Gypsy and Traveller Sites

Objection to the traveller sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to housing in Hullbridge and Traveller Sites. See paper copy for details.

Objection to Traveller Sites. See paper copy for details.

im writing this email because it has been brought to my attention the potential 'massive building scale' in my area.

I understand that 720 homes, travellers sites for 15 pitches and and industrial areas are earmarked for rayleigh.

I also found out that this was posted in the yellow advertiser, of which I have never received them because im in a new house ( was built in the 1980's) I attended a meeting of which it was a staggering shock.
my point of view is.. regarding the traveller sites, we don't want another 'CRAYS HILL SITUATION IN RAYLEIGH'. 15 pitches is quite a number and I knowing the situation and taking advantage of it, I know that lots of families of families will all try to stay on the ammenties allocated for 15 pitches, and it will easily become and 'no go area'. of which potential crime will soar,, im not prejudice, but the situation would easily remedy by suggesting that allocated 'smaller sites throughout the REGION' would be the answer... if they have to live in the area, abide by the rules and regulations of smaller easily policed sites...... i think this is acceptable for a large proportion of home owners/council tax payers.. I am a single parent through no fault of my own and I don't want to feel vulnerable because of introducing 'potential crime' to the area.

I also understand 720 homes are allocated to be built here... is that wise considering no more amenities i.e. doctors which are already at bursting point, schools are full, the traffic chaos would be a nightmare... again maybe social housing built on a smaller scale... I know it is allocated for green belt land, once this sliver of land would be touched, then residents can kiss goodbye to it, and it will be built on bit by bit...I propose the 'brown land up near the traffic lights on the a 130 near rawreth.. makes sense so as not to spoil the beauty of the surrounding areas.

the industrial site.. again I propose that it be built on the land where the tyre place on the slip road coming off the a 127 joining the a 130 would be favourable.. it makes sense as pollution levels would stay away from the housing and rural areas...

I would hope that your department acknowledges my comments on the proposals for the rayleigh/rawreth areas...

I speak on behalf of many other residents who are quite taken aback by all this proposals by this district council... which to me was kept very very quiet. I understand this was all vetoed by hockley, hullbridge , now rayleigh is the last on the list... all this was kept very quiet which I find somewhat alarming.
I hope you reconsider your allocations......

Objection to the Traveller Site.
See paper copy for details.

I attended a resident meeting last night at the Grange Hall on the Little Wheatleys Estate in Rayleigh. During this meeting I was shocked to hear of the councils proposed plans to further increase the levels of new housed built in Rayleigh by another 750, and the proposed Gypsies sites. I believe that the housing options are labelled NLR1 to NLR5, and that the gypsies sites are labelled GT1 to GT7.

I would like to make an official declaration that I do not agree with these proposals and would like to reject them for the following reasons.

1. NLR1, NLR2,NLR3,NLR4 and NLR5.

I have no issue with building affordable housing in the local area, but I have a concern with both the number of houses proposed and the locations. Between the A129, old A130 and Rawreth lane.

These proposed changes will result in a green belt boundary which cannot be defended against future building projects, which will result in the erosion of this green belt area over time.
Traffic along the A129, which is already congested at peek times will further increase, and Rayleigh high street will be almost impossible to get to.
The local infrastructure such as public transport, road access, schools, doctors and amenities would all need to be increased as these are currently overstretched with the recent housing increases in the Makro area of Rayleigh.
I understand that some of the proposed sites are within flood plains and so these would increase the risk of local flooding. What actions would be taken to eliminate this risk?

An alternative to this would be to build fewer low cost houses further along the A1245 past the Rawreth traffic lights on the two current brown field sites, a garden nursery and garage.

These would have ample road access and are easily developed without causing any major disruption to the local community.



2. GT1,GT2,GT3 and GT7.

There is a very good reason why traveller sites are associated with trouble and rubbish. You only have to look at the sites along the A127, between the A130 and pound lane to see this clearly demonstrated. Rubbish has been thrown from the site into the neighbouring fields and there are regular fires which spill smoke across the A127.

Travellers are not in the main interested in joining the local community, there children normally do not attend schools on a regular basis and few pay council tax. I can verify this as my wife worked as teacher at a school in Rettendon, which has an in take of traveller children. As there name indicates they are migrant and move from site to site, without clearing the rubbish they generate.

Who will police these proposed sites and clean up the local area once they have been vacated? Who will pay for this service, the local community tax payers?

Who will ensure the sites do not expand illegally, the local residents or Police?

The site GT3 is too close to local schools, business and residential areas and needs to be removed form these plans immediately.

Recognising the targets set by the council for housing this group of non contributing individuals, and the detrimental effect that there arrival has to a community. I would suggest that any sites your do introduce or legalise are as remote as is possible in the area, and small so to ensure that there effect is minimised.

It is my view that we are too tolerant of these individuals needs and put them above the wishes and needs of the law abiding tax payer.

I would like to add that in the event of these plans going forward as proposed I would look to seriously reconsider my vote in both the general and local elections.

Objection to the Traveller Site.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to the traveller sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to the Traveller sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to traveller Sites In Rayleigh. See paper copy for details.

Objeciton to the housing in Hullbridge and the Traveller Sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to housing and Gypsy and Traveller land allocation in Hullbridge.

For further information and Echo newspaper article of Wednesday April 14, 2010 see paper copy.

Objection to the traveller sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to the Traveller sites.
See paper copy for details.

Various questions and comments received.

For further details see paper copy.

Objection to the housing in Rayleigh and Traveller Sites.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to proposed housing and gypsy and traveller land allocation in Rayleigh.

For further details see paper copy.

Objects to gypsy and traveller site - see full rep for further details

OBJECTS TO GT4 - see full rep for detalis

If the travellers are offered a small plot, within 2 years it would be trebled, and it would cost the council thousands of pounds to put it back to the original site as what happened in Billericay.

Second reason why I object, why do the travellers want a permanent site (if they are travellers). If they want to be permanent, put them on the housing waiting list.

Objection to the Gypsy and Traveller Sites. See paper copy.

Objection to the Traveller SItes.
See paper copy for details.

Objection to West Hockley 50 dwellings and Gypsy and Traveller sites. See paper copy.