Highways Infrastructure

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.

Believe this plan has still not had a proper consultation with the local population. Posting something on a web site does not constitute consultation.

The size and value of this development is significant and should have been discussed properly with open and honest discussion.

This in the the context of our village is a very important thing and will change the fabric of the community.

The people responsible for the passing of the plans have shown a complete lack of honesty and integrity.

As someone who grew up in the Laindon area of basildon during the sixties and seventies i witnessed the true effects of "Planning Blight", I wonder if the people responsible are aware of sheer hatred and loathing that will follow these developments.

i am astonished by sheer lack of imagination of the variouse developments. Rather then look forgetter alternatives to building on "green belt"/green areas at a stroke they have allowed plans to be passed on areas the the entire population of this country have grown up to view as sacred.

If we allow these green areas to be developed there is no going back they are lost forever, I wonder how future genarations will view this.

I am fully aware of the need for affordable housing, but what we are faced with is totally unacceptable and will inevitably lead to some bitter disputes in the future.

- As it is the roads surrounding Hullbridge are at busy times almost gridlocked. When Waterylane for example floods it causes chaos.

- Whatever road study was done it could not have been done at normal times of day or more likely during the school holidays when traffic is lighter, as best this is deceitful and at worst corrupt.

- Had you allowed less houses per acre there may have been a chance some of this may have been viewed as a positive thing, but by building so many houses per acre you inflicting gridlock on the surrounding roads and effectively sticking two fingers up to the local population.

- Is the "Elephant in the room" a Government driven panicked response the brexet negotiations to create a 'housing boom" to help balance to books. if so this most cynical panicked approach is not necessary and will lead to a further fragmentation of communities.

- There many brownfield and empty properties that could be used to help solve the housing problem.

OBJECTION
PROPOSED SITE CFS 127

I STRONGLY OBJECT TO THE ABOVE-NAMED PROPOSAL.

One of the principles of Green Belt is to preserve the identity of individual communities and limit urban sprawl. Rayleigh and the surrounding areas have already lost a significant amount of Green Belt and to add to this will have devastating effects on the community.

Extremely poor access via Bartletts.
Narrow roads/congestion.
Infrastructure - I understand that a report issued in 2016 by the ECC concludes that the infrastructure cannot match the proposed growth due to high levels of under-funding. I believe that the utility companies have not proved their ability, nor given formal commitment to meeting extra demands.
Our schools and GP surgeries are already oversubscribed.
Poor air quality.
Flooding issues.

We moved to Rayleigh forty years ago from Brentwood. I remember attending a local history lecture, and being told that Rayleigh had the widest street of any town in Essex.
Forty years on we have enormously wide pavements and single file traffic. Consequently most times of the day, traffic is backed up to the Weir, while the small roads of Roach avenue Weir Gardens and Glasseys lane are used as a "rat run". Recently while Glasseys lane was closed for water works, absolute chaos reigned. Over the last forty years the number of private dwellings has grown and grown. I understand that this is probably necessary, but road access should have kept pace. Rayleigh has a real present day problem of becoming permanently grid locked. So please before any plans go ahead for the building of 4500 new homes, look at ways of improving the infrastructure first.
It's not enough to say "We don't have the money" before burying your heads in the sand. Something HAS to be done, for Rayleigh to survive.

Reference: CFS024 Land North of Merryfields Avenue, Hockley, MAP G,119

I would like to object to plans to build on this land for the following reason:
1. This is Metropolitan Green Belt and as such it should be protected.
2. I am a regular user of the Marylands Nature reserve and have serious concerns about the impact the destruction of this woodland would have on the wildlife in the reserve.
3. The houses adjacent to the land are prone to flooding. My own neighbour has regular problems with the ground and rain water draining down Merryfields Avenue. The destruction of the woodland will exacerbate flooding problems and I certainly wouldn't want to buy any house built on the land.
4. The increased volumes of traffic, particularly construction traffic, travelling down Merryfields Avenue.
This development should not be approved.

