South West Hullbridge 500 dwellings (250 between 2015 and 2021, and 250 post 2021)

As a resident of Hullbridge of 40 years it was important to me to attend the meeting at the Day Centre in Hullbridge last night and want to convey my disappointment that many of the people in the audience did not behave properly and very little can be achieved this way, it blocks valid points that were being made and therefore no discussion can ensue, it was an inadequate consultation. However, it certainly sets the mood of all Hullbridge people and I trust that this strong objection to the development will be represented in Parliament and the reasons for opposing same, as set out in my letter.

In light of the flooding that we have seen in other parts of the country where housing has been allowed to go ahead on previous flood areas, why are plans afoot to build in Hullbridge, being below sea level, with concrete proof of regular flooding here? Development has already begun in the immediate area ie, Rawreth, impacting on road traffic and other amenities. The services that will be needed not only in Hullbridge but the proposed sites in surrounding areas will eat into our green land and finances, when the nation is already in grave debt. At peak times on the roads, in particular, have reached saturation point. It would be folly to add to the overcrowded situation if we are to remain detached from large towns, which is not what the people of Hullbridge and surrounding areas need, to maintain their well being, outlined below in a report by the RSPB.

Secondly, I oppose development not only in Hullbridge but in the whole of the south east, being protective of our green land that we have left. I quote from a report written by the RSPB 'Natural Thinking' in 2007:-

The links between our natural environment and health have long been recognised. The role of the natural environment in physical health is rising in priority, but mental health problems are less understood.

A new report by the RSPB, Natural Thinking, describes how access to green space can help alleviate a range of mental health problems. For example, contact with nature reduces stress within minutes; increases the elderly's satisfaction with where they live and improves children's concentration and self discipline, including the symptoms of attention deficit disorder. Unquote.

With awareness of the despoliation comes a sense of impotence, a feeling of powerlessness to even slow down, let alone halt the decline, if we do not stem the tide of development.

Ironically, the same night as the meeting, Panorama were scheduled to report a programme 'is Britain Full?' The latest official figures for the UK population show it to rising to 70 million over the next two decades. While some argue that the increase in inhabitants will boost the British economy. John Ware investigates whether the country is simply becoming overcrowded. Quoted from the Radio Times. To which, my reasoning is YES!

As an example, in Britain, in Westfield London, is the largest inner-city shopping centre in Europe. England is the most populous country in the world and three times that population of Australia but fifty-nine times smaller.

I conclude, the problems are far reaching than the proposed development in our region. With some intelligent thinking in government, immigration can be controlled. Then logic and common sense can be seen by the populous in Britain.

Re - Against extending the village by 30% with an additional 500 homes all in one area.

I am writing this letter regarding my objections to the new development within Hullbridge.

Risk Assessment

In your general assessment have you taken into consideration the impact on:

The Environment
Infrastructure
Flood (Watery Lane in regular flood - featured on the National News recently).
Density
Drainage
Main services
Roads
Access to and from Hullbridge
Schools - Secondary
Doctors (already at capacity - and apparently there is presently a shortage)
Council services, including Fire and Police
Health and Safety

I understand that we originally were allocated 10% and would be grateful if you could write to me and inform me of how and why these changes were made.

Is this because we were not represented at the meetings whereby three of our conserative members felt it not worthy of there attendance.

Or that the Parish Council felt that the residents of Hullbridge were not worthy of notifying us in more ways than a paper that is not distributed fairly amongst the village.

The Hullbridge Action group seemed to manage to notify the village and I have not spoken to one person who is for this development.

Designation and Classification of Land

Please provide me with the information on the designation/classification of 'green belt', white land and brown field land.

I had always understood that land had to go through a certain procedure for green belt land to be classified as suitable for industrial, commercial, or domestic development.

Investment

I was also informed at the meeting that you were trying to attract 'investment' in this area, please explain how a domestic development will have the capacity to attract 'investment'.

I did not hear any argument that you may have put forward in your 'application' against a development which would expand the existing population by 30%.

Developers

Could you also please explain how the developers gain the knowledge that 'green belt' land would be available for 'development', hence their purchase and planning applications which you admit have been forwarded by them for approval on this development.

I await your written reply and request that you respond to each item I have raised.

Re - Against extending the village by 30% with an additional 500 homes all in one area.

I am writing this letter regarding my objections to the new development within Hullbridge.

Risk Assessment

In your general assessment have you taken into consideration the impact on:

The Environment
Infrastructure
Flood (Watery Lane in regular flood - featured on the National News recently).
Density
Drainage
Main services
Roads
Access to and from Hullbridge
Schools - Secondary
Doctors (already at capacity - and apparently there is presently a shortage)
Council services, including Fire and Police
Health and Safety

I understand that we originally were allocated 10% and would be grateful if you could write to me and inform me of how and why these changes were made.

Is this because we were not represented at the meetings whereby three of our conserative members felt it not worthy of there attendance.

Or that the Parish Council felt that the residents of Hullbridge were not worthy of notifying us in more ways than a paper that is not distributed fairly amongst the village.

The Hullbridge Action group seemed to manage to notify the village and I have not spoken to one person who is for this development.

Designation and Classification of Land

Please provide me with the information on the designation/classification of 'green belt', white land and brown field land.

