Q56d. Are there areas that require protecting from development?

Object

Representation ID: 38045

Received: 20/08/2021

Respondent: Ms Alison Sear

I dont want the nature of my immediate environment to irrevocably change from rural to built- up, particularly with no infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 38055

Received: 22/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Stuart Jones

All areas of green belt need to be protected.

Object

Representation ID: 38106

Received: 23/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Stacey Gibson

Cfs053 is a field which is unlike any other local public access green space within walking distance to for those leaving north and east of the town centre. Dog walkers, families etc especially appreciate the variety of nature walks currently available to such residents without the need to drive.
In addition to this the Hockley Road traffic is becoming heavier causing tailbacks both through Rayleigh and Hockley. Building an additional 300+ houses with this road being the main route in will increase the pressure on the surrounding roads.

Comment

Representation ID: 38137

Received: 25/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Emily Horsey

Site Ref CFS024 land north of Merryfields Avenue:

As I have previously stated in an email:

This land is a woodland, although privately owned and inaccessible to the public, it is still essential that it is preserved. This is of environmental and ecological importance. It is also an area which backs onto the Maryland’s nature reserve which will be ruined by the building of these houses. This development goes against The RDC strategic priority 5.

Object

Representation ID: 38144

Received: 25/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs

The entirety of Rayleigh needs protection from further large scale development and hundreds more houses. The town already has several large scale developments and there does not appear to be any related improvement in the infrastructure other than the odd roundabout.

Support

Representation ID: 38224

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Kynicos

The following sites 100% require protecting from development on the grounds that will make little impact on the overall housing target while destroying many local resident environments that chose to live in these areas because there are green semi-rural spaces that exist nearby that are good for walking and switching off, without having to get into a car first: CFS105, CFS053, CFS029, CFS027, CFS098, CFS086, CFS134, CFS102, CFS181, CFS207,CFS003, CFS014, CFS037, CFS135, CFS047, CFS089, CFS178 & CFS157

Support

Representation ID: 38273

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Duncan Robertson

Areas that need protecting from developments are CFS053 and CFS027. These areas are currently fields and unspoilt green areas, by building on this land you would be destroying wildlife habitats, hedgerows and even a bridleway.
There is also a flooding risk,where is all the rainwater going to go ? It was only a few years ago that the bottom of Bull Lane was flooded ( totally impassable ) if you propose to build 300+ house this would increase the flooding risk enormously

Object

Representation ID: 38279

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Terrance Bell

CFS027 is the gateway for most residents of Rayleigh to access the upper Roach valley and Hockley woods. CFS027 would change the first part of the footpath to the Roach valley to a walk around the edge of a new housing estate.
There are many mature trees that would be at risk of destruction by the development.
CFS027 encroaches upon the upper Roach valley which is used as a recreational walking area.

Object

Representation ID: 38327

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Ms Laura Campbell

The whole of the Rayleigh Town area should be exempt from development. Pollution from vehicles, loss of green spaces, smaller Mill Hall and destruction of the heritage Mount and windmill site will affect the local population. Heavy plant & pile driving will affect the foundations of the old cottages around this area & wildlife at the Mount. Narrow roads around the town will be further blocked resulting in higher pollution & traffic congestion - a problem for pedestrians & emergency vehicles. Lack of infrastructure is already an issue, further development will make this an impossible situation. Leave Rayleigh alone!

Object

Representation ID: 38331

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Neil Gordon

CFS 146 & 147 should be left undeveloped to avoid a continuous belt of housing across this part of Rayleigh. The extra pressure these proposals would put on local roads would lead to gridlock, especially at Carpenters Arms roundabout, already blocked at rush hours. This would be exacerbated by developments west of the roundabout.

Object

Representation ID: 38336

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Bertram

Ref Numbers
Cfs027 Cfs098 Cfs086 csf029 cfs053
We strongly object to this proposed development. Rayleigh is already grid locked with traffic on the surrounding roads in this area. This is our precious green belt land, other ways should be found to achieve the plan. Particularly to the west of rayliegh where there is more access to the main road and rail network. This would also join the hockley road and Eastwood road creating a rat runs on local streets.

Object

Representation ID: 38365

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr C Thackeray

CFS027
CFS053
CFS098
CFS086
CFS105
CFS163
CFS164
CFS146
CFS147
CFS121
CFS077
CFS171
These areas either provide much valued and used green access routes to other green belt/open spaces or provide the green belt/open spaces surrounding existing housing thereby allowing its inhabitants the enjoyment and wellbeing of place.

Support

Representation ID: 38374

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr chris ward

all open areas need protecting, to live in a country that is suffering from Global warming we should be looking after the open spaces and not living in a concrete jungle.

Comment

Representation ID: 38425

Received: 02/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Vilma Wilson

Yes
COL 7 and 20

History and culture needs to remain as an integral part of our town, along with the museum.

Support

Representation ID: 38442

Received: 02/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Shirley Page

Both the Mill Hall site and the Civic Suite site should be protected from development. Both sites are of historic and cultural importance. The Mill Hall site in particular is an especially valued community resource and should not be denigrated by having housing built on it but should be enhanced for the use of the whole community. There is no other similar facility in Rayleigh and it is used by those from neighbouring areas. The extra houses currently being built in Rayleigh and Hullbridge will greatly increase the population who will wish to use this vital facility.

