Delivering Infrastructure

I strongly object to the proposal of houses being built on the land to the North of Malvern Road and Harrogate Drive. The infrastructure in this area would not support additional houses, access via the main road would cause even further congestion at busy times, and the homes in this area would be greatly affected by any development.

I am writing to express my views on the above document, and more specifically the Land Availability Assessment concerning the Great Wakering area.

I have noted that much of the farmland and fields surrounding the area are being considered for new development. While I fully appreciate the need for housing in the current crisis, I do disagree with Rochford District Council considering certain areas of land available for development. The land I am referring to is marked on your Land Availability Assessment as CFS057, CFS097, CFS034 and CFS056.

My concerns are as follows;
- Lack of existing or plans for future infrastructure proportionate to the scale of current and suggested development. Wakering Medical Centre is already not able to register all residents of the Wakering and Barling areas as patients. A lack of shops / stores means already car traffic on the roads around the village is high as most are reliant on cars to reach amenities. With further residential dwellings this will be worse.

- Destruction of wildlife areas/habitats. Much of the land being assessed, including the lakes East of Star Lane and the surrounding fields is a highly valued wildlife reserve that is regularly visited and enjoyed by the local community. It would be a great shame to destroy the habitat of wildlife residing in this area for the sake of residential dwellings but also to deprive current residents of an open space, with clean air, to enjoy the surrounding countryside.

- Minimal green belt land separating Shoeburyness and Great Wakering. Any development to the South or to the West of Southend Road, Alexandra Road, and Poynters Lane will mean Great Wakering will become near continuous with Shoeburyness. This is already the case where Star Lane and Poynters Lane meet where one side of the road is Great Wakering and the other is North Shoebury. And this also currently occurs along Wakering Road in Shoeburyness, just before it meets Poynters Lane where there are houses that have a Shoeburyness address literally next door to a house whose address is Great Wakering. Any further development between the two will take away from the identity of the village and also eliminate any visible separation of the two Council's districts.

- Financial hardship to existing residents. Many existing residents own mortgaged property whose value has been boosted by the desirable countryside, aesthetic views and rural setting. Development in certain areas to disrupt this could cause those in these areas with mortgaged property to experience financial hardship due to their property's value decreasing.

Please do not take offence at my suggestions, I am not a council planner myself and I am grateful for the work Rochford District Council do for our community. I do however feel disappointed that beautiful rural areas are being considered for development when there are so many unoccupied and even derelict commercial properties that could be repurposed as residential dwellings with minimal destruction of countryside and minimal requirements for improved infrastructure. Examples I am aware of include; the vast expanse of land on Eastern Esplanade in Southend next door to the Premier Inn Hotel, the disused car park behind the Foresters Arms just off Marine Esplanade in Southend, the land behind the BP/SPAR petrol garage at Toomey Motor Village, the disused land South of Ashingdon Youth Football ground and North of the new Airport Business Park development just off of Cherry Orchard Lane, to name a few.

I can assure you that my concerns are echoed by the vast proportion of the residents of Great Wakering and the surrounding area and I would appreciate it that our concerns are listened to and considered when planning and future development in our community.

I wish to protest at the housing developments proposed for land to the west of Rayleigh. I moved into Danbury Road in 1975 & since then hundreds of houses have been built without any improvement to the roads - London Road & Rawreth Lane - which are jammed solid every day between 8am & 9am and between 5 pm & 7 pm. We have lost 1 senior school(Park) & gained 1 primary school with 1 primary school being moved from Rawreth. All the schools are full to capacity. There are only, I believe, 2 doctor's surgeries both of which are over subscribed.

Before any more homes are built something needs to be done about the infra structure & Community facilities in the area.

I would like to register my objections in the strongest possible terms to any proposed development of the land to the north of Malvern Road, Harrogate Drive and the childrens play area/ walk through to Beckney Woods Ref. CFS023/COL38 on the Land Assessment 2017- Appendix B.

This land is and has always been designated Green Belt. The Governments policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework document paragraphs 79 to 92 clearly sets out the responsibilities of a local planning authority.

Paragraph 89 states " A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt", it goes on to list six exceptions, one of which is to provide limited affordable housing for local needs, which does not apply in this case.

I am concerned that this particular exception may have been used by the Council and the developers to falsely manipulate the system in order to gain planning for the recent development of Houses in nearby Hall Road Rochford,

The majority of houses built there, could no way be classified as affordable housing they are high value detached properties, there are of course some affordable housing most of which have been sold to Newham Council to rehouse their overflow of homeless tenants, again not providing housing for local community needs.

Also as far as the Hall Road development is concerned , the initial plans were to include the provision of a doctor's surgery and a school which have not been built, putting extra pressure on the existing infrastructure.

