Biodiversity, Geology and Green Infrastructure

As a resident of Western road I really need to voice my concerns over the proposed developments as listed above. Whilst recognising the need for more housing across the county we have already started to creep on areas enjoyed by wildlife and where the community, our children and our pets are able to enjoy walks and exercise. Some areas I accept that have been selected in recent times are prime sites given their size and location but I cannot understand or accept why you would be considering this development in Great Wheatley's. In addition to my comments above I would add we already have a lack of schools and services in the area and above all I really don't see how the roads can sustain what is effectively a new village. The routes in and out of my road and Great Wheatley would completely disrupt the feel to our road, and local community, and totally transform (for the worse) the family environment I bought in to when I moved in to the area 11 ag o.

I really hope when you consider all of your options you will take my comments, and those of my fellow friends and residents, very seriously as I really see big infrastructure issues with this project. That is the practical plea the more emotional one is that it will totally transform what is a very nice part of Rayleigh with a good mix of housing and green belt. An area where people inside the town go out of their way to come and enjoy walks and family days out.

Thank you in advance for reading and considering my concerns

As a resident of Western road I really need to voice my concerns over the proposed developments as listed above. Whilst recognising the need for more housing across the county we have already started to creep on areas enjoyed by wildlife and where the community, our children and our pets are able to enjoy walks and exercise. Some areas I accept that have been selected in recent times are prime sites given their size and location but I cannot understand or accept why you would be considering this development in Great Wheatley's. In addition to my comments above I would add we already have a lack of schools and services in the area and above all I really don't see how the roads can sustain what is effectively a new village. The routes in and out of my road and Great Wheatley would completely disrupt the feel to our road, and local community, and totally transform (for the worse) the family environment I bought in to when I moved in to the area 11 ag o.

I really hope when you consider all of your options you will take my comments, and those of my fellow friends and residents, very seriously as I really see big infrastructure issues with this project. That is the practical plea the more emotional one is that it will totally transform what is a very nice part of Rayleigh with a good mix of housing and green belt. An area where people inside the town go out of their way to come and enjoy walks and family days out.

I am writing to air my deep concerns regarding a conversation I have had with a neighbour regarding a plot of land behind my home. He has shown me a map of the proposed site fs127 Eastwood nurseries off Bartletts SS6 7LN.
The area cannot be suitable for development due to; poor access
narrow roads that could not possibly cope with more traffic
there are already congestion problems with would only worsen
the field is always flooding
this is an important greenbelt area
I have often seen dear in the fields and in our road so where would they go
this area is on septic tanks and soakaways as the infrastructure is not suitable for new developments
the whole area is not suitable for development theres not enough access without destroying peoples homes and lives Please can we be informed on any decision regarding this proposal as it wasn't for my neighbour I would have known nothing about it. Neither did some of the others residents I have spoken to since.

I wish to object to potential development plans for the land at the end of Marylands Avenue, and behind Merryfields Avenue Hockley.

As a local resident this would have a major detrimental impact on the area. The main concerns as below:

Land is green belt and is there to protect countryside from being developed.

The land is next to the nature reserve and wildlife lives in the woods adjacent. There are various protected species in this area, including bats, badgers, and goshawks. These have all been seen in and around our garden several times over the last year.

Flooding issues would be increased as there is a stream running through the proposed area, and when there is heavy rainfall the water congregates at the end of Marylands Avenue

Access to the proposed site is narrow and limited. The area is a quiet residential street and many young families live in Marylands and Merryfields, therefore having site traffic would be dangerous

Developing on this land has previously been declined at the high courts, and should be declined again.

I wish to lodge my objection to the Second Local Development Plan for 2017 to 2037.

Local residence have already submitted (my self include) their objections in respect of the First Plan for 2011 to 2025
and their reasons are already known by RDC Planning Department.

The the proposed plan will be on Metropolitan Green Belt which is there to protect the countryside from inappropriate development.
This land is also outside the existing settlement boundary.

There is concern also over the close proximity to the Nature Reserve which has a host of wildlife for people to enjoy.
Although it does not affect my property,I understand that excessive amounts of water during heavy rainfall congregates at the end of Merrylands Avenue which the gulley's are unable to cope with.

Increased traffic during and after development will destroy what is currently a quiet residential family area.

I found it difficult to navigate the RDC website in order to find the appropriate comments page. If I have sent this e-mail to the wrong department I apologise and ask that it be forwarded to the correct one.

