Option GT3

As is evidenced by the issues seen at Crays Hill in Basildon, Travellers do not wish to integrate into mainstream society. That is why they are travellers. The converse is also true. Therefore they do not have to be sited near residential areas.

They do not use the transport network in the way that residential commuters do so do not need to be sited near bus routes or railway stations.

will add to traffic congestion and will impact local schools

This site will be too close to the pylons and ElectroMagnetic fields

I do not believe that the local infrastructure will support this type of development, or that RDC has the necessary expertise to manage such a development. I oppose any buildings on green belt or agricultural land.

Too close to existing housing areas

Totally against the decision to place a traveler site in this location. There will be no cohesion within the local community only disruption with their close proximity.

Strongly object to the proposed site GT3, in particular, due to it's close proximity to nearby primary school.

Please do not do this to our community.

This site should be included with sites - GT4, GT5 to provide necessary pitches. All have good access to surrounding roads.

This is inappropriate for the location

I fundamentally disagree that the proposal GT3 is a remotely sensible option to place the travellers site. Such use would be in direct contradiction to the stance taken by the council for refusal (and seconded by Government Inspectors) of other developments along this road. In todays economic climate the council has a responsibility to be prudent and the cost of siting the travellers here would be far too much to justify. So close to houses, this will, with respect, have a detrimental affect on their price. Option GT2 or GT6 would make far more sense and be more empathetic to the precedents set by the council for granting permission to other developments in the area,

There are a number of reasons why this site would be unacceptable for a travellers site. there is already major congestion on the london road during all hours, there would need to be major upgrade to the road and transport links. It is already difficuilt to exit L|ittle Wheatlies chase during the morning and traffic is held up during the evening as you are entering. There would need to be a further upgrade to other facilities such as power and water, as a resident we already have power fluctuations during the evening and without up grade to infrastructure this could be a major problem in the area. There would be also problems with the local schools, It would be located very close to a local primary school and would have adverse affects on the safety of the students and amenity of the site. With increase numbers coming into the area there would also be problems with the local high school as it is aready oversubscribed and another school would have to be built to accommodate the massive increase in population There is also no facilities for the extra young people that would be moving into the area, there is already little to do and few places for them to play, do activities or safely interact. This would get worse than it is now. As a local resident I'm also concerned reagarding house prices.

Access to and from London Road is a major concern for this site, during rush hour the road is always at a stand still so creating a traveller site will only add to what is already a congested road system, there are better options in less built up areas that should be considered.

If this site was to be used it should be for true travellers whose life style is nomadic and provisions should be put in place so that no family can stay permanently.

There is already a travellers site located near Rawreth Lane on A1245 so if there is a requirement for further sites it would be more appropriate to spread these over the whole of the district in small plots not just in one area. To locate another site within such close proximity of an existing site could potentially run the risk of illegal expansion.

Historically the majority of travellers do not wish to integrate or become part of the existing residential community.

To enlarge this illegal site would be wrong, much better to make the few sites that are there at the moment legal and then distribute the other sites required in small groups around Rochford. I believe a community works better together if there are small batches of different types of accommodation provided.

Definately not at all suitable for the community. These sites need to be smaller and placed in a few different sites around Rochford.

I do not believe this to be a good option

This area is a sizable piece of farmland separating Rayleigh from the A1245 and supports the feeling of living in a quiet county town. I think it would give a bad impression to visitors to the town, in particular businesses etc looking to move here. Also to allow travellers on this land would be to allow near permanent structures, since all of the traveller sites I see have brick walls, drives and prefab bungalows rather than caravans. The travellers would also be directly under pylons which would be noisy and perhaps dangerous for them.

Please note that I strongly object to the council's housing options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 & NLR5 (but especially LNR1) because they will;

cause an unnecessary loss of agricultural land,

will increase traffic,

will over load the local services such as schools and doctors surgeries,

will create a green belt boundary that can't be defended in future

and encourage a merging between Rawreth and Rayleigh.

I also srongly oppose traveller site options GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7.

Please note my comments.

Proposed Planning Rayleigh Area

We would like to draw to your attention to our objections to the opposed housing NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 for the travellers site GT3 and to the industrial complex also planned for the London Road site.