Object

Representation ID: 38453

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Mallett

Loss of agricultural land, loss of public amenity, loss of green belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 38457

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Mallett

All farmland between Hockley Woods, Grove Woods and Rayleigh should be included in Upper Roach Valley regional park to protect Hockley Woods from encroachment, to maintain a green lung between Rochford Hundred and Southend and provide large green recreational space with access from all directions. The necessity of this has been demonstrated by the increased use during lockdown.

Comment

Representation ID: 38459

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Mallett

The field to the north of Bull lane is prime agricultural land and should be being used as such, not left fall pending urban development. The development of this field along with those to the south of Wellington Road will inevitably lead to further encroachment in the upper Roach Valley at a later date. All green areas between the Hockley Road, Eastwood Road and Cherry Orchard Road should be protected and included in an Upper Roach Valley regional park.

Comment

Representation ID: 38477

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Anthony Cotterrill

with ref to your site assessment plan for CFS148. I find the statements in the document untrue. one such example is that on the subject of overhead pylons GREEN 5? The area is dotted with pylons and cables how can this be a true comment?
Another example is that of flood risk again GREEN 5 has your consultant actually looked at this site? you can clearly see the surround area surface water drainage flows drainage ditches (very old and cll moats on the maps) this flood in to CFS148
with such obvious oversights can this document be of any value?

Comment

Representation ID: 38478

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr John Blewett

The consultation should firstly look at local infrastructure which is currently under severe strain. Roads are already congested and by building houses on some of the small pockets of land shown in figure 44 will increase the local congestion problem.
Our concern regarding CFS059 is a case in question. Sandhill Road is a private road and not designed to take further traffic. The land sits on the Metropolitan Green Belt boundary, provides a home for wildlife and provides openness for the area which is good for health and wellbeing which you are keen to promote in your area assessment.

Comment

Representation ID: 38509

Received: 05/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Livermore

The area to the North of Great Wheatley Road (CFS077) must be rejected as a potential development site. It is not sustainable and the proposal to construct housing on this Green Belt setting has not been appropriately considered in terms of the destruction to natural habitats, woodland and appropriate access. The damage that added traffic will do the area and the town in general. False and exaggerated assurances of sympathetic construction and inclusion of landscaping must not disguise the untold damage that this level of residential construction will cause to Rayleigh and to the people living in the Wheatley Ward.

Comment

Representation ID: 38510

Received: 05/09/2021

Respondent: Mr David Livermore

Yes, all of the green spaces listed as well as those contained in CFS077, CFS087 and CFS121 must be protected from this relentless and reckless destruction of Rayleigh.

Comment

Representation ID: 38516

Received: 05/09/2021

Respondent: Mr P Davey

As mentioned above, all areas must be protected until infrastructure reaches the level to support such developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 38518

Received: 05/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Kishore Krishnamurthy

We would like to object to the proposed development of the lands of 38 and 39 Wellington Road (CFS053).
The said development is detrimental to the current neighbourhood at Nelson Road and would lead to significant reduction in the green belt area in the neighbourhood., increased vehicular traffic in an already congested road. The proposed development in this area has been declined in 1988 for various reasons. Considering the ongoing housing developments in Rayleigh, this new development is going to add to the considerable strain on the local resources including schools, public transport and healthcare services.

Support

Representation ID: 38534

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Miss tracy ward

open spaces need protection, they shouldn't be built on. PARKS, FIELDS, GREEN BELT. these places are of interest, they have wildlife living in some of them, and if you destroy their habitat where will they go, like most things they will disappear, what then, will our children/ grandchildren, be brought up not knowing about wildlife or to suffer from breathing problems, due to the amount of cars on the road, and their health will suffer due to not being able to get a GP apt, because of the amount of people living in the area.

Support

Representation ID: 38538

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Stephanie Tabbitt

I agree with the Liberals that they need to plan for a whole new town with all the appropriate infrastructure and that they should do this in cooperation with adjacent councils, not in isolation

Object

Representation ID: 38543

Received: 06/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Wayne Clifton

The green space between Wellington and bull Lane, behind nelson road. Save our green space. Build out of town. The infrastructure cant cope. Roads too busy. Pollution high

Comment

Representation ID: 38547

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: mrs Sarah de Cristofano

The area between the A127 and Eastern Road, Weir Farm Gardens and Western Road should be not be developed.
All of the major sites are too far away to walk to Rayleigh or the station and that will force more people to drive increasing congestion and pollution. Also sites next to major roads (especially the A127) should not be considered due to the air and noise pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 38551

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Bertram

Good morning
Ref Numbers
Cfs027 Cfs098 Cfs086 csf029 cfs053
We strongly object to this proposed development. Rayleigh is already grid locked with traffic on the surrounding roads in this area. This is our precious green belt land, other ways should be found to achieve the plan. Particularly to the west of rayliegh where there is more access to the main road and rail network.
Please keep us updated on the project and note our objections.

Object

Representation ID: 38555

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Glenis Beardwell

All the green areas in and around Rayleigh that currently exist need protecting - there has already been too much green space lost