I am writing on behalf of my mother to confirm objection to the new housing
Reference CFS024 Land north of Merryfields Avenue Hockley MAP G 119

Pat Williams
45 Marylands Avenue
Hockley
Essex
SS5 5AH


Our family has lived there for 55 years and we are aware it is metropolitan green belt and is there to protect this sort of development so are surprised to see the application.
The land is known for its wild life and the nature reserve is the right environment for bats that we are aware are a protected species

The other concern is flooding as the existing gulley's cannot with heavy rainfall which we have seen over the years.

Dear Sirs

For the past 27 years, I have lived in Great Wakering and I would like to register my comments on the Rochford District Council's New Local Plan (and sustainability appraisal)
I strongly object to the continued loss of green belt (which I believe should be protected at all costs for us and future generations) and the amount of new housing already been approved and the possibility of even more houses in Great Wakering. The village is changing beyond all recognition and not in any ways that benefit existing residents. The increase in population is at the expense of those who already live in the village as no real investment or contribution to our village has been made by way of schools, doctors or roads etc, to name just a few (i.e. the infrastructure).

All of the legitimate concerns which residents raised before the Star lane estate and the estate behind the high street were approved, (which were ignored) are now even more critical as more population are sharing the existing infrastructure which has not been improved or enhanced. This is having a detrimental effect to the standards of living of residents.

I also refer to the "call for land" and the submission of CFS153 on Map P, the land west of the Common. I believe this land is the highest level of flood plan (Zone 3) and that the Governments recommendation that this should only ever be built on as a last resort. If this was to proceed, it would mean more traffic having to navigate very narrow streets, past a historic church, through a conservation area and past village assets of the Duck pond and the Common. I also believe that part of this plot is within the Rochford District Council's Wildlife site (which covers both sides of Common Road). Therefore any more housing so close to this area and the Common would have an effect on the local wildlife. For full transparency I declare that I am the Chairman of the trustees of the registered charity the "Friends of Wakering Common". Therefore can you kindly confirm that this area will not even be put forward for consideration.

I accept there is a need for housing, but looking at most of the properties in the Star lane these appear not to seem to contribute to the need for "affordable housing" as the asking prices are higher than many of the existing houses for sale in Wakering, therefore these properties would have been sold if affordability was the issue.

The road network from Great Wakering across through Rochford and Southend is often completely blocked and Sutton road into Rochford is almost unusable in the rush hour and more housing this side of the district would make thing much worse.

The High Street in Great Wakering is a historic and very narrow road in the conservation area and struggles with the existing traffic at the church end. Where it is narrows buses (let alone emergency services) often cannot get past the Co-op due to the amount of cars. Therefore to approve any further building to the east of the village of Great Wakering would result in more traffic through this area and exasperate the problem. This would ruin what is a very attractive focal point of the village, which should be protected. The traffic will also effect the primary school, preschools, numerous old people's homes, all of whom are vulnerable to the dangers of increased traffic.

I believe that any future housing plans should respect the wishes of local residents and look to minimise disruption and negative effects on existing residents. If development is to happen it should enhance and bring benefits to all of the residents not lower their standard of living by saturating the services and infrastructure until they break.
As elected local and district councillors I believe that the councils should be looking putting the interests of those who elected you and live here before those who wish to come to the area to live.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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 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

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!

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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).

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.

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!

As a concerned resident living in Malvern Road Hockley, I refer you to RDC reference CFSO23/COL38.

Firstly CFSO23

Lack of privacy, Less than 40ft of garden and the substantial upward slope of the proposed development land, any new housing will overlook my ground floor and first floor ( bedroom )

Security

Development of this field will open up the land to vehicles and people so possibly increasing the bigger threat of burglary.

Flooding

There is a history of flooding to existing properties ( mine included ) due to a rise in the water table in the land behind Malvern Road after prolonged rainy periods.
Due to this, a spring occurs which follows the downward slope of the land and floods back gardens.
I am worried that any building on this land would effect the water table and increase the possible inability of the field to absorb any more rain and cause even more flooding to the
back gardens.

Water pressure.

My water pressure as it stands is not up to the standard required therefor the proposed number of houses may impact the pressure even more as the existing pumps and pipework
may not support any more development.

Access

The land available at the bottom of Harrogate Drive and Greensward lane is insufficient to gain access thereby making a safety issue for road users as any development of the land behind
Malvern Road will substantially increase the traffic flow. Accidents may occur as traffic entering or leaving Harrogate Drive will have to swing wide.