I had always understood that land had to go through a certain procedure for green belt land to be classified as suitable for industrial, commercial, or domestic development.

Investment

I was also informed at the meeting that you were trying to attract 'investment' in this area, please explain how a domestic development will have the capacity to attract 'investment'.

I did not hear any argument that you may have put forward in your 'application' against a development which would expand the existing population by 30%.

Developers

Could you also please explain how the developers gain the knowledge that 'green belt' land would be available for 'development', hence their purchase and planning applications which you admit have been forwarded by them for approval on this development.

I await your written reply and request that you respond to each item I have raised.

Re - Against extending the village by 30% with an additional 500 homes all in one area.

I am writing this letter regarding my objections to the new development within Hullbridge.

Risk Assessment

In your general assessment have you taken into consideration the impact on:

The Environment
Infrastructure
Flood (Watery Lane in regular flood - featured on the National News recently).
Density
Drainage
Main services
Roads
Access to and from Hullbridge
Schools - Secondary
Doctors (already at capacity - and apparently there is presently a shortage)
Council services, including Fire and Police
Health and Safety

I understand that we originally were allocated 10% and would be grateful if you could write to me and inform me of how and why these changes were made.

Is this because we were not represented at the meetings whereby three of our conserative members felt it not worthy of there attendance.

Or that the Parish Council felt that the residents of Hullbridge were not worthy of notifying us in more ways than a paper that is not distributed fairly amongst the village.

The Hullbridge Action group seemed to manage to notify the village and I have not spoken to one person who is for this development.

Designation and Classification of Land

Please provide me with the information on the designation/classification of 'green belt', white land and brown field land.

I had always understood that land had to go through a certain procedure for green belt land to be classified as suitable for industrial, commercial, or domestic development.

Investment

I was also informed at the meeting that you were trying to attract 'investment' in this area, please explain how a domestic development will have the capacity to attract 'investment'.

I did not hear any argument that you may have put forward in your 'application' against a development which would expand the existing population by 30%.

Developers

Could you also please explain how the developers gain the knowledge that 'green belt' land would be available for 'development', hence their purchase and planning applications which you admit have been forwarded by them for approval on this development.

I await your written reply and request that you respond to each item I have raised.

I am writing to you with great concern of your plans to allow a large number of houses to be built in Hullbridge, we are absolutely flabbergasted you would even consider building any more homes in the village, haven't we already had enough new builds and flats.

We have lived in Hullbridge all of our lives and have two young children which we very much hoped to raise here, there is a real sense of community spirit and now it is under threat.

As a resident we know how difficult it can be to get in and out of Hullbridge during peak times when Watery Lane is closed due to flooding which does happen regularly, and so to build in this area would cause so much distruption to all of Hullbridges' residents it would be ludicrous.

We hope this letter will be read with respect and our points taken on board, it will be a real shame to lose our lovely village to an unnecessary development which we feel has been thrust upon us.

I am writing to express my objections and total dismay at your approval for the affordable housing development in the south west of Hullbridge, a green belt area. I can not believe that it was ever considered given the following factors.

1. Traffic. As only 2 roads run into the village and one small country lane, commonly known as Watery Lane due to the fact it constantly floods because the road level is well below the level of the surrounding fields ground level. I am amazed you seem to think that the roads will cope with a 30% increase on the volume of traffic it currently has to take. I genuinely fear for the childrens future road safety.

2. Drainage. Our back garden backs onto the proposed site and is constantly flooding along with the field itself. Abbey Road surface water drains can not cope now when it rains and water comes back out of the gully pots in the road causing the front gardens to flood. The drainage pipes are too small.

3. Sewage. We are often subject to sewage smells and I can only assume that the pumping station can't manage the current flow let alone a 30% increase.

4. Schools and Health Service. With no senior school in the village and one small health centre things will only get worse, another step backwards?

5. Consultation. I am disappointed no real efford was made to contact or consult with the local residents, before the target deadline.

I have lived in Hullbridge since 1976 and bought up my family. We came to love the village type atmosphere and the way of life it gave us all. It is a shame you now propose to ruin the quality of life for us the residents of Hullbridge who are in our twilight years.

Proposed Over Development of Hullbridge

Please take this letter as confirmation that I object most strongly to the ill-conceived and ill-thought out plan of flooding Hullbridge with an estate of new housing. The road through Hullbridge (Ferry Road) would be unable to cope with the additional traffic. Any new road leading off of the estate of housing onto Hullbridge Road would be sited in a most dangerous position - ie just before Watery Lane. Traffic streams out of Watery Lane during the evening rush hour and queues form in both directions of Hullbridge Road, either side of Watery Lane. Another estate would be chaotic and frustrating for residents living there. Not to mention the residents already in Hullbridge.

If this ill-judged plan were to extend as far as Windermere Avenue, Grasmere Avenue and Riverview Gardens/The Drive traffic would be entering unmade roads (the top end of Windermere Avenue being unmade).

Riverview Gardens/The Drive, being unmade roads, cannot cope with the constant traffic going up and down now and to add to this chaos with a new housing estate would create yet more congestion. New incomers moving to these particular roads will not give way to traffic coming in the opposite direction. To add further traffic from a housing estate would add fuel to the fire and create even more trouble.