If this further development were to go ahead it would increase the population of Hockley considerably. The infrastructure is already at breaking point, the situation having not been helped by the addition of the Hall Road development.

The schools are already full, it takes forever to get a doctor's appointment and the roads in and out of Hockley are grid locked at peak times, they certainly could not cope with an additional 1000 cars in the area.

Vehicular access to the proposed site could only be through residential areas serviced by single track roads, totally unsuitable for any planned increase in traffic.

The proposed site is also surrounded by areas of high risk of surface water flooding, any increased development is likely to increase that risk to homes in the area.

This land is therefore totally unsuitable for development for the reasons I have stated, and I will strongly object to any future planning applications.

It was good to meet you on Monday at the Rayleigh W.I. Hall, but I was disturbed that there were no boards outside the hall advertising what was going on inside. Indeed, I would have known nothing of this report if a neighbour had not alerted me, and yet I see there have already been consultations going on.

I now realise that the infrastructure to the Hall Road Estate has been circumvented by the builders - this is dreadful! So the school I had heard about being built there isn't going to happen? You were taking no notes on Monday that I could see, are all the comments being made going to be relayed: there was a lot of opposition that I heard.

Mr. Ward, the Rayleigh Town Councillor present was reassuring us that nothing was going to happen for years - two or three years! What a short time, and people are only just being told.

I feel it just isn't good enough, living in a semi-rural area which is about to alter irreparably and knowing nothing from all the Councils we elected. I did try to get onto that document for comment again, but I just find it very difficult. I shall have to write another letter.

It was a good thing you were there on Monday, almost the only representative from Rochford Council. I hope you have a very good verbal memory to take back to Rochford all the concerns you were hearing.

I would first like to say I don't to believe in consultations as they do not represents public opinion due to the lack of response from residents. This is mainly caused by making the online method too complicated with too many questions. The drop in presentation that were provided by RDC were pathetic with just two maps showing the areas put up for development. Is this the best RDC can do?
I would like to object to building any more homes on green belt land that joins existing villages an towns in Rochford District. The current building programme that runs until 2025 is already causing serious traffic jams on the existing roads with the resulting air pollution, even though building work has only just started. It has been stated that drivers in our area spend 30 hours per year in rush hour jams, the highest in our region. The second highest being Chelmsford at 23 hours per year.
I believe the existing infrastructure has taken on too much already and not just roads but services like electrics, gas, water, sewers and the health system, including the hospital, GP surgeries and dentists. RDC have indicated that they will include additional infrastructure this time but they have a very poor record on this so far, as the current increase in housing has produced practically none at all. I realise the reason for this is that additional housing comes from RDC and the infrastructure from Essex County Council (ECC) who provide the funds but so far this has not happened, as there aren't any.
We do need additional homes for our children to buy but unfortunately most are unaffordable and many end up being used to relocate people from London councils to relatively cheaper homes in our area. We also need retirement home developments in our area that would free up existing larger homes.
We live on a peninsular surrounded on three side by water, if we really have to have an additional 7,500 new houses in our district, I believe a new Garden Village could be located near South Fambridge and served by a new road from the north connecting to the B1012 would be the best solution. This road could cross the River Crouch near Fambridge linking to North Fambridge railway station.
If RDC allow more homes to be built adjacent to the existing B1013 and all the other already clogged up roads in our area, it will make the lives of our residents a misery and I believe they will not put up with it any more.

I am writing to express my concern over the number of new houses that are being planned on Rawreth Lane / Lubbards Farm.

The traffic along Rawreth Lane has already increased substantially with the houses on the old Park School development, and when Watery Lane is closed this is just a nightmare - even outside of rush hour traffic.

The greenery along Rawreth Lane is part of the reason I moved to the area (Downhall Park Way) and it is so nice that this hasn't been overdeveloped like many other areas.

I fail to see how there is a need to build so many new houses, I see it as greedy landowners wanting to sell up and make some money.

The infrastructure of the area is not big enough to cope with this massive increase in population and vehicles.

I strongly oppose this as I suspect many of my neighbours will do too.

I am appalled at the prospect of even more house being built in Hullbridge. You only have to venture onto the roads in the rush hour to realise how absurd this proposal is. The infrastructure isn't there to accommodate more homes. I therefore want to register my objections regarding these proposals.

I wish to complain about the proposed new housing developments CFS 057 CFC 153 CFS 065 CFS070
CFS 011 on the grounds of back of infrastructure.

In regards to the strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment, I would like to state the below points, why land with reference number GF03, CFSO11, CFSO65, CFSO70, CFSO56, CFSO57, CFSO34, CFSO97, and GFO3 - Great Wakering, should not be developed:

1. Infestation of rats throughout the local area. This has happened in the past on building sites in the village such as Havengore close and Star Lane.