Loss of amenities

Loss of view of field and woodland, this will rob the residents of quality of life and enjoyment.

Green Belt Land

The proposed building of housing on this land bordering Beckney Wood could seriously effect this ancient woodland of its flora and forna which includes wood anemones, blue bells
celendine etc and which includes as its forna....Bats, Adders, Barn Owls, Green and Red Woodpeckers, Monk Jack deer, Badgers, Pheasants not to mention all the different kind of birds
that make the wood their home. a huge influx of people walking this wood will threaten the existance of this beautiful place.

RDC reference COL38

Small plot of land Malvern Road ( Childrens play area )

This area is used by Malvern Road families and the local residents to use this land as a play area and right of way for citizens to use every day. I have been using the land for the last 40 yrs
the steep incline and narrow access for vehicles makes it totally an inapropriate and dangerous junction and poses a threat to children etc.

Flash Flooding

With the development of this play area will give rise to the occasional flash flooding as water does run down the hill with increased rain fall into Malvern Road

Forming the first stage of the Local Plan review, the Issues and Options Document identifies a series of strategic priorities and objectives to support the draft vision for the future of Rochford District. These are supported by key planning issues that have been identified for a number of themes, and potential options to deal with these issues.

Document Page, Policy and/or Paragraph Number

Comments

Our Vision and Strategic Objectives

5. Our Vision and Strategic Objectives 5.8

Maldon Council supports a number of key ideas and themes
that have come from paragraph 5.8. Improving the strategic
infrastructure network is a shared objective for both authorities;
the Southminster branch line holds a significant relationship with
the Southend train line, which must be safeguarded and
enhanced.

Delivering Homes and Jobs

Pg. 32. Para. 6.9 The revised OAN now expresses a range of between 331 and
361 homes per year. To effectively meet the revised OAN, all
possible options must be considered including a review of
Green Belt land. With the current pressures on housing need as
a national issue, there needs a balance between serving
strategic housing allocations and mitigating the consequences,
such as loss of greenfield land.

Pg. 39. Para. 6.31 Provided the national threshold for affordable housing is 10
units or 1000sqm, which has been widely adopted by most local
authorities, it would seem appropriate to use this threshold as
local policy given the pressures on affordable housing as a
national issue.

Pg. 56. Para. 6.86 Retention of or amendments to strengthen the existing policy
would be supported by the Council. Any amendments which
would be detrimental to the landscape, ecology and/or
biodiversity of the River Crouch would be objected to.

Pg. 58. Para. 6.91 With a revised OAN of 6620-7220 homes from 2017-2037, the
assessed need of up to 16 hectares of 'new' employment land between 2016-2036 would need to be appropriately situated to align with a vision that seeks increased provisions for sustainable transport and sustainable communities.

Delivering Infrastructure

Pg. 85. Para. 8.26 Although there are limitations on the level of influence local
planning authorities have on the level of provision with regard to public transport, the level of provision is based on the use of services. When identifying strategic housing allocations within the district, this must be taken into consideration. Protecting and Enhancing our Environment

Pg. 127. Para. 10.26 It should be emphasised that there will be a close working
relationship between all contributing authorities in the preparation and production of the Essex Coastal Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy and that there must be a Duty to Cooperate.

Pg. 127. Para. 10.27 Retaining or amending policy ENV1 to strengthen the current policy is supported.

Forming the first stage of the Local Plan review, the Issues and Options Document identifies a series of strategic priorities and objectives to support the draft vision for the future of Rochford District. These are supported by key planning issues that have been identified for a number of themes, and potential options to deal with these issues.

Document Page, Policy and/or Paragraph Number

Comments

Our Vision and Strategic Objectives

5. Our Vision and Strategic Objectives 5.8

Maldon Council supports a number of key ideas and themes
that have come from paragraph 5.8. Improving the strategic
infrastructure network is a shared objective for both authorities;
the Southminster branch line holds a significant relationship with
the Southend train line, which must be safeguarded and
enhanced.

Delivering Homes and Jobs

Pg. 32. Para. 6.9 The revised OAN now expresses a range of between 331 and
361 homes per year. To effectively meet the revised OAN, all
possible options must be considered including a review of
Green Belt land. With the current pressures on housing need as
a national issue, there needs a balance between serving
strategic housing allocations and mitigating the consequences,
such as loss of greenfield land.

Pg. 39. Para. 6.31 Provided the national threshold for affordable housing is 10
units or 1000sqm, which has been widely adopted by most local
authorities, it would seem appropriate to use this threshold as
local policy given the pressures on affordable housing as a
national issue.