I wish to protest against the proposal to build appox 400/500 houses on green belt land in Hullbridge.

I have been a resident of the village for more than 47 years and have seen many changes some good some bad but to allow this development to go ahead is in my view a big mistake. We do not have the school, transport community facilities or infrastructure required to cope with the extra number of people both adults and children this scale of building will produce.

I also disagree with the proposed travellers site on the outskirts of the village as this will also impact on the above facilities and reports of the problems experienced in some areas containing other travellers sites could give rise to a similar situation in Hullbridge which I feel has grown enough in the time I have lived here.

Hullbridge is a village and building on this scale is in danger of changing this status forever.

Objection to housing development within Hullbridge

I believe that expanding Hullbridge would take away from the village feel that we have here. I do not think that the village could handle the large influx of homes and people and it would make this place too busy.

Drainage:- Have you considered flooding in this area? As it is very poor this building development will just increase the flooding.

Traffic:- Have you considered the traffic in the area? As I do not require even more traffic on Lower Road / Hullbridge Road as the infrastructure cannot cope as it is, not alone and increase.

Schooling:- with 450-500 new homes being built, where are all these children going to go to school? The local senior school is oversubscribed and the Old Park School demolished for more housing.

National Grid:- 500+ houses / 1000+ cars = pollution

We already suffer from poor roads, public transport, power cuts, lack of schools, pollution and local facilities. How can building on green belt land be justified?

Please accept this letter as my strong oppose to this development. I expect your reply in the near future.

Objection to housing development within Hullbridge

I believe that expanding Hullbridge would take away from the village feel that we have here. I do not think that the village could handle the large influx of homes and people and it would make this place too busy.

Drainage:- Have you considered flooding in this area? As it is very poor this building development will just increase the flooding.

Traffic:- Have you considered the traffic in the area? As I do not require even more traffic on Lower Road / Hullbridge Road as the infrastructure cannot cope as it is, not alone and increase.

Schooling:- with 450-500 new homes being built, where are all these children going to go to school? The local senior school is oversubscribed and the Old Park School demolished for more housing.

National Grid:- 500+ houses / 1000+ cars = pollution

We already suffer from poor roads, public transport, power cuts, lack of schools, pollution and local facilities. How can building on green belt land be justified?

Please accept this letter as my strong oppose to this development. I expect your reply in the near future.

Ref: Housing Development in Watery Lane

We object most strongly to this development for the following reasons:-

1. The area is frequently flooded and Watery Lane closed. To overcome this problem we believe would severely increase the cost of the development.

2. The roads and services in the Hullbridge area are at the moment used to maximum capacity. The provision of this number of houses and number of extra people would cause many many more traffic problems and completely overload services such as doctors etc. The result would be that the life of a large number of people would be seriously down graded.

Reference: the proposed 500 properties to be built in the area of Watery Lane Hullbridge.

I absolutely object to the building of 500 properties in the Hullbridge area, especially in the location of Watery Lane, as an employee of the Rochford District Council you should be aware that this particular part is always suffering from flooding and it would mean a lot of drainage and road works.

Hullbridge would have to expand its amenities to accommodate the extra people and we spend enough being a parish as it is. The Doctors Surgery would have to accommodate lots more people and increase waiting times, what will you do about this?

Very little publicity has been given regarding the proposed building of these properties, why wasn't more publicity given to this outrages and expensive idea?

To bring in another 500 vehicles and 1000 people at the least is making a big mistake for the environment. What are your proposed plans for the road arrangements?

Why should we suffer the extra 1000 people (at least) in our village?

These properties should be allocated between Rawreth Lane and London Road Rayleigh please inform me why not!

Proposed Housing Development - Hullbridge

Further to the community meeting held on Monday 12th April 2010 at the Hullbridge Day Centre, to discuss the above, I am writing to register certain points which are of grave concern to our household.

1. Having lived in the 'village' (which it is affectionately known as) for over 30 years we have seen many changes to our surrounding areas regarding housing, but it has still kept the pleasant community spirit with very low crime rate making one feel safe for all age groups. This being so our police station has not been changed to a private dwelling, therefore we no longer have the benefit of our own police station. Police now travel, on congested roads, during peak times, from either Rochford or Rayleigh.

With the influx of over 1000 peopled this would be disastrous, encouraging more crime and vandalism and much more congestion on surrounding roads.

2. Having affordable housing this would put pressure on our small infant and primary school, which has now merged, both at capacity registration. There are insufficient Primary Education, Early Years and Childcare facilities not to mention we have no secondary education facility in Hullbridge all senior school children have to travel to either the oversubscribed Sweyne Park or FitzWimarc schools, this again will put pressure on the already congested roads, which is at present a nightmare during peak times.

Where will all those extra children go to school and what will be done about the overcrowding of classes.

3. The reliance on cars in the 'village' will be greatly increased because it is too remote from principal towns and schools and dispensing the large volume of traffic at peak times especially feed flow for the A127 and A130. East of England Plan refers to the A127 and A13 having already exceeded capacity in some areas of potential congestion. Hullbridge does not have the privilege of having on its doorstep a railway station or varied bus routes, therefore again, this would add to the already overstretched, limited bus route run from Hullbridge increasing the stress levels of many Hullbridge commuters. Other towns within the plan, such as Rochford, Hockley or Rayleigh already have this much needed advantage.