2.Massive impact on wildlife and nature throughout the whole area.

3.The local junior school is full to capacity and seniors school students have to travel to Rochford. Therefore, this would mean excessive amounts of buses and slow traffic in rush hour plus excessive children out in poor lit areas.

4.All areas of farmland are on top quality A grade soil. We will be required to produce our own crops now we are leaving the EU.

5.Local doctors and dentists surgeries are full to capacity already, so additional housing will cause unacceptable issues.

6.We do not have sufficient shops within the area to sustain more housing.

7.There is only one zebra crossing in the village therefore additional housing will impact on safety.

8.All areas are within a flood zone. Local residents home insurance prices reflect this and it is a high risk to build in such areas with the UKs current flooding issues.

9.All entrance roads to Great Wakering are single-track roads. Most are liable to flooding, do not have street lights are prone to slow moving farm traffic. There are already traffic issues in rush hour or school times and new housing will add enormous pressure to this current problem.

10.The vast majority of new residents would be required to travel out of the local area for work. Already Trains, A127,A13 and A130 plus local roads are at maximum capacity in morning and evenings, this would undoubtedly cause major issues for emergency services to attend if required.

11.Local NHS services are already stretched beyond workable capacity.

12.Local post office is stretched beyond capacity.

13.There are no local leisure facilities despite the council stating there is.

14.There are also parking concerns within the village with the current amount of cars and issues with the amount of delivery drivers.

15.There is no regular public transport services. You are unable to walk to Shoeburyness station. The Parking at Shoeburyness station is at max capacity therefore there is no infrastructure for more houses.

In regards to the strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment, I would like to state the below points, why land with reference number GF03, CFSO34, CFSO11, CFSO65,CFSO70, CFSO56, CFSO57, and CFSO97 - Great Wakering, should not be developed:

1. Infestation of rats throughout the local area. This has happened in the past on building sites in the village such as Havengore close and Star Lane.

2.Massive impact on wildlife and nature throughout the whole area.

3.The local junior school is full to capacity and seniors school students have to travel to Rochford. Therefore, this would mean excessive amounts of buses and slow traffic in rush hour plus excessive children out in poor lit areas.

4.All areas of farmland are on top quality A grade soil. We will be required to produce our own crops now we are leaving the EU.

5.Local doctors and dentists surgeries are full to capacity already, so additional housing will cause unacceptable issues.

6.We do not have sufficient shops within the area to sustain more housing.

7.There is only one zebra crossing in the village therefore additional housing will impact on safety.

8.All areas are within a flood zone. Local residents home insurance prices reflect this and it is a high risk to build in such areas with the UKs current flooding issues.

9.All entrance roads to Great Wakering are single-track roads. Most are liable to flooding, do not have street lights are prone to slow moving farm traffic. There are already traffic issues in rush hour or school times and new housing will add enormous pressure to this current problem.

10.The vast majority of new residents would be required to travel out of the local area for work. Already Trains, A127,A13 and A130 plus local roads are at maximum capacity in morning and evenings, this would undoubtedly cause major issues for emergency services to attend if required.

11.Local NHS services are already stretched beyond workable capacity.

12.Local post office is stretched beyond capacity.

13.There are no local leisure facilities despite the council stating there is.

14.There are also parking concerns within the village with the current amount of cars and issues with the amount of delivery drivers.

15.There is no regular public transport services. You are unable to walk to Shoeburyness station. The Parking at Shoeburyness station is at max capacity therefore there is no infrastructure for more houses.

In regards to the strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment, I would like to state the below points, why land with reference number GF03- Great Wakering, should not be developed:

1. Infestation of rats throughout the local area. This has happened in the past on building sites in the village such as Havengore close and Star Lane.

2.Massive impact on wildlife and nature throughout the whole area.

3.The local junior school is full to capacity and seniors school students have to travel to Rochford. Therefore, this would mean excessive amounts of buses and slow traffic in rush hour plus excessive children out in poor lit areas.

4.All areas of farmland are on top quality A grade soil. We will be required to produce our own crops now we are leaving the EU.

5.Local doctors and dentists surgeries are full to capacity already, so additional housing will cause unacceptable issues.

6.We do not have sufficient shops within the area to sustain more housing.

7.There is only one zebra crossing in the village therefore additional housing will impact on safety.

8.All areas are within a flood zone. Local residents home insurance prices reflect this and it is a high risk to build in such areas with the UKs current flooding issues.

9.All entrance roads to Great Wakering are single-track roads. Most are liable to flooding, do not have street lights are prone to slow moving farm traffic. There are already traffic issues in rush hour or school times and new housing will add enormous pressure to this current problem.

