Option GT3

We live at 14 Latchingdon Close in Rayleigh, and have resided in the area for almost 11 years.

We are writing to express our concern about some of the options featured in the area development plan as given in the current document
which is out for public consultation.

Specifically, we are strongly opposed to options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5.

We oppose any building of housing between London Road and Rawreth Lane, or that land being used for employment land or travellers sites.
There is already problematic traffic congestion in the area and the addition of such housing would exacerbate this. For example, the queue on Crown Hill to get to the High Street stretches down past Downhall Road on a saturday morning and often down the hill as far as Rayleigh Station in times that would be considered 'off peak' (e.g weekday late morning).

It is our understanding that the land is currently classed as 'green belt' and it should stay that way. The existing road, rail (The trains on the Liverpool Street line are already crammed) domestic and leisure facilities in the town would not support 550 houses plus the 220 we understand are intended for the current Rawreth Industrial site. In addition, we are very concerned that once the land begins to be developed, eventually all of it will be used up. This would be to the detriment of the overall quality of life for all residents in the area as well as the pressure on infrastructure noted above.

We oppose the siting of a travellers site on London Road. It would be to the detriment of the impression and appearance of the area given that the road is main 'gateway' to the town. A site in that position would not encourage 'cohesiveness' as there is consistent evidence that travellers do not wish to integrate with local communities. We are aware of this via annecdotal evidence, media reporting (both newpapers and television) and to some extent through knowledge gained in our professional working lives.

We are not opposed to relocating the businesses from the Rawreth Industrial estate to another venue, the suggested site by the A127/A1245 would seem a sensible and viable option, given the businesses that already seem to be there and the close accessed the A127/A130.

We understand that there is a need for additional housing. We understand that things are difficult for people trying to 'get on the housing ladder'. We understand there is the
possibility of previously used land further north next to the A1245 and would ask whether consideration has been given to using this land. We would also ask whether a proportion
of the proposed new housing will be 'affordable' housing, shared ownership etc.

Thanking you for your time.

i natalie reid object to options
NLR1
NLR2
NLR3
NLR4
NLR5
Because they will cause unnesccary loss of argircultral land
will increase traffic
will creat an green belt boundary that cant be defended in future and encourage a merging between rayleigh and rawreth

I VERY MUCH OBJECT TO THE TRAVELLERS SITES AS THIS DECREASES THE HIGH REPUTATION OF THE AREA
OBJECTION GT1, GT2, GT3, GT7

I would like to register my objection to the proposed residential development on land between Rawreth Lane and London Road. I would also like to object to the proposed siting of legal traveller sites in the area. Please send a short response to this email so that I know my objection has been legally noted & registered.

Dear Sir/ Madam

I am writng to you as I understand there are plans to site travellers sites in Rayleigh.

I am a resident of Polstead close,Langham Drive , Rayleigh and I am disapointed that this is being planned without residents in the local area been made fully aware of this. It is through word of mouth (rumour) that this is planned and nothing substantial from anyone in authority. I have now had a leaflet sent through my door telling me of the proposed sites in Rayleigh from the Libral Democrats. This sort of communication is unsettling as it brings about big change for the local community and it is not the kind of communication which is effective. Appartnely there was a meeting held at the Grange community centre last Wednesday to which local reisdents were able to attend. We in Plostead close were all unaware of this and as a consequence did not tend. This I am disgusted at as we have not been given the opportunity to hear what is being proposed for our local community.

Both my husaband and I totally object to a travelllers site being placed next to Swallows Aquatics or in Rayleigh. There is already a shortage of schools. My son is unable to get into the school in our catchment area which is five mintues walk from our house. Instead we have to walk a 20 mintue walk. This does not allow my son the freedom to walk to and from school when he reaches the age where he should be doing this due to the length of the walk and safety with letting your child walk that far. On the whole there is a shortage of schools in Rayleigh due to the amount of new developments that have been built over the years in Rayleigh with onyl one small school built. Putting travellers site/ s in Rayleigh will increase this problem and especially in the Little Whealty, Langham drive area as there are only 2 school ( one cathloic and takes children from all over Essex) to for the children who live in the area as far as London Hill/ Crown Hill.