4. Having looked at the Site Allocations Assessment Criteria issued by RDC it appears that the proposed development is on Zones 1, 2 and 3a flood risk plains. The proposals seem prosperous the plan is even considering building on a green belt flood plain. World figures are discussing climate change surely the council must sit up and listen to what is being said. To build on a flood plain (as done in other parts of the country with disastrous effects) would be catastrophic. With thousands and thousands of tons of concrete and metal being poured into the site the water table would not be able to cope, causing the inevitable devastating outcome.

We have been told that Watery Lane will be improved. That is a good thing; regularly every year throughout the winter this lane is closed to traffic due to flooding, even appearing on our television screens this year, could this be due to climate change and the water table level? What improvements does this mean cleaning the ditches? Don't think would help much.

Significant investment will be needed to overcome this problem.

5. Electricity is supplied to Hullbridge homes through overhead cables; no investment has been forth coming to improve this situation.

Many of our roads are unmade; no investment has been forthcoming to improve this situation.

We here in Hullbridge have a much loved safe environment, we have put up with overhead cables and unmade roads because we are a close community lots and lots of us moved from London and big towns to what we thought was the country, we are content (which cannot be said for lots of other places) we can walk along the riverbank, talk to our neighbours in a safe environment. We all need to protect this environment if we wanted sprawling houses and flats we would not have moved to the country. Our children and children's children love the 'village' we need to keep it as is, for them and their children, to enjoy for years to come.

We see NO benefits for the erosion of green belt land around our village. The continuing release of green belt land is unsustainable and other avenues must be found. As it stands, at present, there is a conflict with national policies and limited justification for release of green belt land.

To put into words how upset we feel about this plan is a mammoth task (hopefully Hullbridge will not end up like the mammoth) so our final statement is - we can see NO social, economical or environmental benefits whatsoever to develop land within our much loved and safe village.

First of all I along with many people in Hullbridge village see normal procedure as usual, you: the Council have done it yet again, sprung this onto the public more and more housing in a place that already is under water several times a year depending on the weather and tides, what about the roads, schools, doctors locally will be grid locked each and every day. Isn't there one person with a little common sense to see the big problems with schools and loss of property prices, Crays Hill are still in the lime light, no one, police, council the tax departments know what's going on. Why did you as the peoples council not look away from this area, maybe near some of the land in which these MP's live, something isn't correct when those with pens decide for the people, hopefully at the end of all this we don't find more people in the Government Offices looking for legal aid, it could be years but so many people find the past jumps up and bites them. I trust my Council to do the right by us all and not for those greedy property builders.

What has this Government done right for all the public in the past few years!

I am writing to object to the proposal to allocate land in SW Hullbridge for the provision of 500 homes.

Hullbridge is a small semi rural community with a population of just over 7000. The addition of another 500 properties will change the nature of the community and create social problems.

The road infrastructure in Hullbridge is poor and there is only one bus service. Traffic is heavy at present because most people have to rely on road transport and the proposals would create unacceptable congestion at peak times.

There is no secondary school in the village and other facilities are inadequate for accommodating such a large influx of new residents.

The area which is proposed to develop has always been prone to flooding. Most of the existing roads in Hullbridge are unadopted with the residents responsible for the roads and, in many cases, the sewers too. There is concern that if so many new homes are built on the flood plain it will create problems for the existing houses.

Whilst I understand that the Council is required to identify land in the borough which is suitable for new housing I do not think that it is reasonable to put such a large proportion in this area.

We attended the meeting on Monday regarding building a proposed 500 homes within the Hullbridge area (Watery Lane).

We are very much against this proposal. Can Hullbridge cope with around 700 to 1000 extra cars? 700 to 1000 extra people? To come out of Hullbridge between 7.30 am and 8 am is near impossible. Other points are:

No senior schools. An already bursting doctors. No Police service that you can mention, where is the nearest fire station, ambulance service - I think Rayleigh Weir.

Hullbridge consists of majority over 65 years. As you well know Watery Lane's other end is over a very old single road bridge - not capable of withstanding perhaps an extra 800 cars.

You are proposing to build on flooded land - do you not watch the National news?

We have lived in Hullbridge 32 years and every year the Watery Lane corner is closed for maintenance due to flooding (I think the name Watery Lane says it all).

Please can we rethink - perhaps look for more brown sites, if we do not stop this the South East will become a concrete jungle - people will be living on top of each other and like rats when in close proximity will turn on each other - perhaps not in your life time nor mine but it will happen.

We must stop these homes being built in Hullbridge.

Ref: Hullbridge Additional 500 Homes Proposal

I am writing to you in objection re the proposal of building 500 affordable homes on Green belt land in the Lower Road / Watery Lane area of South / South West Hullbridge.

