Green Belt

I would like to log a formal objection to the proposal for development of the above, CFS023/CoL38

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.

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.

Proposal contained in the RDC Town Plan to envroach upon the Green belt land to the extebt of alowing housing developments etc provided that people do not object.

With regard to the Proposal so entsiled, I wish it to be know that I do strongly object to the permission envisaged.

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.

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

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.

Paragraph 10.6 "A fundamental principle of the Green Belt is to keep a sense of openness between built up areas." Yes, that is what the green belt is for. However, most of the metropolitan green belt in Rochford District is maintaining a sense of openness between the built up areas to the west and the sea to the east.

We live opposite the open play space area which can be accessed between properties 43 and 45. We have lived at our property since it was built in1977. At that time the area was designated for open play for use by the community.

In 2013, a Bridleway was proposed to pass through that area. However, many local residents supported both Essex County Council and Rochford District Council in their objection to this. Following the successful rejection of the proposal, Inspector Martin Elliot referred to the level of concern expressed by all objectors, including RDC, that the play area should NOT be developed.

There are not many open spaces around the vicinity and this is one that has been enjoyed by many since 1977.

The area accessed from Malvern Road is by a steep slope which means during very inclement weather it can get very wet. Water can be seen running down the slope into the main drain. I am aware that Mr. Marchant (No. 43) has had to have his garage rebuilt due to subsidence which, I am told, was due to vegetation being planted by RDC. Therefore if houses are built on that space then potentially a larger problem could be created.

In conclusion, we are very much against any development on this open space.

In view of the very serious flooding in the vicinity of the proposed development, it would seem a poor choice of land!
My own house only just escaped flooding some years ago when the adjoining properties were seriously damaged by flood water to a depth of 3 ft or more when the gullies could not cope.

My house is situated at the low part of Plumberow Avenue and would be in serious risk of flooding if the natural woodland soakaway is removed. The existing drainage has already proved to be vulnerable to excess water and to add more housing and ground consolidation near to this low ground area would be a serious mistake.

When the last flooding occurred, home owners were out of their houses for some 8 months and this must not be allowed to happen again.

Also disruption to the wildlife Park and Greenbelt!

My husband and I wish to object in the most strongest terms to the proposed new housing on the rear of our property for the following reasons:

a) The new housing in Star Lane has already had an impact on the infrastructure on the village. Current policy at the GP Surgery is that if you wish to make an appointment to see the Doctor or Nurse you telephone at 8.00.a.m. I can assure you, when you can eventually get through, all appointments have been taken and if it is very important then you are told to visit the Hospital (more pressure on them, which they can well do without. (Having worked there in the past, I have plenty of experience). Patients become very aggressive with Receptionists when they cannot get an appointment, plus you need a referral letter from a GP to see a Consultant, more work for already over-worked Doctors. Has anybody thought of this? and it is no good saying "go private" because the same thing happens there.

b) Now to go onto Schools. Our Son went to Great Wakering Primary and unfortunately had an unhappy time there due to his issues and lack of educational funding - this can only get worse. Where are the new children supposed to go, this then rolls on to King Edmonds in Rochford. Do they have any spare capacity?

c) The most important issue affecting us is the lovely view of the countryside with its' varied and unusual wildlife. The whole reason why we bought this house over 40 years ago. Whilst on this subject, will our property suffer a down valuation as we would be overlooked?

We do not recall anything about this proposal in the manifesto at the last election!!

Having attended the Open Meeting, I am given to understand that new properties in Seaview Drive have had the foundations raised to avoid the risk of flooding Therefore will the new housing in Great Wakering be the same thus inccurring additional cost. Also will the newly created wetland at Wallasea Island increase the risk of flooding should we get another exceptionally high tide as in 1953?

LEAVE OUR VILLAGE ALONE - GREEN BELT MEANS GREEN BELT AND SHOULD NOT BE BUILT ON.

CFS023

I wish to object to any building development of land at the rear of Malvern Road and Harrogate Drive (RDC reference CFS023) for the reasons stated below.

GREEN BELT. It is currently classified as 'Green Belt'.The Green Belt was introduced in the United Kingdom as a policy for controlling urban growth. The idea being for a ring of countryside where urbanisation will be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail. The fundamental aim of the Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open, and consequently the most important attribute of Green Belts is their openness.

Those fundamental aims are significantly more relevant now than when they were conceived.