10.The vast majority of new residents would be required to travel out of the local area for work. Already Trains, A127,A13 and A130 plus local roads are at maximum capacity in morning and evenings, this would undoubtedly cause major issues for emergency services to attend if required.

11.Local NHS services are already stretched beyond workable capacity.

12.Local post office is stretched beyond capacity.

13.There are no local leisure facilities despite the council stating there is.

14.There are also parking concerns within the village with the current amount of cars and issues with the amount of delivery drivers.

15.There is no regular public transport services. You are unable to walk to Shoeburyness station. The Parking at Shoeburyness station is at max capacity therefore there is no infrastructure for more houses.

In regards to the strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment, I would like to state the below points, why land with reference number GF03, CFSO11, CFSO65, CFSO57, CFSO34, CFSO56, and Land CFSO70 - Great Wakering, should not be developed:

1. Infestation of rats throughout the local area. This has happened in the past on building sites in the village such as Havengore close and Star Lane.

2.Massive impact on wildlife and nature throughout the whole area.

3.The local junior school is full to capacity and seniors school students have to travel to Rochford. Therefore, this would mean excessive amounts of buses and slow traffic in rush hour plus excessive children out in poor lit areas.

4.All areas of farmland are on top quality A grade soil. We will be required to produce our own crops now we are leaving the EU.

5.Local doctors and dentists surgeries are full to capacity already, so additional housing will cause unacceptable issues.

6.We do not have sufficient shops within the area to sustain more housing.

7.There is only one zebra crossing in the village therefore additional housing will impact on safety.

8.All areas are within a flood zone. Local residents home insurance prices reflect this and it is a high risk to build in such areas with the UKs current flooding issues.

9.All entrance roads to Great Wakering are single-track roads. Most are liable to flooding, do not have street lights are prone to slow moving farm traffic. There are already traffic issues in rush hour or school times and new housing will add enormous pressure to this current problem.

10.The vast majority of new residents would be required to travel out of the local area for work. Already Trains, A127,A13 and A130 plus local roads are at maximum capacity in morning and evenings, this would undoubtedly cause major issues for emergency services to attend if required.

11.Local NHS services are already stretched beyond workable capacity.

12.Local post office is stretched beyond capacity.

13.There are no local leisure facilities despite the council stating there is.

14.There are also parking concerns within the village with the current amount of cars and issues with the amount of delivery drivers.

15.There is no regular public transport services. You are unable to walk to Shoeburyness station. The Parking at Shoeburyness station is at max capacity therefore there is no infrastructure for more houses.

I am writing this email to express my concern about the proposed New Local plan and in particular CFS074 (adjoining Mount Bovers Lane).

This particular site is not only of outstanding beauty and enjoyed by many of the local people it would significantly add to the already congested roads in the immediate area (eg Potash roundabout and Spar roundabout) during peak travel times.

Overall the number of different sites/houses being proposed is very concerning as I understand there are no plans to provide additional roads and infrastructure. Therefore I would urge the council to reduce their overall target to something that is more sustainable to the area.

Thank you for your consideration.

This planning is for greed and to hit unrealistic stats and not good for the community or the surrounding area. I moved here because this village isn't over developed and is in keeping of a rural area. Building more housing will start a downward spiral of the area and community. we are already inundated with the proposed housing in the surrounding area's and without the sufficient road upgrades and better water pressure and not forget the drainage problem we have every year in watery lane. I strongly disagree and object to this planning here and the surrounding area. You have to build a better network of roads without bottle necks better water supply as well as eco-friendly drainage and sewerage before even attempting to build more housing just so you can hit government targets which are unrealistic in the real world. Build for the future before expanding otherwise your always on your back foot and trying to catch up with traffic jams domestic unrest etc. Use some common sense invest in local people and better infrastructure before flooding the area with more people, cars and pollution.

I am writing to confirm my objection to the new local plan and the 12 Houses proposed to be built on the Paddocks near to Christmas Tree Crescent in Hawkwell. This will not only visually spoil the current development but also the original planning permission was specific for the use of these paddock as as not for building residential properties on. This was one of the reasons I moved to the developement because it was considered in its layout. This would alone make me consider moving away from the area as it is clearly becoming over developed around Hockley and Rockford with no consideration to the increased traffic.

There needs to be consideration for traffic calming measures at the same time on Clements Hall Way as drivers to and from the leisure centre accelerate at speeds that will eventually cause an accident. prevention is better than dealing with the after effects so I hope this is considered.

Should this get through to planning application I will be objecting to this too on the grounds of over development.

I would be happy to discuss this issue with you further.

I am objecting to the proposals for the additional 7,500 homes to be built in the Hockley/Hawkwell area. The infrastructure is not there to support such a development.

