading something about the land having been common at one time) and was grubbed up for the war effort. To add housing to this area would just be a blow too much for the area as a whole. This field sits between Gusted Hall Woods and Hockley Woods - being a Site of Scientific Interest. By building on the field this action would gradually eradicate the nature of the area. If I recall correctly there are something like 22 brownfield sites in the area - are these marked on your Local Plan map and if so are they being considered first before putting more blots on our landscape?