Having this site built in Rayleigh will add to the already bad traffic which every morning when I go to work I sit in throughout Rayleigh going towards, the Carpetners Arms round about, Rayleigh high street, Sadlers farm, and the A127. All of which I have to travel past to get my son to the other side of Rayleigh and myself to work. It takes me over an hour to do this trip each morning.

We also object as this land is the only part of Rayleigh that has not been built on and still gives Rayleigh some countryside in which to walk our dogs and feel you are in the country away from it all after a hard days work. Take that away and there is no where within walking distance that we can do this and feel close to nature. Every where in rayleigh ,every piece of green land has been built on leaving Rayleigh to be a built up area. Take this land and will will have none left!.

I would be grateful if you can inform us of what is intened with the travellers site and the housing developments they plan for Rayleigh.

We wholeheartidly object to any travellers sites in Rayleigh for the above reasons.

I wouldl ike my email to be acceoted as a full letter of objection.

I have recently been informed of the detailed proposals to build a large number of homes in West Rayleigh/Rawreth, including 2 possible sites for travellers in the same area.

I am writing to strongly object to these proposed housing options labelled NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 & NLR5. I am also strongly objecting to plans for any new traveller sites within Rayleigh/Rawreth (GT1, GT2, GT3 & GT7).

Rayleigh is already highly populated and has lost much of it's agricultural land to development over the past few years, we cannot allow more land to be given up. The green fields between London Road and Rawreth Lane should be left alone, no further housing, no employment and definately no new traveller sites. Such proposals will result in a further increase to traffic and pollution, and it will destroy what open spaces we have left.

Leave Rayleigh/Rawreth alone. We've sacrificed enough land already to greedy Councils and Developers.

To whom it may concern,

I am emailing as I want to express my concern and STRONG objection to the councils housing options NLR1 NLR2 NLR3 NLR4 NLR5 being built.

They will cause unnecessary loss of agricultural land, will increase traffic, will create a green belt boundary that cant be defended in future, and will encourage merging of Rayleigh and Rawreth.

The idea of building a travellers site outrages me even more so, and I again STRONGLY object to GT1 GT2 GT3 GT7 being built.
For this to be allowed to happen would be a outrage and would cause me to move out of the Rayleigh area.

I look forward to your response to this email, and would like to know that you are taking objections to these matters seriously.

We are local residents and have in the last 48 hours become aware of the proposal to build a new travellers site along the London Road or alternativeyl expand the existing one nearby Rawreth Lane.

We strongly object to any such proposal as there must be alternative rural locations as opposed to siting the travellers in an established residential area.

Rayleigh is a historic market town and it will not create a good entrance to the town seeing travellers on approach.

Along the London Road the travellers would be in close proximity to Our Lady of Ransom school and this is really not appropriate.

To whom this may concern

Following review of construction planning for the Rayleigh area I wish to object in regards to building on green fields between London Road and Rawreth Lane.and in respect of small scale travellers sites options GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7.

I understand the need for additional housing in the local however to consider building on green field sites is not a viable option - loss of these sites will create a green belt which will be, over time diminished until no such belt exists.

I note that there are two areas of land which have good access to Battlesbridge Rail station which are deemed as brown field sites. These areas should be considered above all other areas for development.

Also, I am hearing conflicting information in regards to the NPower Building on London Road. I understand that this is deemed to be 'commercial' land however if and when NPower do vacant, the site should either be demolished and transferred to residential use or demolished and smaller commercial units (restricted to ground and one upper floor) to be used for offices / light industrial only.

New modern employment land is needed, agreed. Surely common sense is that this is developed on the plot of land near the A127 with the best road connections (with A127 and A13) otherwise the A1245 and in particular London Road around the Richlee Motor Garage will become even more congested. This area of land I understand at this time is used for tyre storage - it seems every other day there is a fire on site belching black smoke across the roadways.