1 Assuming each new home has 2 cars that means a further 15,000 cars on our already over-crowded narrow roads. Congestion is now a an every day occurrence and not just at "rush hour". More cars, more vans, more lorries and more accidents. Will this mean more car parking facilities, and what will that cost?

2 Will there be additional public transport - no I don't suppose there will. At the moment in Hawkwell we only have the no; 8 bus which is few and far between and sometimes doesn't come along at all.

3 Will there be any additional doctors surgeries (or will it be like the Hall Road development and deemed not necessary)?

4 Hardly any shops, except for funeral directors and coffee shops. Travel to Rayleigh or Southend very difficult unless you drive (see
2 above!).

If I was a councillor and lived in Chelmsford or Colchester I probably wouldn't be concerned about any decisions I make which wouldd impact on the residents in the south of the county as it will not affect my life. But if you are a councillor in Rochford then you should be more concerned for your residents and fight for what is best for them, after all they voted for you.

I am emailing in order to raise an objection to the proposed development of land (reference number CFS070) in Great Wakering.
I believe that this land is unsuitable for development for the following reasons;
* Development will lead to loss of green belt land
* Substantial lose of wildlife habitat
* Insufficient sewage, drainage and water clearance which increases risk of flooding
* Poor public transportation links
* Lack of public footpaths in Poynters lane
* Inadequate road infrastructure such as Poynters lane which is totally unsuitable for the increase in traffic

I am emailing in order to raise an objection to the proposed development of land (reference number CFS070) in Great Wakering.
I believe that this land is unsuitable for development for the following reasons;
* Development will lead to loss of green belt land
* Substantial lose of wildlife habitat
* Insufficient sewage, drainage and water clearance which increases risk of flooding
* Poor public transportation links
* Lack of public footpaths in Poynters lane
* Inadequate road infrastructure such as Poynters lane which is totally unsuitable for the increase in traffic

I am emailing in order to raise an objection to the proposed development of land (reference number CFS070) in Great Wakering.
I believe that this land is unsuitable for development for the following reasons;
* Development will lead to loss of green belt land
* Substantial lose of wildlife habitat
* Insufficient sewage, drainage and water clearance which increases risk of flooding
* Poor public transportation links
* Lack of public footpaths in Poynters lane
* Inadequate road infrastructure such as Poynters lane which is totally unsuitable for the increase in traffic

and I live in Hockley. I can be contacted on this email address. I would like to register my objection to any further 'piecemeal' building in the Rochford/Hockley/Rayleigh area. The roads have become intolerable and the general infrastructure simply cannot cope. The only option which should be considered is a completely new village/town with its own infrastructure including approach roads, station, doctors, schools, shops, etc. This is the only way to relieve the pressure on the existing settlements.

The infrastructure in Rochford is not suitable for any more housing developments. 60 residents have already voiced their opinion on this which is being ignored for the South Street developments.

During peak hours the traffic is at a stand still down South Street, Bradley Way, the roundabout at Whittinghams garage, Sutton Road and other areas. This is also before the development of 600 houses in a mini-town in Hall road shows any impact. Surely you can see we cannot take any more development. Most of these people are also being brought down from London and it is not a local housing problem. The roads are not built for this amount of traffic.

Air Quality

Because of the above traffic the fumes in our house peak during peak hours can be smelt. This is not good for people's health and also our house is covered in exhaust which has to be washed off regularly.

There are not doctors in the area to take more development - I have waited over two weeks to see my doctor. Again before the Hall Road Development kicks in.

Southend General has been on black alert for months and has cancelled all orthopaedic operations for over a year. How will they cope with all this development. The only way to see a dentist now in this area is to pay privately.

Even English Heritage is questioning your developments so why are you still going ahead with all these developments.

I write to register my objection to the use of the children's play area (Your Reference CFS023/COL38). Apart from its recognised use as a children's play area it is also a valuable walk through / short cut to Branksome Avenue and to Beckney Woods. This route is used daily basis and I use it regularly to access the woods and friends in Etheldore Avenue. Horse riders also use the route to when they exit the Beckney Woods. If this access was lost it would mean walking along Tonbridge Road, Orchard Avenue, Russet Way, Ash Way and Branksome Avenue to reach the woods. From a drainage perspective the green is at the top (high) part of the road. I live in the lower end of the road, at times of high rain we already see the drainage system is inadequate if we lost the drainage on the green as it is concreted over the situation will only get worse. The green is used by more than children, I have personally seen people enjoying the area using it to do their studies and revise. It is an asset to local people and would be a sad loss; as towns expand pockets of public green space become ever more valuable to residents and in short supply.
Looking at the larger building plan the area around Harrogate Drive. Unless public services are increased in line with any future development then our existing services will become overwhelmed. Doctor's appointments are already difficult to obtain placing more people on the register will only worsen the situation. When my children started their school career class sizes were no larger than 30 by the end the classes were larger. More houses more people, more children larger classes degraded education. I used to live in Rayleigh (my sister still does), and it is a good example of the effects of mass building in a town. Rather than bringing increased trade traffic congestion (traffic gridlock for parts of the day. Listen to local radio and you can hear how often Rayleigh is mentioned) reduces trade as it's easier to go out of town. I avoid going to or though Rayleigh if I can. It would be a disaster for Hockley if we followed the same route.