1. There is no employment need, directly associated with this village to my knowledge. Could you clarify?
2. Why are the homes not being built alongside the intended work places these people are required for? This would be a much greener approach, in the era of 3 bins per household. Could you confirm that we are supposed to be planning for a greener future and what RDC's policies are?
3. There is only one significant bus service. If the proposed development were to go ahead are there plans to increase services?
4. There is no rail link. If the proposed development were to go ahead is there a plan to divert the Hockley Rayleigh service via Hullbridge.
5. the main road links Lower Road, Hullbridge Road, and dare I call the cart track Watery Lane a road already inadequate for the current traffic volume. If the proposed development were to go ahead are there plans to improve the road links for Hullbridge? By improve I do not mean install some traffic Lights!
6. As much as every government department seems to think that we should not drive cars, we are in fact a car society, almost all travel will be by car. If the proposed development were to go ahead yet another minimum 500 cars on our already mentioned inadequate roads. Is it right to impose yet more traffic chaos on the residents of South Essex, I refer to the inadequacy of the major routes A127, A13 and A12?
7. The drainage systems in Hullbridge are inadequate, in fact I believe surface water drainage in none existent, it certainly is where I live. If the proposed development were to go ahead is it proposed to improve the drainage systems for all of Hullbridge?
8. If the proposed development were to go ahead would is it proposed to prevent Watery Lane from flooding? Which is a major route out of Hullbridge as previous road surveys will confirm. Would the building of 500 more houses only worsen the problem?
9. if the proposed development were to go ahead would measures be put in place to prevent Watery Lane flooding? Which during flood periods, already causes travel chaos.

I have lived in Hullbridge 30 years as a rate/council tax payer and can confirm that the only improvement in our infrastructure I believe, that I seen is the straightening of the Hullbridge Road.

A severe lack of power supply infrastructure several years ago was righted by a local resident's pressure group. We have roads leading to sheltered accommodation which are not safe for wheel chair access. We have blocks of flats built next to bungalows. I do not have much positive to say for the elected representatives and town planners. In my opinion certainly Rochford District Council has not had much of a positive effect on Hullbridge

You are supposed to be our servants, but you are not. Whose servants are you?

As a resident of Hullbridge I feel severely let down by our elected representatives and so called town planners. They seem to have their own agenda and the people that are supposed to represent / ensure a nice environment, can just go crawl under the stone from where they came. After all we only pay your wages!

As well as the questions above I would like an explanation as to why residents of Hullbridge were not informed in an above board and very public manor of the proposals for our village.

Its time you stood up for the people you are supposed to represent. South Essex is Full; if any of you travel along the major routes of South Essex you will know this. There is no room and proper infrastructure for the people who already live here. Do your job - No more development in South Essex until infrastructure is vastly improved!

Please investigate all of the above and reply with your conclusion to my concerns.

Following the recent meeting in Hullbridge with the residents of Hullbridge and the leader of Rochford Council and the head of planning dept regarding the proposed plans, of 500 dwellings in Hullbrdige just off Watery Lane we like the majority of the Hullbridge residents are totally against the proposal, our reasons for not accepting this proposal are as follows.
Schools and doctors Surgeries would find it extremely had to cope with the extra influx of people into these new dwellings which if you take each dwelling having an average 4 persons per dwelling would be an extra 2000 people which is a third of the total of Hullbridge at the moment.
Residents attempting to get their children to senior schools such as Fitzwymark and Swayne Park will find it considerably more difficult to make this journey as the roads are unable to cope with it now.
We are told by the council head of Planning that Watery Lane could be upgraded as a means of diverting traffic from Hullbridge road to the entrance of this proposed development, we all know this idea is a non starter. Because of amongst other things the road is liable to severe flooding, along with parts of the proposed site, building 500 new dwellings is just going to compound the problem of flooding, we are absolutely opposed to this development, please acknowledge our concerns and not just disregard them.

Re Affordable Housing in Hullbridge

I refer to your recent Planning Consultation regarding the building of affordable housing in Hullbridge.
If approved that this was something that could not be avoided and we had to choose one of four options.
Any option that will ultimately engage the private toad system in Hullbridge will not be tolerated on in fact workable.
It seems rather strange that Rochford Council have chosen sights in Rawreth Lane to build and then stop where there is a wealth of land still available, in an area where there is a supermarket, schools, doctors surgery and most importantly a road net-work easily accessible.
Why would you want to turn a village into a town. Hullbridge has no senior school and the village school has as I believe it no further spaces, the doctors surgery already seems overloaded and there is no acceptable road system out of Hullbridge, just try sitting in traffic on the Hullbridge Road every morning as it is.
Then why build properties on land that is subject to flooding and the additional cost to put this right. The water/sewage plant that emits a smell directly towards the proposed building land as for the prevailing wind should all be taken into account.
I am therefore against your proposals and look forward to hearing from you as to why my objections are misguided.

Proposed Development of New Housing in Hullbridge.

It is with great concern that my husband and I feel we must write to the Council to protest in the strongest possible terms to the proposed development of approximately 450 houses on land to the south west of Hullbridge. Such a development we feel would have a dramatic and detrimental impact upon the village of Hullbridge, not only in terms of a tremendous strain on our much loved local primary school but also our greatly respected Health Centre. No doubt it will put additional strain on the sewage systems which, at present, leaves much to be desired by the appalling odours that frequently emanate from the Beeches Road sewage works.

The proposed development would enlarge the village by approximately one third by the end of the building of this development which would further ass much additional traffic. As the is no source of additional employment in this area residents in the proposed development would need to travel out of Hullbridge to their respective places of work thus making the early morning and late afternoon 'rush hours' far more busier than they already are.