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 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

We have lived in this village for over 40 years. We have seen many changes, some of them good and now there seems to be a plan to change a nice place to live into an over populated town which will be desperately short of school places, doctor's appointments and just getting in and out of what is at present a village into a place that is difficult to arrive at. At present with the extra unwanted development going on in the village it is near impossible to get to an appointment without being in a traffic queue. We haven't yet seen the impact of impending present development, Bullwood Hall, Folly Grove, Waters and Stanton plot, and all the other single plots being developed into oversized flats.

The amount of pollution created by this increase in stationary traffic will have an adverse affect on our health and it is a very worrying scenario to think of our young people who will be facing health issues due to this increase when there will a shortage of doctors/hospital appointments.

We live in Folly Chase which is under threat of extra unwanted development when we already have the inconvenience of having large heavy lorries speeding on the wrong side of the bends In Folly Lane to get to the development on Pond Chase. This will in turn cause more traffic to arrive at the main road making more congestion. Folly Chase is as the name suggests a private lane, not wide enough for two cars and especially has no pavement. We worked very hard to obtain our property in a nice area and it seems the Council are adamant in ruining our local area. We have only just heard how the extra planned properties on the Pond Chase site was increased at the Council's request and were very annoyed no thought was given to the area or traffic congestion.

I am glad to say our grandchildren will be out of local education by the time this extra development is finished as schools at present are just adequate and we will soon be at the stage where there will be no room for our children to attend their own local school.
We believe ours should be a forward thinking council not one that gives quick fix solutions that will surely cause problems in the areas that they are currently thinking of developing. Thought should be given to look for a site to the east of the district where plans can be made to provide all amenities schools, doctors, services, sufficient roads etc.It could be planned properly from scratch rather than trying to alter an already overcrowded area which will be detrimental to large parts of the community.

We understand Redbridge Council has fought the government to reduce extra development there and suggest this should be a consideration as so many of our residents are angry over this issue and believe some consideration could be given to them.

To summarise, extra unwanted development will cause:
More pollution
More traffic queues
More pressure on present Doctors for appointments
No places for local children at schools
New settlement east of Hockley the best option.

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.

Any proposed north south link and river crossing would join the JAAP area with a possible new garden village at Ashingdon to Souh Woodham and through to the A130 and A12 . This would divert a good proportion of east west movement along the A127 enabling more efficient use of the existing infrastructure . It could have a benefit to providing extra rail capacity by a new park and ride at Fambridge Station so relieving capacity on the Southend line . All this needs government investment which is noticeable by its absence over many years of unplanned expansion .

The road network around Hullbridge is inadequate at present resulting in Lower Road and Hullbridge Road becoming particularly congested at busy times. If the proposals to more than double the number of residents in the village go ahead this will become unmanageable.

Power supplies and broadband availability are also poor and would need considerable investment if they are to supply the new estates as well as the existing homes. The primary school is adequate for the existing community but would not be able to accept such a large increase in numbers.

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.

Following a wide ranging discussion Ashingdon Parish Council were of the view that the document was not so much a plan as aspirational wish list which did not address the fundamental issues relating to living in Ashingdon.

The Ashingdon Road is already the most crowded road that is not a b road in Essex. There is little in this document to address this in a positive way and an awful lot that is negative. The Parish Council could not see how the associated vehicles could be accommodated without further gridlock. Further the lack of infrastructures in the plan means that schools, healthcare and local amenities will suffer greatly. The Parish Council wanted to see a better commitment to raising the quality of life to the inhabitants not a way of raising the number of inhabitants and thereby decreasing the quality of life.

Larger developments should be sited near to major travel routes eg A130, A127, A1245 to alleviate traffic flow through Rochford, Ashingdon, Hawkwell & Hockley.

I am concerned about the plans for the amount of new housing to be developed. My issues are around the following points:-

1. traffic will increase significantly
2. insufficient school capacity
3. commute increase in people travelling by train to either Southend or Liverpool Street
4. Insufficient GP surgeries with the capacity to cope
5. Subsequent pressure on Southend and Basildon Hospital
6. More rubbish and impact on waste collection
7. General deterioration of the area
8. Impact on wildlife

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!!

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!!

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!!