. Land between star lane and Alexandra road 180 dwellings.
I would like to strongly abject to this proposed building .This will back right on to the back of my garden, I bought this house because of all the beautiful open views from the back of my house. This was listed as a selling point when I bought the house on the estate agents description. I would like compensation for lack of view. So far a beautiful old willow tree has been destroyed apparently it did not have a C.P.O. on it, although I cant believe why not, it was not even in the way, its just blatant destruction. I was assured by a Taylor Wimpey employee that further planting will take place but a few old shrubs will not replace this beautiful tree. The other concerns are the wildlife that live in the field particularly the bats badgers, frogs, toads, newts that all live by the lakes not to mention the birds woodpeckers and hawks. Light pollution is another concern particularly for the bats that are common here.Also flooding is another risk with all this land concreted over the field proposed is often flooded but does soak it up eventually this will not happen when its built on Great Wakering has already flooded years ago There is also the more obvious concerns of the fact that the local doctors are full you cannot get and appointment the car park is always full. The primary school is full and there is no senior school( even though we have been promised one for years)the senior children have to go in by bus to other schools out of the area. There is only the local co-op and one small shop to serve the growing community. There has already been a lot of building in Great Wakering its a small village and cannot take these extra houses. THEY ARE NOT WANTED HERE BY MOST RESIDENTS.

We are writing to you today with serious concerns about the future housing development in Great Wakering and Shoeburyness.
Looking at Rochford District Council Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment 2017-Appendix B Map Q
if this land was built on you would be changing the face of this area ,community and wildlife forever and will change great Wakering from a village into a town.As it is it is near on impossible to get a doctors appointment with out waiting weeks ,School places are also extremely limited, the roads and infrastructure are weak at best so getting in and out of just southend alone is a nightmare ,parking would also be an issue these problems can not be solved already ,so increasing the population and building on all this land would only make all these problems worse ,The roads as they are are in a very poor condition and could not handle more traffic as you are aware we are forever under cut backs which is another reason why this building project would be a bad idea ,we also have poor public footpaths that are not kept up to a good standard and in some places there is no footpaths or transport to get you to parts of Shoeburyness ,and the impact on the wildlife alone would be devastating ,these have been open farm fields always and as residents who was born growing up in this area and playing in these areas would find it a tragic loss .The amount of land that has been built on over the years in shoeburyness and wakering has already taken large sums of the open fields we feel that if we lost these the feel of the village lifestyle would be gone forever and before long we would just be like southend ,I would also like to point out that most of the houses that are going to be built will not be sold to locals but to the London community that are selling there houses at a great profit then snapping up houses down here and simple out bidding the locals.

I am writing to you to strongly object to the planning application 17/00862/REM PP-06533180 dwellings of up to 180 houses between Star Lane and Alexander Road.
There are a number of reasons for my objection to this planning application, firstly I live with my family at 279 High Street Great Wakering therefore the proposed planning backs directly onto our back garden causing considerable upset to us, not only will we be losing our beautiful view of open fields (one of the reasons for buying our house in the first place) but also the massive amount of noise and mess that we will have to endure for a number of years whilst 180 dwellings are built. There will be massive detrimental disruption to all the wildlife that dwells on or around this proposed development including to wild birds, bats, newts (in the lakes) etc. Plus I believe our infrastructure and services I.e, schools , doctors, local shops and roads to name but a few things, our local junior schools are already over subscribed and we have no senior school in the nearby vicinity children having to get onto council provided buses into Ashingdon. We live opposite the local doctors and can already see how difficult it is to get an appointment and how busy they are without the proposed extra 180 potential familys moving in. As for local shops there are only 2 or 3 convenience shops in Great Wakering all extremely busy with limited parking spaces. And finally road infrastructure as within most of the Rochford borough the roads are already overly busy and within Great Wakering we have a very limited bus service so if the proposal goes ahead roads will at certain times I'm sure become grid locked. But lastly and I think most importantly most of the local people of Great Wakering do not want this building proposal to go ahead, Great Wakering is a small village with a nice community atmosphere we do not want this spoilt with over development.