A travellers site on the A1245 (old A130) would be most viable option for small scale development on a quality scale which meets the needs of the traveller community. A site on London Road would add to further congestion and perhaps to some less open minded locals would not be welcoming at all to potential new residents.

I object to proposal GT3 as it will create a poor impression upon entering Rayleigh on the A128 and will result in the lowering of nearby house values.

I am writing in respect of NLR1 - NLR5 options which have been drawn to my attention to object to these plans

I am also objecting to GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7 in relation toTraveller sites.

All of th above will increase traffic, is an unnecessary loss of agricultural land. Part of the reason we moved to Rayleigh was because of the fact that it was in the countryand its tranquil setting.

Please take the local peoples opinion into account.

I object to options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 because they will:-

Cause unnecessary loss of agricultural land.
Will increase traffic ( London Road and Crown Hill are congested during rush hour & Saturdays already)
If these fields are built on, it paves the way for more building on green belt in the future, they will be no fields.


I object to options GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7 because:-

These sites just increase in size with time.
Refer to Crays Hill which Basildon Council's decision has not been acted on.
Will Increase traffic
More demand on our already crowded schools.
Devalue the price of surround properties.

I wish to register my objection to the Council's housing options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 because they will contribute to increased traffic, will create a decreased green belt boundary that will be difficult to defend in the future and encourage a merging of Rayleigh and Rawreth.

I also wish to register my objection to the Traveller and Employment options for Rayleigh and Rawreth, GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to object to the councils housing options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 as they will:

1) Cause an unnecessary loss of agricultural land, given that we are being told that more land is required to produce more food.

2) Will increase traffic, at some periods of the day it already takes between 5 and 10 minutes to access London Road, Rayleigh from Louis Drive West.

3) Will create a green belt boundary that cannot be defended in the future and encourage a merging of Rayleigh and Rawreth.

I also object to the travellers sites, GT1, GT2, GT3, and GT7 for the same reason as No 1) above and the fact these sites are proven to cause a drop in surrounding property prices. There is also a danger that the crime rate for the area will increase, as experienced at Crays Hill, Wickford.

Subject: Proposed building of 770 new houses/possible Tesco and sites for Travellers between Rawreth Lane and London Road

Proposals NLR 1 to 5 and GT 1,2,3,7

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm writing to express my strong objection to the proposed building in West Rayleigh (options NLR1 to 5) and the Traveller sites (GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7). Despite there being a 'public consultation' on the above since 17th March 2010, it was purely by chance and word of mouth from a neighbour and a LibDem leaflet that I have been made aware of this. I have a fundamental problem with the fact that most of my local community are still unaware of this proposal which will severely impact all those who live in the Rayleigh area. I do think that Rochford District Council has a duty to disclose something as important as this to their tax paying households and indeed could easily have mailshot us all as they have all our addresses! This has been a most underhand way of dealing with things.

The local infrastructure within Rayleigh can not cope with the introduction of another 770 houses into this already crowded area.

Congestion on the roads is already at ridiculous levels with it regularly taking 30 minutes to drive from Victoria Avenue to the Weir out of rush hour. During rush hour the queue to the High Street regularly extends down along London Road all the way back to the A130. If anything happens on the A127 and traffic tries to come off the road then London Road suffers terribly and is often at a standstill.

As a rail commuter I see on a daily basis how crowded the train services are between Rayleigh and London. During the morning and evening commute it is difficult to get a seat and it only takes one service to be cut and hundreds of passengers are left standing, often for the entire 40 minute journey. This is far from satisfactory in itself considering a season ticket now costs over £3000!

Making the assumption that the majority of the new houses are likely to have children then where will they go to school? With 2 children in school myself, it is obvious the strain on the local schools already with large class sizes and insufficient places at local schools. The only school with spaces is Grove Wood Primary but this is a 15 minute car drive at school times from this area of Rayleigh.

Local doctors, dentists and hospitals are already over stretched - adding more housing to Rayleigh will only make the problem worse. It is already extremely difficult to get appointments and adding 2-3000 extra residents to the lists for doctors and dentists will make it virtually impossible to get through by telephone to book. My children have had to suffer several times because I could not get them appointments to see a doctor.