The levels of house building in in Rochford District in recent years has started to escalate at an alarming rate. The new plans outlined in your leaflet indicate a plan which is disastrous to the local semi-rural lifestyle that we currently enjoy.
The building project in Hall Road is still under way, but already we experience increased traffic especially at the roundabout at Bradley Way / Ashingdon Road / Hall Road. This will become very severe once the Hall road project is complete. The proposed building projects near Mount Bovers lane, Nursey Corner and Cherry Orchard Way will cause a serious loss of open green belt as well as jamming our country lanes such as Hall Road, main Road (Hockley) and Rectory Road.
The recent developments in Brays Lane has noticeably added to delays in Ashingdon Road, and if another 1,182 to 1,382 houses were to be built it would be a disaster in terms of loss good, open farmland, massive congestion in the whole area between Rochford and Rayleigh and an overload on other resources such as parking at local shops. Three and four bedroom houses usually have between two and four cars per house, these would need to be parked off street; are sufficient spaces designed into the projects for this? Once these cars are mobile and going to work, school runs, shops, social trips etc, the journey times will be horrific. Emergency services will experience unacceptable journey times with lives put at risk.
On the subject of emergency services, we have all been aware of the demise of Rochford Police Station. Increased Police presence ought to be incorporated into any housing plan on a pro - rata basis of new houses; also Fire and Medical services. Yet the NHS have apparently merged Southend, Basildon and Broomfield (Chelmsford) Hospitals with a view to transferring injured and ill patients between hospitals; the road congestion already makes this a slow process. The New Local Plan makes it inevitable that more people would suffer more and an increased death rate is bound to occur.
Essex has the lowest rainfall of any county in the UK, with Great Wakering being the driest village of all. So, the strain on water supplies would be very great and with massive housing projects springing up all over Essex, (Rochford, Witham, Bealieu near Chelmsford, Braintree etc etc) the water supply is not going to support all these proposed houses.
In summary, I am appalled by the proposed New Local Plan for Rochford District, and hope that our responsible local democratic councillors can bring sense to the rest of RDC and minimise these plans by a massive percentage, or stop them outright.

Your Sincerely,
John Chapman

The levels of house building in in Rochford District in recent years has started to escalate at an alarming rate. The new plans outlined in your leaflet indicate a plan which is disastrous to the local semi-rural lifestyle that we currently enjoy.
The building project in Hall Road is still under way, but already we experience increased traffic especially at the roundabout at Bradley Way / Ashingdon Road / Hall Road. This will become very severe once the Hall road project is complete. The proposed building projects near Mount Bovers lane, Nursey Corner and Cherry Orchard Way will cause a serious loss of open green belt as well as jamming our country lanes such as Hall Road, main Road (Hockley) and Rectory Road.
The recent developments in Brays Lane has noticeably added to delays in Ashingdon Road, and if another 1,182 to 1,382 houses were to be built it would be a disaster in terms of loss good, open farmland, massive congestion in the whole area between Rochford and Rayleigh and an overload on other resources such as parking at local shops. Three and four bedroom houses usually have between two and four cars per house, these would need to be parked off street; are sufficient spaces designed into the projects for this? Once these cars are mobile and going to work, school runs, shops, social trips etc, the journey times will be horrific. Emergency services will experience unacceptable journey times with lives put at risk.
On the subject of emergency services, we have all been aware of the demise of Rochford Police Station. Increased Police presence ought to be incorporated into any housing plan on a pro - rata basis of new houses; also Fire and Medical services. Yet the NHS have apparently merged Southend, Basildon and Broomfield (Chelmsford) Hospitals with a view to transferring injured and ill patients between hospitals; the road congestion already makes this a slow process. The New Local Plan makes it inevitable that more people would suffer more and an increased death rate is bound to occur.
Essex has the lowest rainfall of any county in the UK, with Great Wakering being the driest village of all. So, the strain on water supplies would be very great and with massive housing projects springing up all over Essex, (Rochford, Witham, Bealieu near Chelmsford, Braintree etc etc) the water supply is not going to support all these proposed houses.
In summary, I am appalled by the proposed New Local Plan for Rochford District, and hope that our responsible local democratic councillors can bring sense to the rest of RDC and minimise these plans by a massive percentage, or stop them outright.