Pg. 56. Para. 6.86 Retention of or amendments to strengthen the existing policy
would be supported by the Council. Any amendments which
would be detrimental to the landscape, ecology and/or
biodiversity of the River Crouch would be objected to.

Pg. 58. Para. 6.91 With a revised OAN of 6620-7220 homes from 2017-2037, the
assessed need of up to 16 hectares of 'new' employment land between 2016-2036 would need to be appropriately situated to align with a vision that seeks increased provisions for sustainable transport and sustainable communities.

Delivering Infrastructure

Pg. 85. Para. 8.26 Although there are limitations on the level of influence local
planning authorities have on the level of provision with regard to public transport, the level of provision is based on the use of services. When identifying strategic housing allocations within the district, this must be taken into consideration. Protecting and Enhancing our Environment

Pg. 127. Para. 10.26 It should be emphasised that there will be a close working
relationship between all contributing authorities in the preparation and production of the Essex Coastal Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy and that there must be a Duty to Cooperate.

Pg. 127. Para. 10.27 Retaining or amending policy ENV1 to strengthen the current policy is supported.

Our first objection is to the strip of beautiful woodland at the end of Marylands Avenue, running behind Merryfields Avenue and adjacent to the Nature Reserve in Hockley, being offered up as a possible site to build houses on.

The reasons being:

1. This is Metropolitan Green Belt and is there to protect the countryside from being developed inappropriately. This land is also outside the existing settlement boundary.
2. The concern over the close proximity to the Nature reserve and the detrimental effect this will have on wildlife in this area. This land is teaming with wildlife and supports the nature reserve itself as it is undisturbed by humans and provides ideal nesting sites. Bats, a protected species, can often be seen circling around in the summer months. We have seen badgers in our garden on two occasions. My neighbour spotted a Muntjac deer, that she reported to yourselves. You said that you had seen footprints nearby in the Nature reserve. My neighbour also spotted a protected species of bird, a type of bullfinch, which is on the red danger list, near to extinction.
3. The trees are protected by a tree preservation order by yourselves, the council, we have been told by another neighbour.
4. Flooding: During heavy rain, excessive amounts of water streams down the hill and congregates at the end of Marylands Avenue which the gulleys cannot cope with. The woodland provides a natural soakaway.
5. Access to this site is too narrow by far. Marylands Avenue itself is a quiet, residential family orientated street and to have heavy traffic weaving it's way up and down this road is extremely dangerous and quite unthinkable and would impact on all residents lives.
Objection to 7500 houses being built in our area over the next 20 years, including using green belt land.

1. Funding/Infrastructure: Infrastructure cannot match the proposed growth due to high levels of underfunding (by a 2016 report issued by the ECC.)
2. Utilites: The privately operated Utility companies have not proven their ability, nor given formal commitment to meeting the extra demands for the Essex County target of 185,00 new homes - (water/electricity/gas/telecoms/waste treatment/recycle.)
3. Greenbelt law: The RDC area of responsibility is 74% classified as Green Belt status, a housing project of this size can only be achieved by sacrificing the GB principals, quote - "...to prevent urban sprawl and preclude one settlement coalescing into another."
4. Civic Amenities: The 10 years (so far) of an Austerity programme has eroded civic amenities and services to the point of crisis (health and care services.) This same situation is now starting to impact Education and Emergency services due to lack of capacity - the plus 30% loading is just not feasible or sustainable.
5. Commuting: Commuting out and into the District is the root cause of rush-hour congestion, this clearly underlines that the existing housing to local workplace ratio is out of balance. Obviating the need to long-distance commute by the generation of local employment must be one of the main drivers for a project of this nature and should limit the scale accordingly.
We, as residents like living in our semi rural area. A project of this size would change our living environment to one that we did not choose, when we decided to live here. We like the feeling of open space and we enjoy driving through the countryside to get to one place or the other. We like to see trees and fields, hear birds sing, see horses in fields. We like feeling safe and knowing that we live in a settled, long standing community. A project like this would inevitably cause a lot of people to feel stressed, unsettled. A lot of people would move away. It would not be such a pleasant place to live anymore. The current resident's quality of life needs to be considered. The wildlife, nature, character of our district needs to be considered.
There simply isn't enough room, there isn't the infrastructure, amenities or utilities to consider a project of this scale. A few more houses may need to be built, but not to the detriment of the people already living here.

I would appreciate a response to my objections please.

I trust you will take into consideration my feelings on this subject.