Surely the area being considered for the 770 houses is green belt and therefore should be protected? How can the local council allow building on such precious land further ruining what little countryside we have left? Once building begins on this land it will set a precedent and future building applications will no doubt follow, swallowing up the entire area.

I am also concerned that a Traveller site will be built. There are many of these in Essex already and putting one so close to established housing areas and businesses is a very unpopular decision locally. Not one resident around here thinks it is a good idea. Surely your job is to enhance the local area for the benefit of local people, not upset the entire local population? We are all very much aware of the effect the site at Crays Farm had on the schools, crime rates and house prices and do not want a repeat of this here. I also hear that Tesco plan to build on the E-On site. There are many supermarkets in the area already. Adding more will make traffic worse, kill local shops already struggling to compete with Asda and Sainsburys. It is not needed or wanted.

My family and I wish to formally state our objections to these plans. I have also copied this email to our MP Mark Francois.

Please keep me updated of any news/meetings on this subject.

I am writing to strongly protest and object to the proposed planning application to Options Labelled: NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NL4 & NLR5, and traveller's option GT1, GT2, GT3, & GT7, due to the following:

Traffic Congestion and Scenic Views

We strongly object to the proposal of 770 new homes. The area in question is the west main road into Rayleigh from the Carpenters Arms roundabout, and Rawreth Lane travelling to the rear of Rayleigh. London Road entry into Rayleigh is a picturesque route with a feel good factor leading into Rayleigh. There is farmland each side of the road and a view of the old barn which changes throughout the year with the seasons. Any redevelopment of the area will devalue the picturesque views for the residents, public and our future children, travelling by car, bicycle and foot into Rayleigh. In addition, the additional traffic coming into London Road from the Carpenters Arms roundabout will cause substantial traffic, noise and pollution which can harm the public, local to the area. With respect to speeding, I note that the council have just had to erect a speeding active warning sign to try and reduce the problem. As a resident, we have already felt the effect from noise pollution from the newly opened A130, which is a constant drone throughout the day and night. I also note that at peak times London Road cannot cope with the present volumes of traffic, with queues often past the Carpenters Arms roundabout, queuing to get into Rayleigh. This we thought would be alleviated when the old A130 was diverted by the new A130. In addition, I understand that Victoria Avenue will be opened up to allow traffic to travel into the development to the rear of Macros and Rawreth industrial estate. As you are well aware this will turn into "Rat Runs" for traffic, which I have experience in my childhood in Eastwood Essex, near Wren Avenue / Bosworth Road. It took many years of complaints to the council and now the council have just installed traffic calming in that area which from a safety point of view is great, but from a visual point of view is a disgrace. I have even seen young drivers using these humps as a chicane i.e. trying to dodge them in their cars, which is even more dangerous. My point here is that the roads do not have the capacity for the additional traffic, will be unsafe for the local schools and children, and will put their health in danger.

A127. This is the main route into the local area and has been under review for widening / improving for many years, just to cope with the present traffic capacity. Presently there are no plans or future funds (bearing in mind the economic crisis that we are in) to upgrade this road. However, a small step was taken recently to place average speed cameras on the A127, just to try to cope with the present traffic. This is not the long term answer, but it shows that the main road into the area cannot take any further traffic.

Loss of Agricultural Land and Environmental Impact.

As you are aware, the proposed development will take many acres of agricultural land, which is presently used every day by the local farmers. This loss of necessary agricultural land is totally unacceptable as we are all trying to prevent and reduce global warming, loss of this land will mean that food produced here will have to come from different locations which will produce more carbon omissions in transportation. There are many Brown Field sites in the area which assuming the infrastructure has the capacity, could be used instead of agricultural land.

I also note that the loss of agricultural land will place additional strain on our over stretched sewage and drinking water systems. Presently the land absorbs the rainwater and puts it to beneficial use, growing food, and not discharging it out to Sea, through the local overstretched brooks, culverts and rainwater ditches. I was also made aware that this area is in a flood plain from a local survey report on a house that a resident was proposing to buy, which was news to me, however, this suggests that building houses in this area is inappropriate, and as mentioned above placing additional strain on a congested water discharge service area.

