Q58d. Are there areas that require protecting from development?

Yes the area around us is full of wildlife i.e. badgers, foxes, squirrels and birds of many varieties. These would disappear if more housing projects were approved and granted.

If you carry on with this ludicrous plan, which you will as you will not listen to the public, please at least ensure that Clements Hall sports field, Glenmore and Spencer's Park are left alone, just so we can remind our children what nature looks like

Any areas indicated on the map which are adjacent to woodland or farm land need to be preserved as such. We need to have these areas of special scientific interest kept for the people and kept as productive farmland.

Belchamps youth centre is a much valued amenity which would be a truly tragic loss to not just Hawkwell but future youth in Essex more generally.

Hockley Woods needs protecting as well as the area behind Folly Chase. Hockley woods is a godsend for the village and surrounding areas, and people come from all over to walk this beautiful and natural environment. Building houses on this would be detrimental to the area and would turn us into an urban area. Green space is a premium and the government initiative to move to more green spaces and reduce our carbon emissions by 2030 would not be achieved if you build more homes in this area. You need to stop building on green space.

I am a participant in the following detailed assessment of CFS064 which is already held by The Council (Daniel Goodman). It is necessary to submit this in this Public Consultation because the Council's Assessment is shown as Deliverable for Development. This report from residents does not agree with The Council.

We, Betts Farm Residents Group, are writing to launch an OBJECTION to the proposed use of land for development standing by RDC in the Local Plan. Land Registry: EX817389. The proposal of use appears in The New Local Plan 2017 to 2037 for residential development ref: CFS 064.

Betts Farm Residents Group is a group of people - 483 members - who live on the Betts Farm Estate and the directly surrounding area. The group was created three years ago to discuss local matters of concern and work together as members of the community to enhance the area in which we live.

RDC development plan was originally proposed over a decade ago. It outlines prospective areas of development within the Rochford District. The plan has been reviewed and with changes to Government strategies the planning is due to be reviewed again. One of the areas highlighted – Stephenson’s Field, Hockley - land lying between Thistledown and Hockley Primary School with Betts Woods, the London-Southend train access with residential areas surrounding. The field is currently owned by a local farmer and is used for agricultural purposes, as well as containing a widely used public footpath and protected woodlands. Access to the proposed site is via a footpath only.


It is not our belief that the proposed development would enhance the area. The site is agricultural land and has been for centuries. The farm seeds annual crops and works on a rotational basis. The land is also well used for leisure activities by local people and supports groups that are set up for rambling and running in the area as well as local families and individuals wishing to take exercise and to access the public footpaths that surround the field mainly known as Footpath 11 or the Jubilee Walk.

The development of this site will not benefit the varied socio demographic of Hockley. The current expected rate is a 65:35 split for affordable housing of which a further 80:20 between ownership and rental. The proposal put forward by yourselves means that there will be only 112 properties that would fall into this category. The current market predictions show a downturn and therefore the cost of affordable housing would have to be considered viable. The recommendation from SHELTER is that affordable housing should cost no more that 35% of someone's earnings. The average salary in the RDC district is £34k.

The proposed density of the development using RDC formulae would lead to the development of an additional minimum of 320 properties based on the minimum ratio of 30:1 hectare - although it is known that RDC will allow this ratio to vary. With this rate of development a small area would extend the population by approximately two thousand people. This proposal creates a density of housing that is not in keeping with the local area and placing an additional growth in population in the Hockley area without the inclusion of sustainable access to key services would be unacceptable.

Evidence shows from previous developments the development of this site would not meet the needs of the residents of the area. As per the Projected Population Profile there is a direct need for housing that is lifelong, easily adaptable and suitable for the disabled and elderly.

Within the local area there are four NHS doctors who are all working at capacity. Before the recent pandemic there was a shortage of appointments with GP’s in the area and also nationally. With the expansion and development of this proposed development space, the expectation of Jones Family Practice would be to expand by over one thousand patients, something that it would not be able to subsist.

