Introduction

Every time there is any talk of building houses, there will be a bombardment of comments stating that the infrastructure, such as roads, drainage, healthcare facilities, schools etc are all stretched to the limit already. The planning reports will all say 'there will be no impact on the current services' or 'provision will be made'. This provision is only ever local provision but does not strengthen the existing whole infrastructure (in other words the problem increases and is just moved further down the line). Adding 600 more homes (Hall Road) must have an affect on the services and infrastructure!!

8.17 "upgrades have been completed at the Rayleigh Weir junction".

What upgrades? The only thing you've done is upgrade the traffic lights which falls under a different set of legislation entirely. Rayleigh Weir is a massive pinch-point. An obvious improvement is to route West-bound traffic directly onto the A127 from the retail park. In additional a filter lane should be provisioned to route East-bound traffic straight into Rayleigh, although a large majority of this traffic shouldn't need to go through Rayleigh if the bypass (mentioned in 8.12) was built.

It is of vital importance to carry out a compete 'Full Survey' of Infrastructure requirements in our Village of Hullbridge. And even more important to act to complete all those items identified, prior to increasing any further developments within the vicinity.

Our local 'Parish Council' have a several page'd list of outstanding road and pathway issues, which they are unable to get action'd by Essex County Highways, due to their unreasonable and outdated 'Priority Grading System'. This situation is unacceptable in modern times and shows a real lack of operational organisation within Essex County Council department.

This extends from Zebra Crossings and General Road Markings, Speed Signage, Community Building Signage etc. to Paved Areas, Both Made-up and Unmade Road and Paved Surfaces.
Broken, Missing and Damaged Safety Bollards and Lamp Posts in the main Ferry Road shopping area.

On a more positive note, I would like to suggest an improvement to the environmental/welfare of the village. By paving and marking out 'Watery Lane/Beeches Road' as a Pedestrian/Cycle Route.
Allowing only vehicle use by local residential and business traffic.
This to be supplemented by Traffic Calming Measures.
Object: - To encourage a safe outdoor exercise and fresh air activity for all residents.

SUMMARY

General, Vital Infrastructure Improvements for Hullbridge Parish.

Suggested Environment/Welfare Improvement

With regard to the proposed new Local Plan, the submitted Map A for the local Hullbridge area shows the majority of the proposed larger sites are in the Green Belt with the exception of a portion of CFS100 Brownfield Site being a lorry/heavy goods breakers yard, formerly a car breakers yard, which is obviously now a highly contaminated site.
Sites CFS006, CFS138, CFS149, CFS099, GY01 and GY02 are not located in Hullbridge Parish but are actually in Rawreth Parish but will obviously still use all the facilities in Hullbridge including the Riverside Surgery which is already overstretched. These sites will obviously require access off the existing narrow, weight restricted Watery Lane/Beeches Road, and
will merge the villages of Rawreth and Hullbridge. CFS015 has 50% of the
site in the flood plain.
CFS151 will require access off the existing single track in Long Lane and CFS120, CFS 026, CFS107, CFS106, CFS110, CFS108 & CFS109 will require access off the unmade single track in Kingsway, all of which will require a major upgrade to provide the required road widths including footpaths/cycle ways as recommended by the Essex Design Guide Highway Standards.

SUMMARY

RDC have not assessed, previously, any alternatives in terms of major impacts and sustainability especially in connection with the Malyons site in Hullbridge and all the other major developments recently completed or under construction, we therefore have no confidence that this will change
in any future emerging new Local Plan for this district. ECC report
concludes that housing targets cannot be matched by infrastructure provisions due to a massive shortfall of £billions in funding (ECC/AECOM GIF Report 2016).
RDC need to take into account further carbon emissions, overcrowding, traffic congestion, flooding and further drains on the existing infrastructure.

This is an objection to land availability Assessment 2017 Appendix C

OBJECTION TO CF5065

New Road Shoebury Road & Seaview Drive. Also any other sites within the boundaries of Great Wakering CF5057, CF5034, CF5056, CF5070
These sites are all Agricultural land growing food produce for many hundreds of years.
Suitability assessment for housing NO.

EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES. POOR.

We have I junior school in Wakering High Street. Our Seniors boys & girls have to travel by bus to Rochford to St. Edmunds School. Two day nursery's .

HEATH CARE
One Doctors surgery with five regular doctors. With the new house built in Star Lane is putting extra strain on the surgery already with the new amount of housing it will not be able to cope. POOR

Retail facilities we have a Co.Op metro type store's and that is it. POOR

PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE

The public transport is insufficient at this moment about 8 buses a day equivalent 2 hour. The roads infrastructure is insufficient to take the public road traffic through the village and adjoining road lanes and routes. Poor

EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS. ADEQUATE

Adequate for the size of the village

HIGHWAYS ACCESS NOT NEEDED

To get access to these small village roads an increase in Volume of cars these roads would not able to cope.
Significant investment in utilities needed if these projects were to come to fruition it would be a massive cost to the council which would be passed on to the households by the council, we are happy as we are.
What ever investment was put sustainable transport would again be put onto the rate payers. Not fair

These farmers and landowners that wish to sell agricultural land and have for years been accepting grants for this land want to sell and make more money.
What happens when we leave the E U we will need this land to help to sustain the growth of produce for British people and not for housing migrants.

"The equality of infrastructure in terms of services and facilities is challenging across the district given that we have such a large rural area to the east, which can mean that isolation becomes an issue." If you embrace my previous suggestion and with Southend and Castle Point persuade central government to fund the new road, the large area to the east will no longer be rural and isolated. In paragraph 8.10 "It also includes
the area to the south of the River Roach in proximity to Great Wakering." you identify exactly the problem that this would address.

8.2 'Any scheme - whether that is for the delivery of new homes or new jobs - will inevitably have some impact on local infrastructure, and it is the responsibility of the planning system to identify what is needed to support a particular development'.

Housing development in Hullbridge will have a negative impact on local infrastructure and we, as residents, can see NO identification of or planning to support improvements to the infrastructure. How are we being supported n this respect?

I write to voice my objection to the proposed urbanisation of Hullbridge which would result if land put forward by local landowners was developed under the new local Plan.

The amount of development suggested is unsustainable as this part of Essex is already highly congested and traffic flow is a major issue.

Although, perhaps, there is a case to be made for a small amount of affordable properties to be built for first time buyers in Hullbridge, the majority of the developments proposed will not be in this category as this type of property is not profitable to developers.

I attended an 'open' meeting last week at the Wakering Community Centre regarding the above.
Looking at the various maps, especially the larger maps, P and Q, I was astounded to see the vast areas of hatching. Obviously I don't know whether all these areas will be built on and what the time scales might be (all at the same time or spread over a number of years). This is in addition to recent developments in and around the village (Star Lane being the most recent).

I have various concerns regarding these developments like building on Green Field and Green Belt lands, surely there must be Brown Belt or Brown Field sites which could be developed first.
My main concern is that if all these areas are built on (I've heard that it would be up to 3000 homes), then the infrastructure of Great Wakering would be swamped. The doctors surgery appears full, likewise, the school. At many times during the day, the parking in the high street is full and it is the same for shops like the Co-op. Also, these maps don't show the road entrances or exits to the proposed sites. Many of the side roads are double parked, and traffic flow, at times, is very congested (Alexandra road for one) so any extra traffic would make this even worse.

My wife and I moved here nearly 4 years ago and one of the reasons for coming was that this is a lovely village with wildlife and fields. Looking at these plans Great Wakering will turn in to a not so nice small town.

I realise that more houses have to be built, and if it goes ahead, you must improve the facilities here (another surgery/school/more shops).