I am writing to you to strongly object to the planning application 17/00862/REM PP-06533180 dwellings of up to 180 houses between Star Lane and Alexander Road.
There are a number of reasons for my objection to this planning application, firstly I live with my family at 279 High Street Great Wakering therefore the proposed planning backs directly onto our back garden causing considerable upset to us, not only will we be losing our beautiful view of open fields (one of the reasons for buying our house in the first place) but also the massive amount of noise and mess that we will have to endure for a number of years whilst 180 dwellings are built. There will be massive detrimental disruption to all the wildlife that dwells on or around this proposed development including to wild birds, bats, newts (in the lakes) etc. Plus I believe our infrastructure and services I.e, schools , doctors, local shops and roads to name but a few things, our local junior schools are already over subscribed and we have no senior school in the nearby vicinity children having to get onto council provided buses into Ashingdon. We live opposite the local doctors and can already see how difficult it is to get an appointment and how busy they are without the proposed extra 180 potential familys moving in. As for local shops there are only 2 or 3 convenience shops in Great Wakering all extremely busy with limited parking spaces. And finally road infrastructure as within most of the Rochford borough the roads are already overly busy and within Great Wakering we have a very limited bus service so if the proposal goes ahead roads will at certain times I'm sure become grid locked. But lastly and I think most importantly most of the local people of Great Wakering do not want this building proposal to go ahead, Great Wakering is a small village with a nice community atmosphere we do not want this spoilt with over development.

I would like to comment on the Issues and Options document as follows:

1) As Rayleigh is already at breaking point on the roads for most of the day, expanding it would be detrimental to the existing residents. Would it not be more beneficial to create a new town/village (or several), rather like the garden cities that have been hugely successful? This would enable you to create the roads/drainage/sewerage/open spaces that would compliment the housing that would be built and be able to sustain it. These could have their own character and be designed with people in mind. There could be areas for business, leisure, clubs, create cycle paths, space for allotments, and you could use renewable energy schemes throughout. This new area (s) would need to be somewhere where Rayleigh wasn't the only access to it. Building this type of scheme would reduce the increase in pollutants that would occur should any increase in building were to take place in Rayleigh. You must ensure that there is adequate greenbelt borders to stop urban sprawl. You also need to make available various entrance/exit routes to avoid bottlenecks and rat runs.

2) Any new houses built should have ample parking. New builds now days tend to build garages that are not big enough for a modern day car. You also seem to stick to the minimum of 2 parking spaces per dwelling, even when it is a 4-6 bedroom house. You then push parking onto the road network. This can be avoided if you implement rules into your documents.

3) Reduce the building of 4-6 bedroom houses. You only make an area exclusive when this is all you offer. The building companies favour this size house and only offer up 1-2 bedroom flats in their "affordable" range. What we need are 1, 2 & 3 bedroom houses for families (and your homeless department state that there are a shortage of 2 bedroom houses). The young CANNOT move out of the family home as the houses are NOT affordable for them, even with Government schemes. If they are lucky, they may be able to find somewhere miles away from their family and support networks. We need a mix of house sizes and this should be enforceable.

4) Many building companies create "boxes" that are fairly generic. We need to have houses that have character, otherwise we will be looking back and comparing what we are being given now like we do with the concrete monstrosities of the 1970's building estates.

5) The infrastructure of Rayleigh will be unable to cope with the amount of housing that you are obliged to provide. The road networks are almost at collapse, many with poor surfaces and pot holes (the criteria to repair them being amended all the time to the detriment of the road users). Who thought it was correct to cover a concrete road with tarmac? We now have roads that have both surfaces, the tarmac reducing all the time from the concrete (which does not adhere well together). Building in Rayleigh means that more traffic will pass through (or try to). Maybe you should be considering building a ring road around Rayleigh or another road that will link the A1245 to Hullbridge? More houses means more people, meaning that we will need more school places to be provided from nursery to 6th Form. How will this be achieved? What about GP's? We cannot get an appointment when we are ill now. More people on the Doctors list means longer waiting times. I suppose that eventually, people will in fact die from waiting to see their GP. That will reduce the population in Rayleigh!!! Cynical maybe. We need investment into GP's or Medical/Heath Centres, Schools, etc.

6)We need areas of provision for our residents who become homeless and we also need to provide smaller accommodation especially for our elderly residents who wish to downsize. There is a shortage of these type of properties. By having these available, the elderly can release their bigger houses into the market (reducing the need to build large houses) and move into these specially adapted dwellings. You would need a covenant on them to stop any of them being extended, and be purely for the "over 60's/70's etc.

7) Our car parks do not have the capacity now for residents at busy periods. how will they cope when there are thousands more houses?