Dental surgeries within a viable walking distance from the proposed site have no patient availability. Hockley does have a large central private practice, however with the ongoing threat of recession and unemployment this is not a measure that people can be expected to take.

The nearest school to the proposed site is Hockley Primary School which forms part of the AET academies of which all Hockley schools belong. Hockley School’s headteacher, Mrs. Heatherson, has placed an objection previously based on the lack of spaces available and the increase in traffic flow - we believe in 2010. Hockley School is a small purpose built school with no room for expansion. The grounds are surrounded by ancient woodland and the school playing field lies adjacent to the proposed site. We also believe that the school has recently had an expansion of the numbers of pupils refused. This application was made due to the lack of spaces available versus the required places. The school also has a unique acceptance process that puts children without siblings in catchment below those out of catchment as well as staff children. Essex County Council’s School Place Planning indicates that there will be a rise in demand over the coming decade which does not accommodate changes in population. With the opening of Jelly Beans Open Air in 2018 the pupils rates have also grown as have traffic issues in the area.

The Betts Farm estate has a problematic traffic flow and parking for residents. The estate has parking, often on both sides of the road, during the day. This has led to issues at the school which have an impact on health and safety. An example being children not being able to be returned to school after a school trip as the coach was unable to gain access due to parking. The number of vehicles has risen in recent years and continues to increase. RDC is aware of this situation due to complaints from residents. The estate is also used for parking by commuters using the London-Southend trains and SEETEC employees who are employed on Main Road. Any form of vehicle increase would cause the roads to have blind spots, lack of residential parking and poor levels of accessibility.


During the Covid 19 pandemic the use of Broadband has become a prevalent service for all. Pre-pandemic Hockley has had several issues with the service provided. The main providers have an interrupted service which is slow and not on a par with advertised rates. There were many reports of people unable to work from home due to the speed of their Broadband and it’s incapability to cope with high traffic levels. Essex County Council is introducing the Super Speed Highway for broadband, “Super Fast Essex”, however there are no plans to provide this area with high speed broadband or fibre connectivity through the council but using private providers. With home working becoming more prevalent post-pandemic it is essential that any additional development would be able to provide a good broadband service which currently the area cannot.



RDC proposed access point is not viable for the free and safe movement of vehicles as required by both EEC and the DTI, the proposed access being a small road way between two properties. According to the land registry the proposed land markings are incorrect on the proposals pitched by the council. There is a boundary discrepancy with the surrounding property, Thistledown. This would mean that the proposed field would be inaccessible to larger vehicles required for development and in the longer term for delivery access and utilities.

‘The positioning of any site entrances, exits and haul roads in relation to the surrounding area should be positioned to route vehicles, whether on or off the site, away from sensitive locations, such as residential areas, schools and hospitals.’ Controlling particles, vapour and noise pollution from construction sites - RBKC.gov.uk

Studies show that the pollutant levels caused by building sites have a detrimental effect on local residents. These are caused by:

Air Pollution: the air will be contaminated by debris caused by the site. Apart from the noise, poor air quality is the most immediate pollution effect that residents will experience from a construction site. Airborne contaminants including contaminated particulate matter and volatile compounds spread around, mostly carried by wind, in the surrounding neighbourhood. The main wind direction will influence the area most affected by air pollution around a construction site. Contaminants spreading around in air can travel large distances in a short time. The main construction contaminants that spread around by wind include PM10 (particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns generating polluted dust), PAHs bound to particulate matter, VOCs (volatile organic compounds), asbestos, gases such as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen oxides.

Water Pollution: the surface water runoff and the groundwater close to a construction site become polluted with various materials used in the construction work. As described for air pollution above, the following construction contaminants can pollute the water: VOCs, paints, glues, diesel, oils, other toxic chemicals, and cement. The immediate effect is creating turbidity in the runoff water and affected surface and groundwater, since some of the runoff water may infiltrate in the subsurface reaching the groundwater. Both groundwaters below the top layer and surface runoff close to homes may constitute a source of pollution emanating from the construction sites. This is a threat to local protected wildlife and the ancient woodland that surrounds the proposed site as well as domestic animals who use the field. This will be of great effect to the school field and therefore local children. There have been repetitive run off issues within the field which also contains Hockley Brook which flows throughout Hockley and therefore would spread any pollutants that enter it.