Under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) introduced in March 2012, planning Authorities are strongly urged to follow the NPPF's detailed advice when considering whether to permit additional development in the Green Belt. In the Green Belt there is a general presumption against inappropriate development, unless very special circumstances can be demonstrated to show that the benefits of the development will outweigh the harm caused to the green belt.
Once an area of land has been defined as green belt, the stated opportunities and benefits include:
* Providing opportunities for access to the open countryside for the urban population
* Providing opportunities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation near urban areas
* The retention of attractive landscapes and the enhancement of landscapes, near to where people live
* Improvement of damaged and derelict land around towns
* The securing of nature conservation interests
* The retention of land in agricultural, forestry and related uses.
All the above, apart from the second, are significant benefits which a can be attributed to the land in question because it is adjacent to Beckney Wood which is classified as Ancient Woodland and the habitats and ecosystems provided by the land supports food chains that make up a food web into the woods. Observed indigenous wildlife by my family and myself include Bats, Sparrow Hawks, Buzzards, Green Woodpeckers, Barn Owls and Adders, Also Foxes, and badger sets rely on the wood and fields.

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

We appreciate the need for increased housing in the area, however, releasing small pockets of green land is not alleviating true housing shortage but is changing the face of our village forever. Removing these small envelopes of green belt does not seem very productive. This site in particular is heavily wooded, would have a considerable cost element per hectare than one of the larger potential development sites which could provide more diverse housing. See our objections below:
Flooding
During heavy rain it is clear to see at the back of our property the field floods and the ditch overflows into our garden and the cul de sac at the end of Marylands Avenue floods encroaching into our drive and that of our opposite neighbour. Without the current woodland to absorb runoff, more serious flooding would occur.
Sewerage
Marylands Ave and Merryfields Road have a history of periodic sewerage overflow, as the system struggles to cope. It has not been updated since it was originally put in in the 1960's and is not maintained by the Council.
Nature
This narrow strip of land runs adjacent to the Nature Reserve, maintained by Hockley Parish Council, and if built on would have a detrimental effect on the current wildlife population which includes bats, woodpeckers etc.
One of our main objections, as we live adjacent to the site in question, is that this land is green belt and is subject to a TPO, ref no 02/00. If major tree clearance were to take place, this could have a serious effect on the stability of our property as was stated in Rochford District Council letter to us dated 23rd January 2001.
When the document is submitted for independent examination?
When the Inspectors Report is published?
When document is adopted?

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.

Having recently reviewed 'The New Local Plan' I am writing to try and convey my concern, even shock at some of the parcels of land under review especially with regard to plots, CFS: 045, 074, 078, 079, 080, 081, 082, 083, 084.

Some of the sites detailed above (especially 045 and 074) are prime greenbelt land, beautiful plots of land that we in the local area have enjoyed throughout our lives and (as with me), I am sure many of us now enjoy these areas with our children. This is part of the attraction of living in our beautiful environment. If we keep eating away at this land, before long, it will be gone forever.

In addition to the above moral issue, there is also the very real issue of infrastructure. We have already seen the building of many new houses locally whether near Clements Hall or Hall Road yet within all these additional new plans, I haven't seen any mention or consideration given to new schools, roads and medical care (just as examples).

Schools
Currently the local schools are overloaded. I live near The Westerings Primary school where (ridiculously) there are already expansion plans yet the local roads are already 'no go' areas during the school run and are over crowded during the day due to teachers parking - some days I cannot even get off of my driveway! In addition, my daughter goes to Greensward Academy but for some local children there are already not enough places and they have to travel to Rochford, Rayleigh, even further afield to go to school.

Roads / Transportation
The main routes into Hockley / Hawkwell are not large (or even minor) A roads, they are B roads that were originally built to accommodate large villages / small towns yet the Hockley / Hawkwell area is now morphing in to a medium sized town in it's own right with a vastly increased population for the capacity of our local roads. As a consequence, at any given time of the day it is often quite difficult to get out onto the B1013, let alone when it is rush hour / school run time when the whole area around The Spa and/or Potash Garden Centre becomes absolutely gridlocked. Slightly further afield, I travel to Leigh on sea train station every day as trains from Hockley are so unreliable, dirty, expensive and already absolutely bursting at the seams due to overcrowding (another issue!) but if I leave slightly late I am also held up in Cherry Orchard Lane. I am generally forced to leave early to miss the already heavy traffic during rush hour, a journey which at off peak takes me 15 minutes but at rush hour, this 8 mile journey can take up to 40 minutes! I am lucky that my daughter is slightly older so I can be flexible with my leaving times but for those people that aren't flexible, getting out of the local area by car is already horrific!

Medical Care
No matter how you look at it, the population of the UK is generally ageing and with lot's of older people locally in Hockley / Hawkwell we are probably actually ahead of the curve compared to many other parts of the UK. As a consequence trying to be accepted on to a local doctors surgery roster is already pretty much impossible and I would imagine that local dentists would be the same. My doctor is in Westcliff and my dentist in Southchurch just as an example!