Our main objections are as followed:-

* Increase in traffic onto a very narrow road which cannot cope now with the traffic flow
* This area is notorious for flooding - fields under water most of winter

* There will be no defined green barrier between Rayleigh and Rawreth

* No planning for additional schools - doctors - sports facilities

* Pressure on existing utilities - already overstretched

* Rayleigh town already has inadequate parking and facilities - no attractions for 30+ age group

* Proposed extension to Southend Airport will add to local traffic problems


The Industrial Site

The site in Rawreth lane was built originally in an isolated area. Then the Victoria Garage development was built. The residents were assured the site would not affect them but approx 10 years on the complaints regarding air quality and noise have resulted in the plans for relocation. To put a larger industrial complex opposite approx 770 new homes will result in continued complaints from new residents. Housing and industry do not mix and this industrial site must be more isolated. Again, the size of vehicles using this facility will, in the main, be wider than the A129. It took us about 4 minutes to proceed out from Little Wheatley Chase towards Carpenters arms due to heavy traffic. Quality of life for existing residents must be preserved and brown fill sites should be the site of choice therefore the A127/A130 junction or the A1245 beyond Bedlows corner would be more isolated and therefore less problems.

There are already other industrial units in Rawreth Lane surely they are enough for this small area.

Residential

Housing could be an option to replace the Eon site. Certainly the rumour of Tesco acquiring it would only raise the problems of traffic once again. Parking is a problem to residents in this area from workers at Eon and this would get worse with a supermarket there. Again this option would create extra traffic which the A129 cannot cope with.

In short, the infrastructure does not exist to cope with anymore.

We understand that highways object to the travellers site off the A1245 Bedlows Corner and that is onto a dual carriageway so how can they possibly agree to more access from and to the A129.

Finally we have only recently moved to this district from a local area where over development of both housing and Industrial sites made day to day a living misery. It must not happen in Rayleigh.

Proposed Planning Rayleigh Area

We would like to draw to your attention to our objections to the opposed housing NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 for the travellers site GT3 and to the industrial complex also planned for the London Road site.

Our main objections are as followed:-

* Increase in traffic onto a very narrow road which cannot cope now with the traffic flow
* This area is notorious for flooding - fields under water most of winter

* There will be no defined green barrier between Rayleigh and Rawreth

* No planning for additional schools - doctors - sports facilities

* Pressure on existing utilities - already overstretched

* Rayleigh town already has inadequate parking and facilities - no attractions for 30+ age group

* Proposed extension to Southend Airport will add to local traffic problems


The Industrial Site

The site in Rawreth lane was built originally in an isolated area. Then the Victoria Garage development was built. The residents were assured the site would not affect them but approx 10 years on the complaints regarding air quality and noise have resulted in the plans for relocation. To put a larger industrial complex opposite approx 770 new homes will result in continued complaints from new residents. Housing and industry do not mix and this industrial site must be more isolated. Again, the size of vehicles using this facility will, in the main, be wider than the A129. Quality of life for existing residents must be preserved and brown fill sites should be the site of choice therefore the A127/A130 junction or the A1245 beyond Bedlows corner would be more isolated and therefore less problems.

There are already other industrial units in Rawreth Lane surely they are enough for this small area.

Residential

Housing could be an option to replace the Eon site. Certainly the rumour of Tesco acquiring it would only raise the problems of traffic once again. Parking is a problem to residents in this area from workers at Eon and this would get worse with a supermarket there. Again this option would create extra traffic which the A129 cannot cope with.

In short, the infrastructure does not exist to cope with anymore.

We understand that highways object to the travellers site off the A1245 Bedlows Corner and that is onto a dual carriageway so how can they possibly agree to more access from and to the A129.

Finally we have only recently moved to this district from a local area where over development of both housing and Industrial sites made day to day a living misery. It must not happen in Rayleigh.

Proposed Planning Rayleigh Area

We would like to draw to your attention to our objections to the opposed housing NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 for the travellers site GT3 and to the industrial complex also planned for the London Road site.

Our main objections are as followed:-

* Increase in traffic onto a very narrow road which cannot cope now with the traffic flow
* This area is notorious for flooding - fields under water most of winter

* There will be no defined green barrier between Rayleigh and Rawreth

* No planning for additional schools - doctors - sports facilities

* Pressure on existing utilities - already overstretched

* Rayleigh town already has inadequate parking and facilities - no attractions for 30+ age group

* Proposed extension to Southend Airport will add to local traffic problems


The Industrial Site

The site in Rawreth lane was built originally in an isolated area. Then the Victoria Garage development was built. The residents were assured the site would not affect them but approx 10 years on the complaints regarding air quality and noise have resulted in the plans for relocation. To put a larger industrial complex opposite approx 770 new homes will result in continued complaints from new residents. Housing and industry do not mix and this industrial site must be more isolated. Again, the size of vehicles using this facility will, in the main, be wider than the A129. Quality of life for existing residents must be preserved and brown fill sites should be the site of choice therefore the A127/A130 junction or the A1245 beyond Bedlows corner would be more isolated and therefore less problems.

There are already other industrial units in Rawreth Lane surely they are enough for this small area.

Residential

Housing could be an option to replace the Eon site. Certainly the rumour of Tesco acquiring it would only raise the problems of traffic once again. Parking is a problem to residents in this area from workers at Eon and this would get worse with a supermarket there. Again this option would create extra traffic which the A129 cannot cope with.

In short, the infrastructure does not exist to cope with anymore.

We understand that highways object to the travellers site off the A1245 Bedlows Corner and that is onto a dual carriageway so how can they possibly agree to more access from and to the A129.

Finally in the main housing will be aimed at the 30 plus age group who need the sort of entertainment currently not avaliable in Rayleigh. A look at night life in Billericay for example must be considered if plans are being made for more housing. The children too will need local sports and recreation facilities, again not currently in Rayleigh

I currently live in St. Johns Drive and we regular problem with travellers. We have had numerous articles go missing and we have even had one of their horses dumped on our fields, which we returned back to them only for it to end back at ours again a few days later. I fear that this kind of activity would escalate further. I have 3 young children and feel very safe where I live and i fear this would change dramatically. Would you also compensate for the value of my property declining substantially?.

It would be more appropriate for travellers sites to be small manageable plots provided throughout the district not all the provision to be confined to one area.

There is already a travellers site located near Rawreth Lane on A1245 to locate another site within such close promimity or even expanding the existing site could potentially increase the risk of additional illegal sites being occupied neighbouring the existing plot or the proposed new location.

Historically the majority of travellers have no desire to integrate with neighbouring residents or communities.

We would like to draw to your attention to our objections to the opposed housing NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 for the travellers site GT3 and to the industrial complex also planned for the London Road site.

Our main objections are as followed:-

* Increase in traffic onto a very narrow road which cannot cope now with the traffic flow
* This area is notorious for flooding - fields under water most of winter

* There will be no defined green barrier between Rayleigh and Rawreth

* No planning for additional schools - doctors - sports facilities

* Pressure on existing utilities - already overstretched

* Rayleigh town already has inadequate parking and facilities - no attractions for 30+ age group

* Proposed extension to Southend Airport will add to local traffic problems

Strongly object. Too close to residential area, schools, parkland and businesses. Find it hard to imagine how any site of this nature could lead to "increased community cohesion and integration into other settlements".

"Good access"? London Road is an accident hotspot as well as having traffic flow issues particularly since the introduction of excessive speed restrictions on the A127. London Road leading into Crown hill and Rayleigh one way system already unable to cope with existing traffic volume, particularly at weekends and morning and evening "rush hour".

I strongly object to this site. I feel it would be detrimental to Rayleigh. It would impact on house prices, crime rates, ambience of the area and take divert spending away from other more important sectors.

I strongly obect to the provision for Travellers sites so close to luxuary housing!

House prices would be reduced! Crime would increase!

Congestion on A129 would be inreased in an area already heavily congested!

why should this part of rayleigh be dumped on by rdc there is a chance i might be out of work because of this new houses and why should i go to bed at night and have to keep one eye open because of this travellers.