Soil Pollution: soil at and around a construction site can become contaminated due to air transport followed by deposition of construction contaminants as well as water runoff of construction contaminants. Soil may constitute a sink for pollutants and some of those may accumulate in soil and persist over longer periods of time (e.g., PAHs).

Noise Pollution: noise is usually associated with construction work which may adversely affect the health of local residents, including effects such as stress, sleep disturbance, high blood pressure and even hearing loss.

With current proposals it is estimated that the development would add an increase of 600 cars to the narrow roads of Folly Chase, Folly Lane, Church Road and the main roads of Hockley. This does not include the additional traffic in the form of visitors, deliveries and day to day residential operations. Previous car monitoring in the area shows that vehicular use of the roads was in its thousands daily which in such close proximity can lead to health complications from pollutants - diesel is responsible for emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxides causing long term damage to the respiratory system. This would remain prevalent after the development had been finished.

AQMA’s will not be reduced due to the substantial amount of traffic using Main Road as an access route to other areas eg Southend Airport. During periods of the day there are two junctions that are affected by stagnant traffic by the additional flow of up to six hundred residential vehicles as their direct access route on to Main Road and the surrounding roads. There is no scope for the redevelopment of junctions in the area due to the narrow formation of the involved roads.

The proposed site would only allow a small amount of sustainable transport modes to reduce pollutants. This would be in the form of a bicycle, however Hockley does not have a developed cycle route and the roads in the local area are too narrow to do so. Neither does Hockley have access to hire services and bicycles are expensive to purchase and maintain.

The site does not reduce the need to travel to reach amenities. The original development plan and recent County Council proposals mean that people will need to travel to access library and council facilities. The proposed merger of services for Basildon, Southend and Broomfield Hospitals means that patients will need to travel further to reach previously easily accessed services.

Whilst there is a timetabled regular bus service with an average ten minute walking distance, the extent of traffic congestion means that these do not run on time in either direction. The closest bus stop would be approximately 0.4 miles from the proposed entrance or 1.0 miles for a different service via the road. Employment opportunities in the local area are limited and travel to work would be frequent to and from the Southend and London areas in particular.

This expansion in the volume of the traffic will lead to the increase of air pollutants. There will also be an increase in air pollutants caused by the development itself. During the time of the proposed build there would be an increase in airborne pollutants. Pollution emissions from construction sites can have a detrimental effect on health and the local environment. Particles and vaporous discharges can have an adverse impact on the health of local residents by affecting particularly the eyes, nose, mouth, lungs and skin. Fine particles can penetrate deep into the lungs, contributing to respiratory and cardiovascular problems. Large particles can cause nuisance through soiling of surfaces such as cars, property and washing. Excessive noise levels can be a hazard to local people and disturb local wildlife.

It is our understanding that a recent development on Folly Lane has led to a public drainage issue in the area. We understand from residents that until recently this new housing development was not able to be connected to sewage outlets resulting in the use of a cesspit which was being emptied daily. The pump house on the Folly Grove estate, that the waste system is now connected to, leads to the pump house on Caernarvon Close on the Betts Farm estate. This pump house already services the Betts Farm estate, Folly Chase and now the new development on Folly Lane. It is our belief that the pump house in Caernarvon Close is now at flow capacity and would not be able to cope with any more additional flow.

Light pollution is especially relevant in this area with many species relying on moon patterns for breeding seasons, for example the local glow worm community which actively breeds in the vicinity. Light pollution caused by a new development would have a detrimental effect on such breeding programmes. Currently the proposed site is sheltered from these forms of pollutants due to the canopies created by the trees that form the surround of the field. All of the current residential properties have a tree break between themselves and the proposed site.

The proposed area has a number of protected wildlife species that form part of the micro environment within the woodland and field areas. There is an established badger sett, closely monitored by the Essex Badger Protection Group, within Betts Wood. Also, local residents have mentioned the field providing a breeding ground for glow worms that can be seen in the field past dusk. A full ecological survey of the land would be required prior to any land being considered for development.