Merging of Rayleigh and Rawreth

With the area being developed as proposed, it can be seen that Rayleigh and Rawreth will merge together, and be absorbed to create a new town which will lose its identity, character and history, turning into a new town which will look like any other lifeless new town.

Rayleigh Community Resources

The present infrastructure, schools, doctors, dentists, police, will be under strain and not be able to cope. Children's education will suffer, as schools are presently oversubscribed, with excessive class sizes, which prevents freedom of choice to attend whatever school you would like as promised by the government. This is presently happening as discussed by my neighbours, without the proposed expansion.

Industrial Employment land / Green Belt

I fail to see why green belt land is being designated as industrial land, when there is brown field employment land nearby. Why do we need additional industrial land when the Bryon Works Industrial estate and surrounding Industrial estates in Wickford, a short 2 miles away is virtually derelict and could be regenerated to supply the industrial land required. In point of fact the adjacent Enterprise way business park only looks 25% full and could also be regenerated to supply the employment land required. It appears that no attempt is being taken to look at other brown field site regeneration projects, but to rail road through demolition of the green belt.

Finally, my objection here is that the green belt boundary will be moved and cannot be defended in the future, for our children and children's children and brown field site regeneration projects should be proposed.

Proposed Travellers Sites GT1, GT2, GT3, & GT7

I oppose the proposed additional traveller's sites in both London Road and A1245 near Rawreth Lane. My complaint here is that areas should be allocated to them away from built up areas. From my experience, they are unfortunately, untidy, collecting rubbish for I presume recycling, however when this cannot be reused, they discard it locally for the council to dispose of. This is a health and safety issue for the residents. This site will also devalue the local properties. I understand travelling is their way of life; however, situating them on green belt land or fields is totally unacceptable. My suggestion would be to either increase the size of existing sites or put them on brown field sites.

We wish to formally state our objection with these plans.

I am opposing GT3 on the grounds of extra traffic on the A129 which is bad enough at the best of times. The crime rate will rise. Schools will be Overcrowded. Extra litter. House prices will drop and we wont be able to sell our properties'

I am opposing NLR5 on the grounds of once again the traffic congestion on the A129. Once again the schools will be overcrowded. We have no Facilities on this side pf Rayleigh ie doctors, dentists, vets etc. If we need any of these facilities Rayleigh can be a nightmare to reach with the Amount of traffic already. With the proposed 550 new houses plus there cars travelling will be diabolical.

I am opposing options E13 E14 E15 E16 and E17. Putting an industrial site on either side of the A129 will cause chaos with more traffic. Lorries turning onto an already busy road. The environment will be affected by the extra lorries and traffic, backing on to a school.

I feel that there must be better options for all the proposed proposals ie E18 is well away from our houses and could accommodate the industrial Estate and the gypsies with better access to the A127 and A1245.

I am extremely annoyed that these planning applications were not widely advertised giving the local residents time to digest what the full impact Would be. It seems that this whole thing was so low key that it seems that the council wanted to push these plans through without the local rate Payers knowledge. I in tact only heard about a meeting an hour before it started and that was by word of mouth.

As a long term resident in Rayleigh, I am writing to lodge a complaint and opposition to the referenced proposals.

The complaint is due to the lack of public consultation which has taken place. As all residents will be affected by these plans, due to increased congestion, increased crime rate etc..., all residents in Rayleigh should be consulted. We learned of this through word of mouth.

The opposition is that such a housing development will further hamper traffic flow in the area. Rayleigh is already a crowded town, difficult to maneovre around, and more residents, housing and cars will compound these problems.

Also, these proposals would have a negative ecological effect to the area.

I also oppose the proposed development of new gypsy / traveller sites., We already have a site on the old Chelmsford Road, and there was a noticeable increase in crime when this opened. By considering additional sites or spaces on the doorstep of a town is an injustice against the town residents.