Further, if Watery Lane were to be 'improved' this would put further traffic weight on Lower Road / Hullbridge Road which would be used to a far greater extent by traffic coming from Chelmsford / Wickford and beyond, in order to avoid the road between Rayleigh and Hockley. Surely, there are many smaller areas that could be utilised for additional dwellings in the district.

Having attended the meeting in the village on Monday 12th April last, it was a very apparent the level of objection from residents by the many who had tried to attend the meeting but were unable to get into the hall due to the vast number who had attended to voice their objections.

We Sincerely hope that our objections will be given serious consideration

Proposed Development of New Housing in Hullbridge.

It is with great concern that my husband and I feel we must write to the Council to protest in the strongest possible terms to the proposed development of approximately 450 houses on land to the south west of Hullbridge. Such a development we feel would have a dramatic and detrimental impact upon the village of Hullbridge, not only in terms of a tremendous strain on our much loved local primary school but also our greatly respected Health Centre. No doubt it will put additional strain on the sewage systems which, at present, leaves much to be desired by the appalling odours that frequently emanate from the Beeches Road sewage works.

The proposed development would enlarge the village by approximately one third by the end of the building of this development which would further ass much additional traffic. As the is no source of additional employment in this area residents in the proposed development would need to travel out of Hullbridge to their respective places of work thus making the early morning and late afternoon 'rush hours' far more busier than they already are.

Further, if Watery Lane were to be 'improved' this would put further traffic weight on Lower Road / Hullbridge Road which would be used to a far greater extent by traffic coming from Chelmsford / Wickford and beyond, in order to avoid the road between Rayleigh and Hockley. Surely, there are many smaller areas that could be utilised for additional dwellings in the district.

Having attended the meeting in the village on Monday 12th April last, it was a very apparent the level of objection from residents by the many who had tried to attend the meeting but were unable to get into the hall due to the vast number who had attended to voice their objections.

We Sincerely hope that our objections will be given serious consideration

I am writing to register my Disagreement with the proposed housing development at Malyons, in Hullbridge. I attended the local meeting on Monday 12th, and give my views below:

* Green Belt land should not be built on, either by private or council/government schemes. It was put there to ensure that green areas were preserved and this should be adhered to at all costs

* The land in question is a flood plain, but apparently there is now different categories and this land is in the one that is ok to be built on! Watery Lane adjoins this land and is always being closed because of flooding. The cost of drainage etc. to remedy this before building there would be so enormous, it is just so wrong, and most people cannot understand how this area came to be considered in the first place.

* Flooding, and flooding because of building on flood plains has been very much in the news in recent years, and yet it is still being talked about here. At the meeting the other day some very well informed protestors raised the issue of responsibility in case this does go wrong in future, and also compensation - very valid points I thought.

* Hullbridge is a very pleasant place to live, a good mixture of young and old, and a good size village. This amount of new houses will upset the balance and create a lot of problems, the school, doctors, transport, roads, all being over-attended.

* Where will the access to this site be?? At the moment on-one could give an answer! There does not seem to be a suitable place, and it will cause a high volume of traffic. But during the actual construction time, many people living near will suffer terrible disruption to their lives.

* Although this is not the place to talk about government policy, this is all happening because they stipulate how many dwellings the local council should build and this is misguided as it causes more problems than it solves.

I am writing to register my Disagreement with the proposed housing development at Malyons, in Hullbridge. I attended the local meeting on Monday 12th, and give my views below:

* Green Belt land should not be built on, either by private or council/government schemes. It was put there to ensure that green areas were preserved and this should be adhered to at all costs

* The land in question is a flood plain, but apparently there is now different categories and this land is in the one that is ok to be built on! Watery Lane adjoins this land and is always being closed because of flooding. The cost of drainage etc. to remedy this before building there would be so enormous, it is just so wrong, and most people cannot understand how this area came to be considered in the first place.

* Flooding, and flooding because of building on flood plains has been very much in the news in recent years, and yet it is still being talked about here. At the meeting the other day some very well informed protestors raised the issue of responsibility in case this does go wrong in future, and also compensation - very valid points I thought.

* Hullbridge is a very pleasant place to live, a good mixture of young and old, and a good size village. This amount of new houses will upset the balance and create a lot of problems, the school, doctors, transport, roads, all being over-attended.

* Where will the access to this site be?? At the moment on-one could give an answer! There does not seem to be a suitable place, and it will cause a high volume of traffic. But during the actual construction time, many people living near will suffer terrible disruption to their lives.

* Although this is not the place to talk about government policy, this is all happening because they stipulate how many dwellings the local council should build and this is misguided as it causes more problems than it solves.

I wish to protest against the Domestic development of 500 Dwellings in South West Hullbridge, irrespective of the timing of the Development.

I was very pleased to attend a meeting at the Day Centre on Monday 12th April 2010 regards a proposed development which will extend the habitable boundary by approximately 30%.

I was always of the opinion that a Local Authority was set up to serve and represent the people, but your attitude at the meeting gave me the impression that you really serve the County Council and Central government dictates, please explain how this attitude serves Local Democracy.

Did you inform the 'community' at the meeting that you have already forwarded the incumbent Planning Application to the National Inspectorate?