Betts wood is found on the perimeter of the field. The wood consists of ten acres of ancient semi natural woodland. Several species are found within the area including Hornbeam, Hawthorne, Holly and Silver Birch. There is a range of Oak trees that are also in the area. The wood is maintained by RDC and coppiced five years ago. Areas such as these provide biodiversity that should be protected in the current climate. Locally, Betts Wood, and also Hockley-Hall Wood South, are known as the “Bluebell Woods”, due to the magnificent display of bluebells in spring.

Hockley-Hall Wood South lies within the boundary of the potential field development, near the railway line. The wood contains a range of Oak-Hornbeam wood. This ancient wood is small yet contains Period II boundary woodbanks with pollard trees. The woodland is referenced by Oliver Rackham in his book, ‘The Ancient Woods of South-East Essex’. This wood also contains, as does Betts Wood, a range of veteran trees that provide a contribution to the biodiversity of the area. The Woodland Trust has stated that, “Ancient Woodland dates back hundreds of years and supports more threatened species than any other habitat in the UK. However, only around 550000ha remains. It is a functionally irreplaceable resource for biodiversity and is also an important part of our cultural heritage.”

On the field boundary, opposite Hockley-Hall Wood South, lying adjacent to Betts Wood, there is a further ancient wood - Folly Wood. There is great concern that any form of development would cause disturbance and damage to all three of these ancient woodland areas which partially surround the site on three sides. All three of these woods have grown and developed over hundreds of years. The effects of the development being built are listed above. There would be an increase of pollution after the development is completed due to the increase of an average 450 cars to the estate, and light pollution. Even the additional impact of domestic pets on the site would need to be taken into consideration, as well as trampling and the risk of fly-tipping. We are of the understanding that all three of these sites would have equal protection in the National Planning Policy Framework. RDC would need to make considerations for the woodland pasture identified as ancient in planning decisions in the same way as any other larger woodland area.

Previously mentioned is the use of land for recreational purposes by the local community. Whilst being used for agriculture, a main public footpath, Footpath 11, is situated around the field. This key footpath services the Jubilee Walk as well as Footpath 10 and is actually directed through Hockley-Hall Wood South. These footpaths give access to a variety of areas in Hockey and the surrounding areas.

A development in the site would do nothing to conserve the areas or enhance the diversity of species that are found within. The development would cause a range of potential issues for the immediate wildlife and the three ancient woodlands that surround the field. As these areas of woodland are relatively small they face a larger potential risk from the damage that is caused by the chemical effects of the development not only as building takes place but after once the buildings are in situ. The development would ‘increase the isolation of natural habitats by creating increasing barriers to movement ‘(Belisle&Clair 2002). It may be associated with the destruction of semi natural habitats and movement corridors between ancient woodland fragments and ancient woods and nearby semi natural habitats. (ref. Woodland Trust)

A development on this site would not maintain and enhance the general greenbelt location of this site. The ability to conserve the wildlife, trees and plants within the space would decline and there is the further opportunity for non-native plant species invasion. The development would lower the probability for species to disperse successfully between the woods. There would also be a change caused in local species breeding behaviour as previously mentioned.

Over the past six months we have seen the need for green spaces in this country. Not always the bigger places but small areas of recreation that have allowed the local community to walk, children to play and develop their experience of nature whilst developing a sense of respect and understanding of the area in which they live. The land is currently used effectively and development here would not deliver any form of enhancement to the use or management on the Urban Fringe. The area provides vital access to less mobile local people who are limited with their travel options to an outdoors haven for exercise and helping their physical and mental wellbeing. Losing this would directly negatively impact the quality of life for the residents who rely on this area remaining natural and free from development. MIND has stated that the ability to spend time in nature has been found to help with a range of mental health problems including anxiety and depression. Research into, ‘Ecotheraphy’ has shown that it can and does help with a variety of Mental Health problems.