By considering these proposals, you are not considering the current residents who pay the taxes, that pay your wages.

I object to housing options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NLR5 because they will -

cause an unnecessary loss of agricultural land
will increase traffic, in an already traffic blackspot
will create a green belt boundary that cannot be defended in the future
will encourage a merging of Rayleigh and Rawreth, creating a sprawl of housing.

I strongly object to traveller options GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7 as they will introduce unwelcome elements to a currently stable environment.

I would like to raise my objection to the council's housing options NLR1, NLR2, NLR3, NLR4 and NRL5 because they will:

cause an unnecessary loss of agricultural land,
will increase traffic,
will create a green belt boundary that can't be defended in future and encourage a merging between Rayleigh and Rawreth.

I also object to traveller sites and employment - options GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7.

I trust you will take my obections into consideration

Having attended a meeting on the subject, I object to housing options NLR1 NLR2 NLR3 NLR4 & NLR5 as they will :

cause an unnecessary loss of agricultural land
will increase traffic, without major improvements to infrastructure
will create a green belt boundary that cannot be defended in future
will encourage a merging of Rawreth and Rayleigh


I strongly object to traveller options GT1 GT2 GT3 & GT7

I wish to object to the proposed site for Travellers near Swallow Aquatics in Rayleigh.

I also wish to object to the proposal of building 550 new homes on the London Road, my son currently attends Our Lady Ransom Pre-School and another 550 homes would put more pressure on the local roads, schools and public services.

Ref: NLR1 - NLR5. GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT7

We appose any of the above developments on the grounds of increase in traffic, use of greenbelt land, unnecessary loss of agricultural land. We further object to any further increase in travellers sites within our area and any new employment land (industrial units). Please be aware there is a forth coming general election and should you wish to proceed with these proposals, then you will undoubtedly not be getting our vote. Furthermore we object to your underhand way of passing these applications without proper consultations with the general public.

The proposed traveller site between Our Lady of Ransom Primary School and Swallows Nursery is not an appropriate place.

When the land was cleared a bonfire was started which closed the school swimming pool because of the ash and caused a number of children to suffer asthma attacks. You could not prevent this from happening again causing the children at the school to be at risk from bad health and safety practices.

It also dangerous to have a opening on to such a busy fast road that will be obscured by the trees before the entrance.

RE: Proposed building of 770 new houses, sites for Gypsies between Rawreth Lane and London Road, and possibly a Tesco

We are writing to strongly protest about the above captioned. Despite there being a 'public consultation' on the above since 17th March 2010, it was purely by chance and word of mouth from neighbours that we have been made aware of this.

We have a fundamental problem with the fact that most of the local community are still unaware of this proposal which will severely impact all those who live in the Rayleigh area. We do think that Rochford District Council has a duty to disclose something as meaningful as this to their tax paying households and indeed could easily have mailshot us all as they have all our addresses! At the very least this proposal could have been laminated and tied to lampposts around the area, if it were a question of cost!

We feel as residents in Rayleigh that our Council has severely let us down by even thinking it possible that we would wish or consent to a traveller camp within or anywhere near us. Our crime rate with go through the roof, our beautiful town will no longer be so, we will be unable to move (as who would want by choice to live near that). Many people have said they will no longer pay their council tax should this go ahead, if its good enough for the traveller community it will be good enough for us. Unfortunately there is a stigma attached to these folk, who do nothing but cause havoc and upset wherever they settle and still do nothing to change that stigma. If these people were travellers, please explain why they need pre-fab homes.

The congestion in Rayleigh High Street and access via London and Crown Hills is currently a nightmare. Even out of rush hour it has taken more than 30 minutes to drive from homes past the station and down to the Weir! What can you be thinking by introducing another 770 houses to this already crowded area? On the basis that each home will have an average of 2 cars and 2 children, how will our infrastructure - roads and schools - cope with this? It is quite impossible and should not be allowed consent.

Our family wish to formally state our disagreement with these plans and have copied this email to our local MP.

Please keep me updated of any news/meetings on this subject.