I consider it somewhat regrettable that the truth course of action, under the rules and regulations of Local government, that prior notice was not given will in advance of Planning Applications being submitted.

It seems that you do not consider it prudent to allow the 'community' the opportunity to discuss and put forward our opinions, objections and grievances of your proposals, in this instance, affecting the existing community as a whole.

It is unacceptable, at short notice to inform me that all opinions are required by or before the 30th April, not providing me with the opportunity to make the necessary educated perusal of the advantages and disadvantages of the scheme being requested for approval.

It is also regrettable for the Planning Officer (Mr Scutton) not answering some very pertinent questions and to inform the people at the meeting that the eventual outcome lay in the hands of the inspectorate.

I presume the meeting was held in accordance with set procedures and principles and obligations of Local Government to inform the people only.

Did your secretaries (presuming they were present) make notes of the questions and answers being put forwarded by the residents, and will I get a copy of these 'minutes' for perusal. It was noted that, apart from the three officials of the District Council, the absence of the Councillors representing Hullbridge was clearly obvious. In my opinion this suggests the low esteem with which has always been treated in many respects.

Risk Assessment

In view of this most important issue, I wonder if you would be kind enough to provide me with the opportunity to scrutinise the 'General Risk Assessments' you are obliged to make to the inspectorate and which will have an impact on the proposal, such as:

The Environment
Infrastructure
Flood (Watery Lane in regular flood - featured on the National News recently).
Density
Drainage
Main Services
Roads
Access - to and from Hullbridge
Schools
Doctors
Council Services, including fire and police
Health and Safety.

18 Gypsy Sites.

I was informed that 18 gypsy sites are required to be made available for 'Travellers' who make no contribution whatsoever to the financial requirements of the locality and, indeed could you explain the benefits to the community.
I am required by 'Law' to make payment for all services, but there is no requirement for these people whatsoever to observe the same rules and regulations as the rest of us, I wonder if you can make some plausible argument to pay for the services through our Council Tax.

Have you learnt from the experiences by other Local Authorities and that is well known that these people have no respect for us whatsoever.

Designation and Classification of Land

Please provide me with the information on the designation/classification of 'Green Belt', White Land and Brown field land.

Investment

I was also informed at the meeting that you were trying to attract 'investment' in this area, please explain how a Domestic Development will have the capacity to attract 'investment'.

Developers

Could you also please explain how the Developers gain the knowledge that the 'Green Belt' land would be available for 'Development', hence their purchase and planning applications which you admit have been forwarded by them for approval on this development.
Can you explain how 'Social Affordable Housing' will be purchased, or indeed will not be only made available for 'economic migrants'.
It is well known that it is extremely difficult to get mortgages or indeed the finances to rent properties.

Your response will be welcomed and I hope you will provide me with the opportunity to debate the merits of this development, and a proper timetable given to me/community.

I wish to protest against the Domestic development of 500 Dwellings in South West Hullbridge, irrespective of the timing of the Development.

I was very pleased to attend a meeting at the Day Centre on Monday 12th April 2010 regards a proposed development which will extend the habitable boundary by approximately 30%.

I was always of the opinion that a Local Authority was set up to serve and represent the people, but your attitude at the meeting gave me the impression that you really serve the County Council and Central government dictates, please explain how this attitude serves Local Democracy.

Did you inform the 'community' at the meeting that you have already forwarded the incumbent Planning Application to the National Inspectorate?

I consider it somewhat regrettable that the truth course of action, under the rules and regulations of Local government, that prior notice was not given will in advance of Planning Applications being submitted.

It seems that you do not consider it prudent to allow the 'community' the opportunity to discuss and put forward our opinions, objections and grievances of your proposals, in this instance, affecting the existing community as a whole.

It is unacceptable, at short notice to inform me that all opinions are required by or before the 30th April, not providing me with the opportunity to make the necessary educated perusal of the advantages and disadvantages of the scheme being requested for approval.

It is also regrettable for the Planning Officer (Mr Scutton) not answering some very pertinent questions and to inform the people at the meeting that the eventual outcome lay in the hands of the inspectorate.

I presume the meeting was held in accordance with set procedures and principles and obligations of Local Government to inform the people only.

Did your secretaries (presuming they were present) make notes of the questions and answers being put forwarded by the residents, and will I get a copy of these 'minutes' for perusal. It was noted that, apart from the three officials of the District Council, the absence of the Councillors representing Hullbridge was clearly obvious. In my opinion this suggests the low esteem with which has always been treated in many respects.

Risk Assessment

In view of this most important issue, I wonder if you would be kind enough to provide me with the opportunity to scrutinise the 'General Risk Assessments' you are obliged to make to the inspectorate and which will have an impact on the proposal, such as:

The Environment
Infrastructure
Flood (Watery Lane in regular flood - featured on the National News recently).
Density
Drainage
Main Services
Roads
Access - to and from Hullbridge
Schools
Doctors
Council Services, including fire and police
Health and Safety.

18 Gypsy Sites.

I was informed that 18 gypsy sites are required to be made available for 'Travellers' who make no contribution whatsoever to the financial requirements of the locality and, indeed could you explain the benefits to the community.
I am required by 'Law' to make payment for all services, but there is no requirement for these people whatsoever to observe the same rules and regulations as the rest of us, I wonder if you can make some plausible argument to pay for the services through our Council Tax.