In conclusion, the representatives of Betts Farm Residents Group OBJECT to the proposals made by Rochford District Council. It is felt that the proposed site would not enhance the local area nor would it bring advantages to those living on the Betts Farm estate, Folly Lane or the general Hockley area. We believe that it would result in a series of issues, from its commencement, to local residents and the surrounding natural area, that are clearly laid out in this objection.

Fields and pathways around Clements Hall need protecting for their access for walkers, horses and for natural developments, green highways etc.

I feel that further development of this area will be at a detriment to local infrastructure, particularly schools. My particular concern is the development of the area behind Hockley Primary School. This school would suffer the burden of extra places, and if expanded would destroy its character as the local village school. I also feel over development of the Betts Farm area will negatively impact on environmental health. The increase in traffic will increase harmful emissions in an area where children will be playing and learning. I feel this development will also encroach on the area of nearby ancient woodland.

yes CSF263 should be protected due to local wildlife see there such as badger, Rabbits, foxes and birds

The Increase in traffic on the already congested roads. it will generate more private cars and air quality will decrease further meaning that the site is unacceptable and unsustainable for further development. Public transport, Doctors, Schools and local shops are required to be improved before any new houses.

Traffic from this site would have to go through Pulpit Farm site therefore my objection to this site are the same and if permission is given for this site then it would be given for CFS 263 to allow access. The Increase in traffic on the already congested roads. it will generate more private cars and air quality will decrease further meaning that the site is unacceptable and unsustainable for further development. Public transport, Doctors, Schools and local shops are required to be improved before any new houses. Plus it would affect the public footpath and bridleway.

I wish to object to sites CFS199, CFS 201, CFS197 The Increase in traffic on the already congested roads. it will generate more private cars and air quality will decrease further meaning that the site is unacceptable and unsustainable for further development. Public transport, Doctors, Schools and local shops are required to be improved before any new houses.

With specific reference to site CFS074:
This site provides one of the iconic views of Hockley/Hawkwell from the B1013 across wide open space to Gusted Hall Woods and Hockley Woods. Development here would fundamentally alter the character of the area, leading to loss of amenity and open space
There is a public footpath across the site that is frequently used by walkers, runners and cyclists. Development would lead to loss of this amenity.
Skylarks nest in this field. Skylarks have declined on farmland by > 50% during the 90s and are still declining. Loss of this habitat will be detrimental to this species and contribute to further decline. With land lying fallow this summer wild flowers have started to return. Again loss of this habitat will be detrimental to local biodiversity.
Access to the site from the B1013, which is regularly congested. Development here will exacerbate this meaning the site is unsustainable for further development
Increased traffic will increase pollution - worsened with gridlocked traffic - bringing detriment to physical and mental health of local residents
The site is a considerable walk from town centre amenities and local schools - meaning more local car journeys

All our woodland areas and conservation lands, our children walk in this woodlands as I did as a child, its a fantastic area for all families and wildlife.

I am opposed to the development of land to the north and east of Folly Chase (CFS064). The site has poor road access, leading to noise, pollution and congestion on the B1013 and potentially the quiet residential Betts Farm Estate (access by the latter would be totally unreasonable and would also involve the removal of Hockley's Community Centre). There would be a significant impact on residents health and well-being.The site has a well used and loved footpath providing access to green belt countryside and is the start of several circular walks.

Trinity Woods,Hockley Woods and surrounding farm land need protecting or utilising in to family space.Ideally like Cherry Orchard Nature Reserve.

All green belt sites should be protected from development to stop any further irreversible damage to the environment. The whole of Rochford District is already at capacity. Upper Roach Valley Special Landscape area needs permanently protecting. Same is true of land surrounding Clements Hall, St Mary's Church and Hall Road.

No further development should take place until the infrastructure is in place. The Council should push back to national government any requests for further building until adequate roads etc. have been built.