Now, I absolutely get the need for new housing although I suspect the UK should probably take a 'rain-check' until we see the fallout of Brexit first but notwithstanding this, we need to stop overloading and destroying the few remaining rural areas of South Essex, areas with little infrastructure. If we are as a community forced to accept more housing, surely areas with direct links to major arteries into the area (i.e A roads) should be the areas that are highest on the priority list but even then, schooling and other services should be considered as a priority over just building, building, building new houses relentlessly.

I know that lot's of my neighbors also have the same concerns and I hope that they too take the time to write.

With all of the above in mind, I truly hope that some time is taken to very seriously consider the topics raised (among others) before potentially (and quite disastrously in my view) moving ahead with these local proposals.

We stronger are opposed to the proposed housing development e.g. code plot: CFS065 & CFS011 in Great Wakering, end of Brookside Ave, & Shoebury Road. This proposal has not been properly thought out in terms of the infrastructure limitations, along with the impact on the village. Primarily, our medical centre which is already over stretched will not be able to cope with thousands of more patients on their books, also traffic would be out of control, e.g. the roads would not be able to cope, further more, Great Wakering, is a VILLAGE! not a town, it's history goes right back to the Doomsday book 12th century and beyond that to Anglo Saxon times, to build this extensive housing would be the end of a village construct, it would become a town!, this is totally not right! Many people in Great Wakering are elderly, and young families, the latter move to Great Wakering for the safe, quite lifestyle and tranquillity of village living, these proposals to use virtually every green space/field space in the area, is morally not right, and totally unfair to the people of Wakering and surrounding areas...The voices and opinions of the village folk must be considered, we are the ones who actually live here!! and would like to continue to do so in peace and tranquillity. There are more aspects to our quality of living rather than monetary constructs.... People come first.. the elderly come first... young families come first.. the local wildlife comes first... peoples sense of happiness & safety comes first.. services come first...e.g. medical, schools, etc. The people of Great Wakering and the surrounding villages will stand their corner to protect and preserve their green spaces... we may not have the money to hire top lawers.. but we have passion in our hearts..... in short we are human beings with our village lifestyle... and we WILL keep that.

PEOPLE COME FIRST!!!!

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.

Reference CFS024 Land north of Merryfields Avenue, Hockley: Map G, 119

I wish to Object to the plan of houses at the end of Marylands Avenue north of Merryfields Avenue.

1) This land is Green Belt and adjacent to the Marylands Nature Reserve. Many animals use this area as a corridor and major disturbance and destruction of their ancient paths would put their numbers under considerable pressure. Badgers inhabit Crab Tree Wood, and Plumberow Avenue and are regularly seen around Marylands Wood. Their runs crisscross the land north of Merryfields Avenue. Plumberrow Mount is adjacent to the Marylands Nature Reserve and any building right next to the other side of the Reserve would sandwich all the naturally occurring creatures and plants. The stream runs from Marylands Wood, across the land north of Merryfields Avenue where wild flowers and newts can be seen.

2) I have lived here for more than four decades and this area has flooded many times causing problems to the sewerage. There is a natural stream which overflows often in winter.

3) The number of bats seen in our garden beside Marylands Wood have recently increased, and they are known to inhabit wood on the land behind Merryfields. Housing would seriously disrupt the bats' habitat, obstructing their recovery in this area.

4) Children play in the street in Marylands Avenue, but an increase in traffic would be a danger and cause pollution. The only access to the land north of Merryfields Avenue is through the estate on narrow roads not in the least suitable for heavy lorries.

5) Our water pressure is low, and extra housing would reduce the water flow further.

6) The gas pressure dips on my hob at times, and this would be put under further pressure.

7) It is already difficult for local children to find places at local schools, and this would be made worse by extra housing. Local Doctors' Surgeries are overflowing and Plumberow Avenue is really busy all the time.

I object most strongly to houses being built north of Merryfields Avenue for all these reasons.

*As a side note to this - maybe addressing the poor conditions of the local roads should be priority over building new homes! i.e. St John's Road, Cupids Chase, North Street to name a few.

The infrastructure of the local area is already struggling to cope. The local primary school barely has enough available spaces for children already living in Great Wakering, without the addition of more resisdents moving into the area. The doctors surgery is also already bursting at the seems, struggling greatly to accommodate the vast number of patients it has on its books. Both services will be put under even more undue strain if this proposal goes ahead!
As a person with a severe health condition, I am massively concerned that I will not be able to be seen by my doctor when I am experiencing an exaserbation of my COPD. If you know anything about the condition, you will know that it is extremely unpredicatbale, and potentially life threatening in left untreated. Occationally, I have no choice but to go into hospital, but given the low immune system I have, this is not advisable if it can be avoided at all. Access to my doctor and her time to make house calls is vital to the upkeep of my health.