Have you learnt from the experiences by other Local Authorities and that is well known that these people have no respect for us whatsoever.

Designation and Classification of Land

Please provide me with the information on the designation/classification of 'Green Belt', White Land and Brown field land.

Investment

I was also informed at the meeting that you were trying to attract 'investment' in this area, please explain how a Domestic Development will have the capacity to attract 'investment'.

Developers

Could you also please explain how the Developers gain the knowledge that the 'Green Belt' land would be available for 'Development', hence their purchase and planning applications which you admit have been forwarded by them for approval on this development.
Can you explain how 'Social Affordable Housing' will be purchased, or indeed will not be only made available for 'economic migrants'.
It is well known that it is extremely difficult to get mortgages or indeed the finances to rent properties.

Your response will be welcomed and I hope you will provide me with the opportunity to debate the merits of this development, and a proper timetable given to me/community.

I would like to object in the strongest possible terms to the proposal plan for another 450 homes in Hullbridge.
I was born here 64 years ago and lived here all my life.
I am still waiting for most of the roads in Hullbridge to be adopted by the Council and to be made up properly. Most are still single track roads with only passing places.
Water supplies, sewerage and the extra traffic that 450 new homes would place on the infrastructure would be entirely unacceptable. 540 new homes could possibly represent 900 extra cars and 900 or more children requiring places in local schools.
I sincerely hope that this proposal will be rejected by our local councillors in its entirety.

I recently attended 2 meetings at Hullbridge regarding the proposed 500 houses that to be built at Hullbridge and Gipsy Sites. We strongly oppose to this.

Hullbridge is a low crime area and everyone in Hullbridge have worked hard within the community to keep it this way, but with the proposed plans no way would this be the case and would result in more policing etc.

Hullbridge would not be able to cope with the drainage as we already have problems with flooding and many houses have needed underpinning etc.

Access to and from - Hullbridge to Rayleigh and surrounding areas is already a problem, but capable it the proposed plans take place there would be big problems to residents getting in and out of the village and putting extra lengthy times on their travel to work etc. The roads in and around Hullbridge are not good enough to hold more traffic and would cause more accidents etc.

Tourists from London etc visit Hullbridge to get away from hustle and bustle, but once your proposed plans take place this will decline drastically as it will not be the pretty, clean village where they can have a quiet drink along the river anymore. The village will be to built up and more like an Estate and will need policy at all times.

The residents in Hullbridge have worked very hard to keep it clean, tidy lovely village but this will all change and our hard work would have been a complete and utter waste of time and money.

We pay our Council taxes and should be heard as to what would be good for Hullbridge and strongly as you to block these proposed plans as Hullbridge would no longer be a village but become a concrete jungle.

I recently attended 2 meetings at Hullbridge regarding the proposed 500 houses that to be built at Hullbridge and Gipsy Sites. We strongly oppose to this.

Hullbridge is a low crime area and everyone in Hullbridge have worked hard within the community to keep it this way, but with the proposed plans no way would this be the case and would result in more policing etc.

Hullbridge would not be able to cope with the drainage as we already have problems with flooding and many houses have needed underpinning etc.

Access to and from - Hullbridge to Rayleigh and surrounding areas is already a problem, but capable it the proposed plans take place there would be big problems to residents getting in and out of the village and putting extra lengthy times on their travel to work etc. The roads in and around Hullbridge are not good enough to hold more traffic and would cause more accidents etc.

Tourists from London etc visit Hullbridge to get away from hustle and bustle, but once your proposed plans take place this will decline drastically as it will not be the pretty, clean village where they can have a quiet drink along the river anymore. The village will be to built up and more like an Estate and will need policy at all times.

The residents in Hullbridge have worked very hard to keep it clean, tidy lovely village but this will all change and our hard work would have been a complete and utter waste of time and money.

We pay our Council taxes and should be heard as to what would be good for Hullbridge and strongly as you to block these proposed plans as Hullbridge would no longer be a village but become a concrete jungle.

I recently attended 2 meetings at Hullbridge regarding the proposed 500 houses that to be built at Hullbridge and Gipsy Sites. We strongly oppose to this.

Hullbridge is a low crime area and everyone in Hullbridge have worked hard within the community to keep it this way, but with the proposed plans no way would this be the case and would result in more policing etc.

Hullbridge would not be able to cope with the drainage as we already have problems with flooding and many houses have needed underpinning etc.

Access to and from - Hullbridge to Rayleigh and surrounding areas is already a problem, but capable it the proposed plans take place there would be big problems to residents getting in and out of the village and putting extra lengthy times on their travel to work etc. The roads in and around Hullbridge are not good enough to hold more traffic and would cause more accidents etc.

Tourists from London etc visit Hullbridge to get away from hustle and bustle, but once your proposed plans take place this will decline drastically as it will not be the pretty, clean village where they can have a quiet drink along the river anymore. The village will be to built up and more like an Estate and will need policy at all times.

The residents in Hullbridge have worked very hard to keep it clean, tidy lovely village but this will all change and our hard work would have been a complete and utter waste of time and money.

We pay our Council taxes and should be heard as to what would be good for Hullbridge and strongly as you to block these proposed plans as Hullbridge would no longer be a village but become a concrete jungle.