All areas of wildlife habitat need to be presereved especially if they are home to badger populations as disturbing these causes major problems to property in the surrounding areas. It is also vitally important that attention is payed to maintain existing biodiversity in order to support all species particularly endangered or protected ones.
Existing farmland should not be used for development as apart from providing important wildlife habitat around its boundaries it is more important than ever that we keep our country's food sources in production to provide for the increasing population and help decrease our reliance on importing food.

Ref CFS064 plan for housing on site Folly Chase for 214 houses
This site is green belt and has been farmed regularly for some years
The field has a locally important footpath running round its perimeter (The Queen Elizabeth Walk) well
used for recreation by walkers.
The field has important wildlife habitat .
Dont you think we have all ready have a traffic problem in Hockley .
Will you be building more schools for the extra children .
I could go on and on but do you all care

Site CFS194 needs to be protected from developers.
It is productive farmland which would be lost forever. We should be producing more of our own food not building over agricultural land.
Site CFS194 and adjacent sites are full of wildlife. We feed badgers, foxes, squirrels and birds that live there. Where would they go? It's environmental vandalism to concrete over and displace all this wildlife.
This area also flooded in 2013, why build with a flood risk?
Also, the infrastructure simply does not exist to support such a massive influx of people and extra traffic.

The area surrounding Beckney woods CFS023, COL38, CFS197, 198 / 199, CFS204, CFS236. The Horse fields ( pulpits) at CFS263 and CFS259. Area along railway line CFS169 and CS194.These fields are wildlife corridors and also enjoyed by general public. Increase in population/ traffic and new housing developments has forced more and more wildlife into these areas. Where will/ can they go?

Site CFS064 adjacent to Betts Wood is not suitable for housing or commercial development for a number of reasons including:
1. Road access would have to be through existing residential roads not designed for increased volume of traffic.
2. It would isolate the existing wildlife in Betts Wood including at least one badger set.
3. The current field drains into a small stream that in the past has caused flood damage to some houses in Westminster Drive. Building houses or commercial units would increase the risk of localised flooding.

I object to the developments at CFS064, CFS94045, CFS160, CFS161CFS074, CFS194, CFS169, CFS150, CFS020 & CFS261 Hockley and Hawkwell cannot currently cope with the number of people and cars that are on the road. There is only 1 way into Hockley and out the roads are already gridlocked at school time and rush hour, let alone the state of the roads. The schools and Doctors surgerys are already over subscribed to and you cannot get a doctors appointment for generally over 2 weeks.
In relation to CFS064 the proposed development is near to Betts Woods and Bluebell Woods. Two areas of high wildlife population that would undoubtedly be disrupted by any development. They would also be detrimental impact on the environment with pollution from the many additional cars, as most households have at least 2 cars now.

We have provided a separate submission by email which includes a table setting out some of your site allocations, mainly ones in Hockley and Rayleigh, that we believe may pose a threat to ancient woodland or to ancient veteran trees. We would like you consider either removing these from the plan or, where possible, putting in appropriate buffers (of at least 50 metres).

Site COL38 should be protected from development as this Park is a well-used amenity by the local residents. It is used as a access point to Beckney woods, as well as a popular spot for dog walkers etc. This has previously been recognised by Mr Martin Elliott following an inspection in 2014 that concluded there is a public right of way. It is our understanding that this land is on peppercorn rent to Ashingdon parish council; from when the lease started in 2000 it had to be used as a play area for at least the next 100 years.

Sites CFS023, CFS199, CFS204, CFS206, CFS201, CFS197, CFS198, CFS236, CFS263, CFS259 and COL38 should be protected. Developing these sites would cause irreversible harm to green belt land and have a significant detrimental effect on woodland and associated habitats and trees. Agricultural land would also be adversely affected. Building on those sites would also add to already congested roads and lead to a loss of footpaths and bridleways and impact the openness of the general area. Beckney Woods is one of the few remaining local areas of natural beauty where residents can enjoy peace and quiet, and should therefore be protected.