I am writing to object to the proposal to place a travellers site on London Road, Rayleigh GT3. Unfortunately the reputation of travellers is such that we do not want a site close to our houses located off the London Road. If this site was given the go ahead, there would be nothing to stop it expanding out of control into the adjoining fields and I do not have confidence that Rochford District Council could stop this happening, no more than other councils have been able to prevent it. London Road is already a heavily congested route into Rayleigh and a travellers site will only add to this congestion. It will be an eyesore and not a good 'first impression' for anyone visiting Rayleigh. In my opinion, GT6 would be a much better option as the site would have the capacity to support the full allocation required. It would give the travellers good access to major routes and allow them their own community, which is what they appear to prefer.

I do not want London Road to become another Crays Hill!

I am writing to express my objection to the proposed housing development in West Rayleigh/Rawreth NLR 1-5 and proposed Traveller sites GT 1,2,3,7.



My family moved to Rayleigh 30 years ago and at that time we lived very close to the edge of the town surrounded by open fields. It was a small friendly town, which was why we chose it. Over the years it has grown to be a large, busy, noisy, congested and increasingly intimidating place.



Where once London Road was a quiet road it is now extremely busy and very noisy day and night, and trying to pull out of our road onto it is nigh on impossible at certain times of the day. Traffic noise keeps us awake many nights as it is.



The High Street car parks are overrun and trying to get doctors/dentist appointments is very difficult. Public Transport is crowded at peak times.Youths have nothing to do and hang around in ever increasing size gangs in the town centre and in chidren's parks. Adding more people to the same resources without massively upgrading the infrastructure will make all of these problems worse.



It can take over half an hour to get from the Carpenter's Arms roundabout up to the High Street on a normal weekday along London Road and when incidents occur on the A127 it comes to a virtual standstill. Adding more houses to this area, as well as businesses, is a ridiculous idea as the road simply cannot cope with any more traffic. 770 houses could, if each house has 2 cars, mean an extra 1400-1500 cars needing to use the road daily and all the business traffic would be on top of this .



There are too many people and cars in the area already. This is not the place to put a major housing development, industrial site or Traveller camp. We the residents who know the area well can all see this would be a disaster and have a very negative impact on our lives.



Please keep me informed of future decisions relating to these issues.

RE: Proposed building of 770 new houses, sites for Travellers between Rawreth Lane and London Road, and possibly a Tesco on London Road.

I am writing to strongly protest about the above captioned. Despite there being a 'public consultation' on the above since 17th March 2010, it was purely by chance and word of mouth from neighbours that I have been made aware of this.

I have a fundamental problem with the fact that most of the local community are still unaware of this proposal which will severely impact all those who live in the Rayleigh area. I do think that Rochford District Council has a duty to disclose something as meaningful as this to their tax paying households and indeed could easily have mailshot us all as they have all our addresses! At the very least this proposal could have been laminated and tied to lampposts around the area, if it were a question of cost!




I feel as residents in Rayleigh that our Council has severely let us down by even thinking it possible that we would wish or consent to a travellers site within or anywhere near us.

I also object the 770 homes that have been proposed, schools are full to capacity at present, roads are congested, children's after school clubs are full already with very long waiting lists, trains to London are already full to capasity, how will Rayleigh as a community cope with the pressures of all these homes being built and this Travellers site will bring?

The congestion in Rayleigh High Street and access via London and Crown Hills is currently a nightmare. Even out of rush hour it can take more than 30 minutes to drive from homes past the station to Rayleigh Weir! What can you be thinking by introducing another 770 houses to this already crowded area? On the basis that each home will have an average of 2 cars and 2 children, how will our infrastructure - roads and schools - cope with this? It is quite impossible and should not be allowed consent.

I wish to formally state my disagreement and STRONGLY APPOSE all these plans.

Please keep me updated of any news/meetings on this subject.