Your Sincerely,
John Chapman

Getting into or out of Rayleigh town centre at rush hours 7-9am and 4-7pm is a nightmare whichever direction you are travelling and more houses will only make this worse. I appreciate the need to build more houses but as others have said the infrastructure needs to be improved drastically first. Changes should be made so that S.106 agreements can require developers to contribute towards infrastructure improvements rather than just facilities.

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).

I attended a meeting yesterday at Great Wakering Old School to discuss with my local councellor your plans regarding new housing
estates in and around Great Wakering.

I am especially concerned with the proposed development of CFS056 and have the following objections to the proposals.

1) The proposed development is on a flood plain.Where are the proposals to strengthen the sea wall.
2) It is stated that the transport links are good. A bus every one and a half hours from the end of Victoria Drive into Southend via Barling or down to Shoeburyness railway station is not good.
I have seen no proposals to improve this.

Regarding the rest of the proposals:-

1) The Doctors Surgery in Great Wakering is running at full capacity now, It cannot take more patients.Is there a proposal to build another surgery
2) Great Wakering School is full and could not cope, A new school would have to be built just to take all the extra children that would move to these houses with their parents.
Where will this be going.
3) Access to Great Wakering is through narrow country lanes , eg Poynters Lane and Southend Road.
I do not see any proposals to widen these roads. And if they are not widened,building all these homes would result in great congestion.
4) Most of the land is designated agricultural land and should not be build on.

I would like to make a representation to the planning consultation process for RDC. My main concern is with the saturation of traffic on local roads, particularly with the B1013, between Rayleigh and Rochford. Little thought seems to have been given to the consequences of approving planning applications. This has been the cause of much misery for local residents who have to live with the results of new housing. I appreciate that this probably is the responsibility of Essex County Council, but as a long term ratepayer our concerns need to be addressed at County level. We cannot go on with extensive development without regard to road congestion. One feels that officials at County level seem oblivious to the problems created by the new developments, and increased car usage..

We do need a relief road to take some pressure off our local roads, possibly adopting the solutions advocated by the Rochford Ratepayers Association.Please, let us have some imaginative thinking!

As a Hockley resident that lives on the High Road I feel I must object to the additional homes in the area without an improved infrastructure.

We constantly have queues of traffic outside our house morning and evening as the roads currently cannot cope. As a result, the fumes from the sitting traffic are strong, particularly in cold and foggier weather when the fumes sit lower. I walk my daughter to school along the main road in Hockley and we regularly have to deal with the fumes; I have on occasion turned back and got in the car and joined the traffic as sometimes it is very bad and am concerned about us inhaling it - however, I'm then adding to it. We are encouraged to walk our children to school but it is becoming a health risk. My husband has also mentioned it when he runs along the road.

It also takes a long time to cross the road where there are no set crossings, due to the heavy traffic flow (we don't have any crossings at our end of the High Road).

I do hope these considerations are taking into account when planning the future of the local area.

With ref to the current consultation regarding proposed building of houses to the North of Merryfields Avenue Hockley.

I must strongly object to the proposed building of houses within this area.

This is a small estate that simply cannot sustain further development. Hockley village suffers every day to traffic congestion. The main and local side roads are full to capacity and are becoming a danger to pedestrians and all road users alike.

There is not enough infrastructure available in the area to deal with further homes. Not enough doctors, dentists, schools etc.

The area being talked about is a Metropolitan Green Belt area and should be preserved not destroyed. There is a nature reserve adjacent to the area which should be sacrosanct as wildlife is being pushed from one place to another causing them to lose their environment and therefore perish as a result.

The area being considered is also of great risk to flooding which was the case only a couple of years ago. If houses are built as proposed then excess water will not be able to drain away in to the nature reserve and wooded area, a natural soakaway and therefore put our homes at risk to flooding.

I could go on and on about this but feel it would fall on deaf ears.

Please take on aboard mine and other points of view about this proposed building area and do not go ahead with it.

The owner of this land has tried in the past to build on this land for just total profit and without any concern for local nature and further continual agony for other residents. Please do not let him get his way this time.

I am opposing any future development of housing in the area around Rawreth lane. The infrastructure is insufficient to meet additional demands. The roads are jammed at rush hour, insufficient medical and educational facilities to meet additional demands. Do not allow the government to build more housing in this area. Force them to build west of London where there is more space and doesn't have a sea border restricting out of the area.