No less important, is the impact these developments will have on the depletion in house values in the area. Many people have purchased family homes in Great Wakering, sold (like me) by the landscapes and community vibes. We are so lucky living where we do. We get the best of all worlds - being right on the outskirts of Southend town and only a short train journey away from the city of London, while experiencing life surrounded by country side, but being a stones throw away from the sea.
Home owners are going to lose money and interest in investments they would not necessarily have made, had they known that these developments would be going ahead.

Another issue that I feel has gone without consideration but will prove to be a big issue upon development, is that the internet speed is severely below average in the area, with an average speed of anything between 2-10gb. With the internet, and the way we use it, continuously progressing, it is important that we are given the access to a decent internet connection. This is not currently available in Great Wakering, and until this is addressed, will always be an issue.

It is for these reasons, I wish to express my profound objection the the proposals of local development in Great Wakering. I understand that society is growing at an expediated rate, and new homes are a necessity; however, I strongly believe that there are other plots of land locally that would be better suited for development. Plots of land that are not arable, and would also lend themselves to keeping travellers away!

I would be extremely greatful if you would seriously consider my comments, and take the time to look at alternative options for these proposed developments.

We have already lost the 'great' in Great Britain. Please don't take away the 'great' of Great Wakering too!

One of the biggest selling points of not only my house, but of Great Wakering as a village, was the beautiful scenery and sense of community spirit amongst the local residents. As a mother with three young children, it was definitly the place I wanted to raise my present and future family. I could see myself living here until my retirement and then some. Especially since I was given complete assurance that the surrounding farm land would never be sold on for any other purposes, or used for development as it is classed as 'top grade land'.

I feel that this proposal of development is a terrible idea. Not only because I strongly beleive that our country side and wildlife should be nurtured and protected, but because this development makes no sense.

Firstly, Great Wakering exists in a red alert, high flood risk zone. Whenever we experience exceptionally high tides or adverse weather, Great Wakering is always on high alert for flood warnings and on stand by for evacuation. With the development of both Alexandra Road and Star Lane, we are already experiencing high levels of traffic in and out of the village, without another 7,000 plus households being introduced to the area. On average each home houses two cars. That's an additional 14,000 cars populating the roads of Great Wakering. Roads that are already well in need of maintainance*. Can you imagine the disruption a frenzy of residents populating 9,000 homes trying to evacuate a small area that only has two ways out will cause?

*As a side note to this - maybe addressing the poor conditions of the local roads should be priority over building new homes! i.e. St John's Road, Cupids Chase, North Street to name a few.

The infrastructure of the local area is already struggling to cope. The local primary school barely has enough available spaces for children already living in Great Wakering, without the addition of more resisdents moving into the area. The doctors surgery is also already bursting at the seems, struggling greatly to accommodate the vast number of patients it has on its books. Both services will be put under even more undue strain if this proposal goes ahead!
As a person with a severe health condition, I am massively concerned that I will not be able to be seen by my doctor when I am experiencing an exaserbation of my COPD. If you know anything about the condition, you will know that it is extremely unpredicatbale, and potentially life threatening in left untreated. Occationally, I have no choice but to go into hospital, but given the low immune system I have, this is not advisable if it can be avoided at all. Access to my doctor and her time to make house calls is vital to the upkeep of my health.

No less important, is the impact these developments will have on the depletion in house values in the area. Many people have purchased family homes in Great Wakering, sold (like me) by the landscapes and community vibes. We are so lucky living where we do. We get the best of all worlds - being right on the outskirts of Southend town and only a short train journey away from the city of London, while experiencing life surrounded by country side, but being a stones throw away from the sea.
Home owners are going to lose money and interest in investments they would not necessarily have made, had they known that these developments would be going ahead.

Another issue that I feel has gone without consideration but will prove to be a big issue upon development, is that the internet speed is severely below average in the area, with an average speed of anything between 2-10gb. With the internet, and the way we use it, continuously progressing, it is important that we are given the access to a decent internet connection. This is not currently available in Great Wakering, and until this is addressed, will always be an issue.

It is for these reasons, I wish to express my profound objection the the proposals of local development in Great Wakering. I understand that society is growing at an expediated rate, and new homes are a necessity; however, I strongly believe that there are other plots of land locally that would be better suited for development. Plots of land that are not arable, and would also lend themselves to keeping travellers away!

I would be extremely greatful if you would seriously consider my comments, and take the time to look at alternative options for these proposed developments.

We have already lost the 'great' in Great Britain. Please don't take away the 'great' of Great Wakering too!