Firstly I am utterly disgusted in the way that my local council and government representative have gone about this issue.
The first that myself and family heard about this issue was through friends only a day ago. We reside on a beautiful estate where we have paid lots of money for our home very very close to where this site will be.
I can state with personal knowledge that if this site goes ahead, the crime rate for the area will escalate dramatically. This will create much animosity within our community, towards the travellers and local council.
Why is it when the council know what opposition will be met by any public consultation, they do NOT canvass the area for feedback and comments. It is because the decision has already been made and passed.
I oppose this site with all of my and families hearts and hope to God that the council do NOT allow this to go ahead.
I cannot express my sadness and feeling of utter distrust towards the local council enough in an e-mail.
If anyone has the decency to contact me and wish to meet in person, I would be more than happy to speak, I am sure that I have many questions that need answering. All of which are echoed by our hard working community.

RE: Proposed building of 770 new houses, sites for Gypsies between Rawreth Lane and London Road, and possibly a Tesco We are writing to strongly protest about the above captioned. Despite there being a 'public consultation' on the above since 17th March 2010, it was purely by chance and word of mouth from neighbours that we have been made aware of this. We have a fundamental problem with the fact that most of the local community are still unaware of this proposal which will severely impact all those who live in the Rayleigh area. We do think that Rochford District Council has a duty to disclose something as meaningful as this to their tax paying households and indeed could easily have mailshot us all as they have all our addresses! At the very least this proposal could have been laminated and tied to lampposts around the area, if it were a question of cost!


We feel as residents in Rayleigh that our Council has severley let us down by even thinking it possible that we would wish or consent to a traveller camp within or anywhere near us. Our crime rate with go through the roof, our beautiful town will no longer be so, we will be unable to move (as who would want by choice to live near that). Many people have said they will no longer pay their council tax should this go ahead, if its good enough for the traveller community it will be good enough for us. Unfortunately there is a stigma attached to these folk, who do nothing but cause havoc and upset wherever they settle and still do nothing to change that stigma. If these people were travellers, please explain why they need pre-fab homes.
The congestion in Rayleigh High Street and access via London and Crown Hills is currently a nightmare. Even out of rush hour it has taken more than 30 minutes to drive from homes past the station and down to the Weir! What can you be thinking by introducing another 770 houses to this already crowded area? On the basis that each home will have an average of
2 cars and 2 children, how will our infrasstructure - roads and schools - cope with this? It is quite impossible and should not be allowed consent. Our family wish to formally state our disagreement with these plans and have copied this email to our local MP.
Please keep me updated of any news/meetings on this subject.

RE: Proposed building of 770 new houses, sites for Gypsies between Rawreth Lane and London Road, and possibly a Tesco

We are writing to strongly protest about the above captioned. Despite there being a 'public consultation' on the above since 17th March 2010, it was purely by chance and word of mouth from neighbours that we have been made aware of this.

We have a fundamental problem with the fact that most of the local community are still unaware of this proposal which will severely impact all those who live in the Rayleigh area. We do think that Rochford District Council has a duty to disclose something as meaningful as this to their tax paying households and indeed could easily have mailshot us all as they have all our addresses! At the very least this proposal could have been laminated and tied to lampposts around the area, if it were a question of cost!




We feel as residents in Rayleigh that our Council has severley let us down by even thinking it possible that we would wish or consent to a traveller camp within or anywhere near us. Our crime rate with go through the roof, our beautiful town will no longer be so, we will be unable to move (as who would want by choice to live near that). Many people have said they will no longer pay their council tax should this go ahead, if its good enough for the traveller community it will be good enough for us. Unfortunately there is a stigma attached to these folk, who do nothing but cause havoc and upset wherever they settle and still do nothing to change that stigma. If these people were travellers, please explain why they need pre-fab homes.

The congestion in Rayleigh High Street and access via London and Crown Hills is currently a nightmare. Even out of rush hour it has taken more than 30 minutes to drive from homes past the station and down to the Weir! What can you be thinking by introducing another 770 houses to this already crowded area? On the basis that each home will have an average of 2 cars and 2 children, how will our infrasstructure - roads and schools - cope with this? It is quite impossible and should not be allowed consent.

Our family wish to formally state our disagreement with these plans and have copied this email to our local MP.

Please keep me updated of any news/meetings on this subject.