Option EA1

A similar application for this site was made in 2001. All the reasons for its rejection then still stand today and are even more relevant. Like many of my neighbours, I am extremely suspicious of this obsession with the expansion of King Edmund school. A new school should be built in the expanding Shoebury/Wakering area. Pupils would no longer need to travel from there. The result would be less traffic congestion and places at King Edmund would become available for local children. I will be sending a more comprehensive objection to the council by post.

Apart from taking over green belt, this land provides a useful local amenity for horse owners through stables and pasture land. No suitable alternatives are available in the locality.

Brays Lane currently suffers from heavy lorry traffic to and from Baltic Wharf. Moving King Edmund School traffic onto Brays Lane would create even heavier traffic loads at each end of the school day.

Any site in this area will erode the green belt. However, the Ashingdon Road is already full to capacity.

OPTION EA1

As this land immediately adjoins the King Edmund Secondary School, it is ideally placed to deliver the educational and highway improvements for the school. We have held discussions with both Blaise Gammie from School Organisation and Planning at Essex County Council and Mr Abel, the Headmaster of the school. There is agreement that this land, immediately to the north of the school in the most appropriate location for these improvements. Although the Core Strategy identifies that 3ha of land needs to be reserved for future educational requirements, it has been agreed that the school's requirements in terms of both the reserve land and the highways improvements can be accommodated within 3ha. Although this revised configuration allows for a larger residential land parcel (2.53 ha) this could only accommodate around 60 dwellings at a density of 30 dwellings per hectare. Even at a higher density of 40 dwellings per hectare only around 80 dwellings could be achieved. Whilst achieving a greater number of units such a scheme would neither meet the Council's requirements of 100 units, nor would it reflect the character of the area. Furthermore, financial viability would be put into question given the significant infrastructure contributions required.

This location is further from Rochford Town Centre and train station than other options that are being considered for Rochford, which are considered to more sustainable development options.

Option EA1 is also considered as a suitable location for the expansion of King Edmund School (KES2 & KES3), therefore there is a potential conflict with another key objective of the document.

Option EA2 & EA3, both of these options are located wholly or partly to the north of Brays Lane, and would not create a defensible boundary, contrary to PPG2.

I am writing to express my views on the proposed development of the above area. I consider that if an area has to be chosen for this development, it would be best to develop the area south of Brays Lane for the following reasons:



There is already an area of development that was created on the north side in Victory Lane and Nelson Road, as well as Golden Cross Mews.

The increase of students attending King Edmunds School from this area means more will be crossing Brays Lane to go to school, this road is already used heavily by large vehicles and is a danger. If the development were on the south side, the pupils would not have to cross the dangerous road.



Another concern is that the Ashingdon Road is already very heavily congested. It can often take 15/20 minutes to get from Ashingdon to Rochford. The infrastructure is not sufficient to meet the needs of further development in this area.

Dear Sir.
Ref. the above relating to the Brays Lane option for access to King Edmund School expansion.

There appear to be two options.
1) Brays Lane.
This is possible if Brays Lane is up graded and Ashingdon Road widened. This would account for todays congestion with a small extra capacity for some expansion for through traffic. The existing traffic using Brays lane Large lorries from Canewdon, Wallasea and farms clogs up what we have.
2) Sapwoods. This could come off the existing Ashingdon Road, which still needs to be upgraded. through the farm field. Crossing Oxford Rod into the existing access to King Edmund School. This to my mind will cause the least disruption also keeping down costs. More importantly not involving property developers building more houses.
Therefore this is my preferred option with no increase in housing.


My main objections to any further housing are:
1) Road Infrastructure not able to accommodate existing traffic without major up grade. To move away from the area as well as through traffic.
2) Main drainage can't cope now, lifting manhole covers/flooding Brays Lane and Farm fields (I also understand this happens in Stambridge Road as well) so any further increase must be avoided at all costs until sufficient systems are in place.
3)Water, Gas and Electric supplies are also under resourced.

Expansion is not yet required, as no new dwellings have been built.

The options seem to be:
(1)Vehicle access to King Edmund School via rear Sapwood/end of Oxford Road and any
further pitches or development to be similarly placed(ref.KES1).
(2)School-vehicle access via land south of Brays Lane and construction of 100 dwellings
with no pitches(ref.EA1).
(3)"Concrete Heaven"construction of road access,dwellings north/south
Brays lane and pitches.
My conclusion is that any construction to the north of Brays should be
avoided;(a)Brays lane has very poor traffic management and is hence
very hazardous to all users(b)The area is on a flood plain with regular
sewage surcharges(c)The field should be considered a Green-Belt with
Badgers,slow-worms etc and thus protected.
Item (1) is the best option with no dwellings required.

RE: ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS



Thank you for giving Anglian Water the opportunity to comment on the above document.



Please find our comments summarized on the attached document.

Objection and comments to the housing in East Ashingdon.
See paper copy for details.

Comments regarding land allocation for East Ashingdon.

For further information, see paper copy.

Various questions and comments received.

For further details see paper copy.

Comments received regarding option EA1, EA2, EA3 and KES1.

For further details see paper copy.