8) The recycling centre in Castle Road cannot cope now so how will it be able to provide a service with even more households using it? It opens too late for people to use it on their way to work and it closes several times during the day in order to change over containers, thus causing long, road blocking queues (and pollution).

9) I noticed that our bordering Councils may not be able to meet their requirements and may request that some of their need be taken on by their neighbours. WE CANNOT take on the housing quotas for Southend and Castle Point. We have our own problems. We can also NOT be able to provide even more sites for travellers, we have several illegal sites now. We do not want another Crays Hill! If we compare the needs of these site residents, wanting to keep their expanding communities together, we must ask why they have not settled like the rest? My children cannot buy in Rayleigh. One has had to go to Basildon, the others are at home with no chance of affording to rent, never mind buy. We are all people. Why be treated differently? Could you provide my family somewhere they can live near me? No! But this is a requirement for other communities, which is discrimination.

Dear Sirs/Madam
I write with much concern over the proposed New Local Plan for up to 7500 houses in this area! I believe the building that is currently going on in this area is far greater than the infrastructure can cope with!
I realise there is a need for more housing but with some of the affordable housing being around £350,000 how is this going to help our young people? If affordable housing is necessary why are houses worth up to a million pounds being built in this area particularly in Hall Road? I also believe that many of the houses being built in Hall Road are for a London Borough which I find completely unacceptable as we are grinding to a halt locally if this is so why are we committing to other boroughs? Surely common sense tells us that with all the traffic jams and problems in the area at the moment we cannot carry on building at this rate and also house people from London Boroughs! I believe the large building projects should be taken away from the South East altogether! This area of the country is simply FULL UP!!
We also have the huge industrial estate being built at the airport at the moment and goodness only knows how much extra traffic that will bring into the area aside from the delivery lorries which this site will bring there will be thousands of workers and customers! New jobs to the area you say - well that is if we can actually drive on our roads to reach it - perhaps drones are the answer!!!
If you happen to live in this area you will be aware of the chaos that is caused by even the refuge collections every week! Simply vans delivering to the local businesses in Hockley, which cannot park, can cause several miles of traffic queueing back in all directions! Road works of course are a necessity but can cause absolute chaos especially at time when it has been decided to dig up all surrounding roads at the same time!! It is not unusual to take an hour to drive from Rayleigh to Ashingdon which is of course before this housing phase is complete!
I also understand that all the various infills of flats and houses don't get counted in the big scheme of things? Is this correct and why are they not??
I would also be interested in knowing how the infrastructure would be improved because apart from knocking down half the houses on the main roads I fail to see what can be done! Local flooding can also be a problem and will not be helped by continued building on such a scale!
I am fed up with being told about Government policy - I don't believe anyone in the local planning office could actually justify what is about to be thrust upon us!
Our local hospitals, doctor surgeries, schools are not coping now so how on earth will they cope with everything that is proposed in this phase so I believe the allocation for the next phase should be dramatically cut and certainly avoid any further building directly adjacent to the Rayleigh to Hockley main road and also the main Ashingdon Road!!

Ref: CFS060
I live in Havenside Little Wakering & I object to the planning application for the above reference number most strongly for the following reasons.
The field running adjacent the The Parry has a wide diversity of wildlife which will be lost forever if this build goes ahead.
We have a huge variety of birds that visit not only my garden but in the surrounding area. We have both hedge sparrows & house sparrows ( declining species), blue tits, coal tits, great tits, long tail tits, dunnocks, green finches, gold finches, chaffinches, a variety of woodpeckers, sparrow hawks , magpies, crows, herons, collar doves, wood pigeons, blackbirds, thrushes, starlings, swallows, house martins, swift's, nightingales, pheasants, egrets, owls & even kestrels. There are also hedgehogs ( another endangered species) in the area ( these hibernate in my garden), moles, rabbits, hares, foxes, squirrels, badgers & there are also muntjac deer in the area.
Do we really need to lose this diversity ?
I understand the need for more housing but we simply do not have the infrastructure to support the current new builds let alone another 7500 The locals schools are full! The doctors surgery is full! The public transport is not enough to support this amount of building. The local roads are country lanes. With this amount of building there is a potential 15000+ children requiring a school place, a potential 15000+ cars on our country lanes, a potential 30000+ people requiring a doctor!
I am not sure if this is accurate, but I was informed that there is only 1 main sewer leading out of the village too. How on earth will this cope with all the new builds?
We rarely see a policeman in the village anymore & I was told by a policeman that if we need urgent assistance after 5pm, then the police have to come from Canvey! Whoever needs that assistance could potentially be dead by the time help arrived.
This planned housing does not appear to have been properly thought out.
The power that decide these issues do not live in this area.

THEREFORE I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSED PLANNING IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS............