H2 General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option

Regardless of the number of new homes proposed for west Hockley, the proposed infrastructure/measures to accommodate this are inadequate.The area is already congested (by traffic from surrounding areas which have a large number of new homes proposed).The proposed extra homes in all area's would add further congestion, put strain on the already inadequate public transport (1 bus per hr in Hockley),not to mention rail stations and car parks.West Hockley already has an estate with limited access on and off the estate onto the main road through. Residents do not want a traffic jam just to get off there own property.

The Core Strategy is incomplete & unsustainable. It will have significant impact on existing residents & supporting infrastructure - Majority have absolutely no idea that this proposal exists & are unlikely to have time to lodge any objections. The increase traffic on our very busy roads, will only create more congestion & potential accidents. The lack of facilities in primary/secondary schools in Ashingdon & Hockley, will impact on our childrens development. The extra demand on very limited health service. Lack of existing public transport. Lack of existing recreational areas. Removal of greenbelt' land abutting existing housing especially in Ashingdon.

The development of Rochford as proposed pre and post 2021 will put undue pressure on the roads infrastructure, especially Ashingdon Road, which already has far more traffic than intended. The pathways and roads are clogged in the morning and afternoons especially around school times.

I believe there should be some allocation for additional housing in the Hullbridge area prior to 2015 to even out the burden on additional housing requirements in the Hockley/Hawkwell and Rayleigh areas.
Hullbridge is the only area not allocated at this time for additional housing until after 2015 and the 450 up until 2021.
Surely it would be more sensible to allocate some of the proposed 450 additional houses prior to 2015 so that the increase is more gradual rather than high impact over a short period.
This would also help to reduce the immediate impact on other areas.

I think this is going to be difficult for everyone. People have got to go somewhere and someone will have to suffer the consequences as a result. I agree the infrastructure isn't great and will probably grind to a halt in places. However if new roads are built or expansions/improvements are made to existing routes, I think people need to feel confident that this won't open the doors to more and more devleopment/submissions for housing by developers once the first stage is complete.

I also believe people in Rochford need to be given a better chance to hear about these consultations. I have spoken about this to quite a few people and most had no idea this was going on. Would something of this scale not benefit from flyers through the doors of residents. Perhaps posters in the super markets?

The area does not have the industry or transport infrastructure to support extensive domestic growth.The expanded airport would surely find a workforce from existing areas from Basildon to Southend,along the A127 corridor,& Chelmsford to Canvey Island.People imported to the area with special skills would find homes in the existing housing stock.Jobs created by building the housing estates and expanding the airport would be short term.

It will be a very sad day if approval should be given to plans which could ultimately join all the individual communities and villages into something that mimics the London Eastend which has now reached Romford.

Have noted the figures for the Hawkwell area, and my main concerns are the supporting infrastructure.Very pleased to hear that there are plans to expand King EDmunds School and to provide a new primary school in West Rochford, as I believe these to be badly needed.Also pleased to note the intention to provide youth facilities and planned play spaces in locations being developed.Believe that these plus other measures will help to reduce anti social behaviour.

May I request that in keeping with the area, the green grass verges on the Holt Farm Estate are preserved as green spaces, and continue to be controlled by Highways.

Have a particular concern about the grass verge at junction of Ashcombe and Wheatley Close ( outside 27/29 Ashcombe), and request that the green space is preserved. Residents in Ashcombe have already mentioned that they feel that it would be inappropriate and unsafe to put a play area on this small piece of land.

Margaret Andrews

South West Rayleigh is an area of special landscape value in that it forms part of a hilly ridge visible from the north and west as you approach Rayleigh. It enhances the historic setting of the town and retains the last remnants of a market town feel, and more rural past.
This area of green belt should not now be set aside to meet housebuilding targets, but defended for the long term good of the area.I am sure other sites exist in a less elevated setting, which will not destroy the areas character.
This site also has narrow access approaches.

Hawkwell West 330 New Houses Proposal.

My wife and I and our families whom live in Hawkwell would strongly object to the above being approved by the council for the following reasons.

The traffic that passes through Main Road Hawkwell in the mornings and evening is at saturation point, we unable to get in and out of our drive way without having to wait up to five minutes, and then when can get out it is very risky, due to the fact that you have to take your life in your own hands because the traffic is nose to tail.

There will also be a heavy volume of construction traffic on our road, plus the fact that if the proposals goes ahead we will have all the additional cars and delivery vans passing through Main Road.

The local infrastructure is not capable of coping with this proposal (i.e. - Schools, Doctors, Sporting & Recreation, Bus services, Policing, and Wear & Tear on existing roads).

Yours sincerely,

Mr-Mrs Galbraith and Family

I am writing to you to advise you of my strong objections to the building of new homes in the Hockley, Hawkwell and surrounding villages by 2015.

After living in the London Borough of Redbridge all our lives, my husband and I along with our two children made the decision to move to Hockley and did so in August of this year.

We moved because the areas had become overcrowded due to new homes and buildings and as a result huge increase of population which then stretched our GP/Health Services, the roads in the last 5 to 10 years are now extremely busy and at many peak times came to a standstill, secondary schools are not meeting the government national average targets in GCSEs etc...I could go on. And if this core strategy plan goes ahead I'm afraid Hockley and the surrounding areas will greatly suffer and I will see a deterioration as I have seen before.

The impact on Hockley will include extra traffic on the B1013 and surrounding roads.

There will be extra demand on our limited Health Service. (Hockley has the worst GP/patient and Dentist/patient ratios in South East Essex).

There will be extra demand on schools in the area, particularly Greenward which is oversubscribed already - My daughter who is in Year 10 has been on the waiting list for over year even though we live in the catchment cannot get a place and is now at Sweyne Park in Rayleigh.

Lack of public transport - one bus an hour for most of Hockley, Hawkwell and Ashingdon. (So travelling by bus for my daughter to school is not an option).

Hockley is a village - I want to live here because I wanted to be part of what village life offers. There is not the sufficient infrastructure in place to cope with so many new homes and buildings and the resulting increase in population. It will be a disaster.

I trust you will take my views and many other local residents views and concerns very seriously and will not allow these proposals to go ahead.

I hope to hear your comments soon regarding this matter.

I am writing in response to the article in the local papers about all the extra traffic that will be in and around Hockley when all these new houses are built.

I don't think Hockley will be able to take all this extra traffic. The Main Road, Aldermans Hill is bad enough some days as it is. The road is often congested. We live in Folly Lane and this road itself is terrible with so many large lorries passing through. This is a rat run being used as a short cut to Hullbridge. Some drivers go so fast and the pavements being narrow is an accident waiting to happen. It is especially bad at the end where Ryan Van Hire is. There are parked cars there, also becuase of the adjoining garage.

We moved here two years ago and could not get a NHS Dentist in the area. We have to travel to Westcliff for this. We always had this service before. With all the influx of people this will get worse.

My last concern is the buses. I have read recently that the bus service is going to be one an hour in Hockley. I use the buses quite a lot as I don't drive, so I think this is ludicrous that there's only one bus to Rayleigh every half an hour now, and Southend from my stop. If you go into the village they are more frequent to Southend. Why can't they continue it on to Rayleigh as well instead of terminating at the Spa.

I understand that new houses need to be built but when they build so many, what used to be a village ends up a congested Town. The reason we moved here was because of it being a nice quiet village.

With reference to the possibility of 330 new houses being built off Rectory Road, Hawkwell, I wish to lodge my objections to this proposal.

The infrastructure in and around this area will not be able to cope with such a large increase in population. We can expect an additional 600 cars on our already at times over subscribed roads. Hockley Spa junction and the bridge 'T' junction at Rochford are already points of massive traffic build ups. The new road leading to the Tesco roundabout with its new large garage, car showrooms, petrol station and Spar supermarket will bring additional traffic through Hawkwell once it gets fully operational. The main road through Hockley and Hawkwell will be unable to cope.

Doctors and dentists will have in the region of 1200 new patients to cope with.

We have a parade of shops in the Main Road with a car park that at times cannot cope with the amount of cars using it at present. School class sizes, when all these extra children arrive must surely increase which must have an adverse effect on their education. Not a good idea when central government are pushing for better education for our future generations.

From the plans it would appear one estate would lead out near the Rectory Road railway bridge. This from a road safety point of view could be a disaster.

Hawkwell still has a village feel about it with its Green Belt land and small village type shops. Please do not destroy this by pandering to a Government ill conceived recommendation to build vast housing estate everywhere.

Thanking you for your time in reading this letter.

I believe it would be very detrimental to Hockley and Hawkwell to build these new developments. Our health services are already very overstretched and the roads are becoming increasingly congested already. A planning officer told me that Hawkwell was chosen instead of Hockley to prevent increase of traffic through the village due to people travelling to southend but the traffic going from Hawkwell to rayleigh/basildon is just as bad so why is this objection not being upheld for Hawkwell. The main road will not cope.

I think releasing of green belt land for new homes should only be done where the footprint of Hockley would not increase. Therefore in areas with other homes and roads in place already. Small developments or single plots of individual houses, eco-friendly and architecturally innovative. Houses that would enhance the area and set a bench mark for new homes in Hockley.

What keeps Hockley's character are the open spaces and the ability for residents to utilise the many footpaths. It is important to conserve these. Housing developments needs to be minimal or Hockley will deteriorate into an overcrowded and crammed town, not a village as it still feels now. The character of Hockley is of paramount importance, it is why we live here and if it is not protected it could never be restored.

We have insufficient health care for the current population, how could an influx of newcomers find doctors: and the same goes for schools. Leisure facilities are minimal, with nothing for youngsters to do other than Clements Hall, which has a restricted bus service. That is why there has been a problem with young teenagers being destructive after drinking. This would potentially escalate with an influx of new families.

The main road from Rayleigh to Hockley has become a traffic jam on most days. In the rush hour a single delivery vehicle causes a hold up back to the Rayleigh and Hockley boundary, as do the refuse lorries. Hockley is a noisy place already due to the vehicles and police or ambulance sirens. Aircraft from the airport seem to be increasing, as well as many helicopters which are very loud.

Transport is mentioned often in the Consultation Document as needing to be enhanced, and yet Arriva are withdrawing buses from Hockley and Hawkwell so that without a car we cannot get to Southend Hospital; or to shop in Rayleigh or Southend.

Consultation is of no use if the people are not listened to: we are the ones who live here and best know what it is to try to get an appointment with your doctor for the next day, or have your teeth repaired on the National Health - both almost if not impossible. I hear of newcomers whose children are refused places at the local schools because there is no room.

Hockley is at saturation point at the moment. Further housing would bring people into the area who could not be absorbed and reduce the beauty of the surrounding green areas by building on them. Hockley should be spared.

My wife and I have lived in Thorpe Road, Hawkwell for 7 years. We moved here from Woodford Green, so that we could raise our children in a better, more rural, environment. As such, we object to the proposed location of the new housing in Hawkwell, which will radically change the nature of the Hawkwell parish from quite rural to quite urban. Indeed, if these houses contain the average number of residents, then the population of Hawkwell will be increasing by more than 25%.

I attended the meeting in Hawkwell on 13 November, where Cllr Hudson explained the main reasons behind the Core Strategy. He failed to answer the crucial question raised, which was:

"If the district does have a legitimate need for new housing, then why has this not been allocated in the same proportions to the existing urbanisations/populations."

i.e. Hockley has approximately 5 times the population of Hawkwell, but has been allocated approximately one seventh of Hawkwell's proposed new housing.

I have been assured that this has nothing to do with the number of councillors that live in Hockley, as opposed to those that live Hawkwell.

In summary, my wife and I (together with all our friends) feel that the location and number of properties proposed for Hawkwell will drastically change the nature of the parish, so that it will become an urban sprawl connecting Hockley and Ashingdon. This directly contradicts the main reason for moving to Hawkwell and will finally eliminate the appeal of the area.

Having received your letter about the revised Core Strategy Preferred Options, I would like to express my opinion on this.

I have a piece of land in London Road, Rawreth Rayleigh which has remained green belt for over 30 odd years - when the farmer sold his land you built shops, housing estate and school but stopped before my land. There are a few plots along the road which if became building land would enhance the area. Mainly because of the area ie it runs parallel to A127 and shops and all the ammenities, garages, schools, bus routes and of course Rayleigh rail station. It is a prime area for housing because its off the busy A127, but so close to everything. I used to kennel my dog just past my land, and that was sold for building land. The development has provided people with beautiful affordable houses within easy reach to station and shopping centre.

I feel so much could be achieved and a great sense of satisfaction to the area if planning permission is granted. I do hope my views will be heard.

Thank you.

I understand that, with minimal publicity, Rochford District Council has agreed to the proposal to build a few thousand extra houses within this area. Anyone who has tried to drive along the B1013 in the last ten years will regard this proposal as being a joke in very poor taste. This road is quite inadequate for present levels of traffic and has been so for some time. The often discussed ring road from Rochford to the A130/A127 would be a valuable asset in this case.

Similarly, anyone who has had to visit Southend University Hospital will know that, whilst they are doing a good job, every clinic is bursting at the seams. There is similarly heavy pressure on local dentists and doctors in Hockley.

If you have had government targest foisted upon you which make these developments "desirable", you should make it clear to those who have set the targets that they will only be met after the government has put in place the improved infrastructure to cope with the future requirements.

Do not be put off by vague promises from this government.

It is my understanding that there is every likelihood that the Christmas tree farm and other land adjacent to Clements Hall Way has been designated for the building of some 330 new properties to include low cost housing.

I have numerous objections in relation to this proposal to include:

As many other Hawkwell residents agree, the infrastructure within the village simply cannot sustain what would amount to around a 25% increase in the number of households residing within the area.

The proposed development would not be in keeping with the types of existing properties.

Assuming my figures are correct, having gleaned them from third parties, it is my understanding that only 36 additional properties have been designated for Hockley. This as a percentage of current population is totally insignificant as indeed would be an additional 330 properties. Should the reverse not be the case in that Hockley should absorb the bulk of any future development or indeed Rayleigh?

As intimated above, Hawkwell has a very limited infrastructure and this is highlighted even further when compared to Hockley. The latter basically has more of 'everything' including schools, doctors and shopping/parking facilities; this list is by no mean exhaustive.

Rectory Road is already bottleneck in the mornings and it is often very difficult to turn right out of Clements Hall Way. Any development of the land mentioned herein will only serve to exacerbate the existing problem. And there is also already queuing traffic both at the traffic lights at the railway bridge near St Mary's church and the mini roundabout near Potash Nurseries.

Whilst I appreciate that should any development be given the 'green light' drainage capacity will be pre-determined, it would appear that there is already an existing problem in respect of same. The car park at Clements Hall leisure centre is regularly flooded and there is a large accumulation of standing water directly outside the Christmas tree farm in Rectory Road. I woudl appreciate your comments as to whether or not this is considered a problem and whether or not this has been looked into at this stage. Furthermore, has the respective water company(s) been consulted to date as to any proposed development?

There is no doubt a wildlife issue associated with the proposed site and I am sure other residents have dealt with this separately.

Due to the high level of activity both on and around the site of late and the fact that Essex County Council are aware that the land depicted herein is a site of interest to Rochford District Council, would you please be so kind as to confirm whether or not Rochford District Council have made a preliminary determination as to the most suitable site for development under its Core Strategy? And woudl you also be so kind as to confirm whether or not the same level and/or types of activities have been undertaken at the other proposed sites? Whilst I appreciate that the exact locations of any future development will be advised in the Allocations Development Plan Document, I would appreciate an explanation as to why so much exploratory work has been undertaken already at the site in question if no decision has yet been reached.

It is my intention to seek the advise of Counsel in order to get an opinion as to whether or not a Judicial Review woudl be applicable in this instance, assuming that this site is confirmed as the one to be developed, or failing that, what other avenues could be open to protect resident's interests. I will of course wait until I have had sight of the Allocations Development Plan Document but in the meantime will be seeking advice as to what is contained within the Core Strategy with regards to how the content of same relates to what is being put forward, as to my mind certain issues appear to be at variance.

To whom it may concern

Just wanted to express my concerns over the development of new houses over the next 17 years in Hockley and the surrounding area.

It is evident to residents that driving in Hockley is hectic at the best of times. Very seldom do I approach the main Spa roundabout without having to sit in traffic. Cannot comprehend how the council believes that more houses in the area will be sustainable without severely impacting the quality of life.

I chose three years ago to move into Hockley due to the 'village' feel and the surrounding countryside. The schools were highly recommended. I am extremely worried that these changes are going to impact my children and our future within the borough. I understand that the goverment has initiatives that you need to adhere to but the road network and current facilities simply cannot cope with the increased number of people and cars that this development will generate.

I believe this development will be of great detriment to Hockley and would like to log my view as so.

We would like to register our objection to the proposed 50 new homes in the West of Hockley, also the additional houses planned for by 2015 on the grounds that we do not need extra traffic on the B1013. Also the extra demand on our health service and schools.

I understood from local publicity that there was to be a presence at Canewdon Village Hall from 10th Nov. I visited, but nobody there! I read the document on line and tried to give my comments on line. However, the site jdi-consult.net/ldf/ was not available! It is good to have the opportunity to be consulted, but please don't make the process too difficult. I am sending you my comments below.

1. It is good to see you identify transport problems, partic across the area, East to West. Unless there are some major improvements, this is going to become an increasingly important topic in the years to come. Plans for change do seem a little vague at present. I feel it is most unlikely that car usage will be discouraged unless good alternatives (not just walking and cycling) are put in place.

2. You identify the lack of services and transport in Canewdon. There appears to be a proposal to build 60 more houses by 2021. The location given is South Canewdon. Where is this? Are services etc to be upgraded to cope with a sizeable proportion increase in the population? I feel local residents feel they are the 'poor relations' in spending terms. You mention the possibility of a multi-agency centre in Great Wakering. Canewdon only has a village hall which is way past its sell by date.

3. I very much endorse the improvements to the Baltic Wharf access road. This has been a sore point for many years. I consider the present road to be very dangerous!

These are just a couple of points that come to mind. I agree largely with what you have in the document, but it is rather general at present and I look forward to seeing and being able to comment on more specific objectives.

I attended the CAC Meeting in Hawkwell.

Hockley must remain as a distinct community with boundaries and green spaces between Hockley and neighbouring parishes. Countryside in and around Hockley including woods, footpaths,bridleways play areas, playing fields and nature reserves must be 100% preserved. There should be no loss of greenbelt or open spaces in Hockley or the surrounding areas.

Due to shortage of available building land, housing development in and around Hockley must be minimal, and should include starter homes and affordable housing. Historic and listed buildings must be preserved.

Hockley Town Centre development must maintain the character of Hockley, and include a variety of shops, family restaurants,enhanced parking facilitiers, and facilities for the youth. It must consder appropriate facilities for people with disabilities.

Increased pollution in Hockley and its neighbouring parishes must be supported by additional healthcare (dentists and doctors)primary and secondary school places, community services, and leisure facilities.

Improved highways and cycle networks are essential in and around Hockley to support increased traffic volumes, improve road safety and eliminate congestion.

There must be no additional pollution in Hockley in terms of air quality and noise, particularly related to increased traffic volumes and airport expansion programmes.

Public transport must be improved in and around Hockley in terms of routes and frequencies to support additional population and to alleviate the impact of additional traffic volumes.

Additional controls must be introduced to ensure crime levels, vandalism and anti-social behaviour issues, in and around Hockley, do not increase due to additional population numbers.

The core strategy does not provide an option of placing all 3500 homes in one new locations, remote from Hockley, with provision of appropriate self supporting infrastructure (schools, healthcare,community services and leisure facilities) and including public transport and highway networks that do not impact on Hockley.

As the majority of proposed additional housing, pupulation and traffic is located to the east of Hockley, the plan is not sustainable, in and around Hockley, due to insufficient infrastructure proposals (schools, healthcare,community services and leisure facilities) and particularly related to public transport and highway networks. Roads through Hockley already suffer from major congestions issues, and no plans are evident in the strategy to eliminatge current and future traffic issues.

Surely it is not unreasonable to expect there to be a planned infrastructure
put in place before all these houses are built. Where are all these new
roads going to go, stating the obvious that we do have the sea one side.

Also what about our farm land we need this protected for food supply.

One further comment, most people live in Hockley or come back to Hockley because of what it is now, when this wonderful vision for John Prescott eventually happens, no body will want to come back!

Rather than create another large single development, complete in-fills in already built up areas. The substantial site adjacent to ASDA is unpopular with pre-existing residents, for reasons of intrusion and lowering of property values, making relocation not an option. Incomers are generally displeased as well, as is evidenced from the local councillors web site. There are currently numerous dwellings in the unmade roads area North of Rawreth Lane and East of the Hullbridge Road which could provide the location for many additional properties, while enhancing the living environment (paved roads and better utilities)and prospects for most current residents. The intrusion on the Green Belt would be limited to in-fill rather than devouring another huge swathe of land more obvious to the public and the consequent loss of productive farmland. The major access point should be created from somewhere near the Makro site entrance and a widened Rawreth Lane from that point to the traffic lights on the A1245 would mean less distruption than whatever traffic alternatives are provided on the London Road for the current proposal.

The unique events of recent months have highlighted very clearly what a lot of us have recognised for many years. That is the development of culture within our society that advertised that everything was available to everyone at a cost. And if they could not afford it right away then they could borrow and pay for it later. Well many are now paying for it and will be doing so for many years to come.

Therefore the blind optimism of the financial culture has now been overtaken by reality. Likewise this local plan was developed from Central government planning which itself was developed under so massively different economic circumstances, that even if there ever were justifiable elements to the original overall thinking then, there can not possibly be any in to-days climate.

Therefore I believe local Government should be advising Central Government that overall central planning has lost all credibility and that the local plan should be put on hold until a total review of central planning has been undertaken.

It will be years before lending finance becomes available anywhere near the recent levels. When thing do start to pick up lenders are still going to require 20% deposits because firstly they now recognise risk and secondly they know that rising house prices will not be there to represent collateral. So is building thousand of new houses such a bright idea any more.

Re Hawkwell Village Hall Meeting

Sir,

I was present at the above meeting last Thursday, and this is my opinion of the meeting:- Mr Mason said that every person there was objecting to the proposed planning, this I feel was not true, as probably 50% in attendance were there to be updated on what was happening in the area.

The lady who spoke on the subject about appointments at the local Doctors surgeries was also wrong, I use the Jones surgery and if one phones between 8am until 9-30am one can get same day appointment.

I was born in Hawkwell, and am 71 years old, also my parents- grand parents were born here, and they have taken up residents in Hawkwell churchyard.

Hawkwell I feel started to go down hill in the 1960s, but we must live and let live, the area that is being highlighted for expansion is ideal I feel, as it is a contained area so that there is not any chance of expanding, being hemmed in by Clements hall sports centre, and open space where there is plenty of recreation space for walking, cycling ETC, on the other side of the area there's Spencer's Estate, then behind the existing properties leading round to Rectory Road, this is why I feel this is the correct place to build, and of course if any persons wish to go into the Hockley wood area just walk up through Gusted Hall Lane, or Mount Bovers Lane past Belchams Scout camp.

I would appose any planning submitted for building on open farm land, also I also thought that it was unnecessary to remove the old Hawkwell school, this I feel was a bit of history, and could have been used as a library or such like. My son and daughter live in the area, also have grandchildren who will be needing housing themselves in the near future.

Just felt I wanted to air my views.

Many Thanks

Dear Sirs,

I read with dismay, in the local paper,of the plans for 3,500 new homes currently under consideration together with the posibility of a further 10,000 homes under separate proposals.
As a resident of this area for over 60 years I cannot believe that these proposals are being considered, bearing in mind the already overcrowded routes in the area, in particular, the B1013.

One must assume that the majority of the new residents will be working, probably in the Southend/ Rochford area or commuting Westwards. In either case the impact on existing transport links and roads will be considerable and the parking problems of the area will become intolerable.

When considering these proposals please have some thought for existing residents of Southend and Rochford, before the area becomes unbearable and the little Countryside we have left is lost forever.

Although I have already sent you comments on behalf of Hockley Parish Plan Group, I would now like to register my own comments as a resident of Hockley:

The Core Strategy proposes to add 1,550 new homes on Greenbelt land in the pleasant semi-rural region comprising Hockley, Hawkwell, Ashingdon and Rochford, plus a further undefined number of homes on brownfield sites, and a further undefined number of homes in the Hockley and Rochford town centre developments. The new homes will reduce the open spaces between these parishes, closing the boundaries, and leading to the loss of their individual community identities.

Residents enjoy living (and retiring) in this region. However, the infrastructure of the area is already stretched in terms of roads, public transport, parking, schools, community services, and healthcare. The Core Strategy proposal gives very little detail of infrastructure improvements to support the increased population and traffic. It provides no details of costs or responsibilities for infrastructure implementation. By spreading the locations of new homes, it will be more difficult to ensure that developers incorporate and pay for new infrastructure.

Although average daily traffic on the B1013 is stated to be only 72% of the maximum capacity, there are no figures available that highlight the current congestion in peak periods, where traffic is almost at a standstill. Unless significant highways development is introduced, especially in the vicinity of the Spa roundabout, the additional traffic resulting from the Core Strategy proposed homes in Rochford and Hawkwell, will create gridlock. Proposed Southend Airport development will add further traffic problems through Hockley. The Core Strategy is not sustainable without a solution to the highway network bottlenecks in and around Hockley. No solution is provided to the lack of cycle path networks in the region.

The bus service in the Hockley and Hawkwell region is about to be cut back, but will need to be increased to support the additional number of residents proposed in the Core Strategy. Agreements with Arriva must be included to make the Strategy viable.

Car parks in Hockley are regularly overfull creating queues especially in Spa Road. Exits from the car parks in Spa Road are hazardous and will one day inevitably lead to a serious accident. Space in Hockley town centre is at a premium, but additional and safer car parking is essential to support the proposed additional traffic, or again the Core Strategy is not sustainable.

The Core Strategy includes new primary schools in Rochford and Rayleigh and an extension to King Edmund secondary school, but there is no proposal for additional school places in Hockley and Hawkwell. I assume that the majority of additional younger children in the Hawkwell region will go to Westerings School, where the roads in the locality are already a hazard during the 'school runs' where mothers drop off and pick up their children. Local residents regularly have to weave between cars and drive on pavements to avoid a collision. Without major improvements to the road networks in this region, the increased numbers of cars will undoubtedly cause havoc and lead to accidents. There are no proposals in the Strategy to accommodate additional secondary school children at Greensward College, which is the nearest school for Hawkwell West.

Community Services such as crime prevention, street cleaning, waste collection and road maintenance are already stretched, and will not be able to cope with the additional homes without a considerable increase to their budgets. It is unlikely that increased Council Tax revenue from the additional population will support the extra costs.

Doctor and dentist to patient ratios are currently unacceptable for residents in Hockley and would need to improve significantly to support the additional number of residents.

In conclusion, although many of these obstacles can be overcome with possibly cost effective justification, the necessary changes to highway networks and car parking in and around Hockley to support additional traffic volumes are massive, and probably not feasible due to cost and space limitations, leading to the Core Strategy not being sustainable in Hockley and the surrounding area.

Whilst we appreciate the need for new homes in the area, we have deep concerns on the following:-

Road congestion. Hockley Spa junction which already causes traffic queues
Road congestion. A 127 into the Southend area which already causes traffic queues
Health. Adequate provision of Doctors and Dentists are required. We are already woefully lacking in both these areas.

We fully support recent policies which have resulted in the provision of designated areas for woodland, green corridors and the coastal protection belt.However we feel most strongly that any large scale development must incorporate green areas for wild life and recreational purposes.

The proposed numbers of homes which have been put forward for the area - 11,000 plus - is a huge amount of development which cannot do anything other than change the area permanently.We have already seen considerable in filling and new estates going in over the last few years and the infrastructure not keeping pace.

This burden of housing must be reviewed
The resultant level of development must be shown to provide the necessary infrastructure at the planning stage for all to see.

Dear Sirs

Further to recent correspondence where apparently the local area 'requires' thousands of new homes and in particular 330 in Hawkwell.

I believed that Green Belt land was specifically designated stop urban spread and to maintain and protect the countryside and I am appalled that there are suggestions that this may be ignored and strongly object to such a plan.

What possible benefit can there be other than profiteering?

This project would very obviously be detrimental to the area, local residents and local wildlife and the reason I chose to move to Hockley was because of its rural setting not because I wanted to be surrounded by further housing.

You should be maintaining the area not trying to create a new Basildon!

So much for England's green and pleasant land.