Site CFS023 (Land north and east of Malvern Road) should be protected from development as developing on this piece of land will have detrimental and irreversible effects to the adjacent ancient woodland; your own site survey scores it at a 1 (worst performing site) in regards to ancient woodland. Your vision statement for Hockley / Hawkwell is about “making the most of its access to ancient woodland”, clearly recognising the importance of protecting our ancient woodland, including Beckney woods.
The government’s own gov.uk website (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ancient-woodland-and-veteran-trees-protection-surveys-licences#assess-the-impacts) states that developments nearby ancient woodland can have the following affects:
• reducing the amount of semi-natural habitats next to ancient woodland
• increasing the amount of pollution, including dust
• increasing disturbance to wildlife from additional traffic and visitors
• increasing light or air pollution
• increasing damaging activities like fly-tipping and the impact of domestic pets
• changing the landscape character of the area
All of the above would affect the ancient woodlands of Beckney woods, and the vast range of ancient trees and other flora and fauna that inhabit it. Any increased pollution to the area would damage the wonderful bluebells and wood anemones in Beckney woods.

In the Hockley/Hawlkwell area Beckney woods is one of only 2 ancient woodlands; therefore it is not unreasonable to protect Beckney woods by choosing other sites for housing developments which are not adjacent to ancient woodlands, therefore ancient woodland ecosystems would not destroyed.

The Woodlands Trust is actively working to save ancient woodlands and ensure appropriate buffering land is in place, therefore we have informed them of your proposal, as the site is one of the last remaining greenbelt strips connecting Beckney Woods to the surrounding areas.

The proposed site is an important animal and insect habitat in its own right. Many different birds of prey use the green belt as a hunting ground, meaning there is numerous small prey animals that call the site home. Snakes are known to live on the site, while bats can be seen most evenings, so they must roost nearby. Foxes and badgers have also been sighted on the proposed site, as have both Spotted and Green Woodpeckers. We would be able to provide photographical evidence of these, if required.

Furthermore, there are other reasons in addition to the site being adjacent to ancient woodland that make Site CFS023 inappropriate for development.

This is green belt land, and should not be built on. Why make policy changes on protected sites, when others are suitable instead. Your own survey ranks development on the site as the most damaging to green belt land. There is a lot of trees on the site itself, which would have to be felled; again this is indicated on your survey as having a big impact on protected trees.

The proposed access to this site (Harrogate Drive) is currently single lane track and is not suitable for the additional traffic 139 houses will bring. It is unclear what land would be used to widen this road to make it suitable as there are already houses either side of this unmade track/road. Additionally, your site survey highlights that the development is no where near any parts of the strategic road network, and while reasonable access to Greensward Lane for a bus stop, it has very poor access to bus services.

While the proposed site may have a low flood risk itself (as it is on the crest of a hill, with pretty steep terrain), if it was to be developed there is a real risk that the extra water that will no longer soak into the ground (due to a large amount of new pavements, roads, driveways and the houses themselves) will cause surface flooding issues to those houses beneath in Malvern Road. Many of the houses in Malvern Road already have issues with such flooding. The site itself also scores poorly for critical drainage risk.

Malvern Road already suffers with weak water pressure, which will only be exacerbated by further housing development.
I would also like to question how the proposed site has received a 5 for topography, as it is literally on the crest of a hill, with a steep West to East gradient. I would like any planning officer / councillor to walk the length of the site and not comment on the height change.

Access to local primary and secondary schools maybe good, as they are physically within walking distance, but from their Ofsted reports, they do not have the capacity to support the additional housing you are suggesting on the area. Surely picking a larger site, where developers would have to provide facilities, such as schools and doctors, would be a smarter choice by the council. Leading on from this, the road infrastructure in the local area is already struggling to meet demand, in particular on Greensward Lane under the railway line where a large bottleneck forms as there are no alternative routes through.

Site COL38 requires protecting. Although titled as a formal park on the planning options map, it is very much still an active park. It provides access to Beckney woods, one of the key ancient woodlands in your vision for Hockley & Hawkwell.

Site CFS023 needs protecting from development. It provides a vital buffer land between existing developments and the ancient woodlands of Beckney woods. Removing this greenbelt land would require needless policy changes - the greenbelt holds importance as it forms a vital habitat that co-exists with the ancient woods. There are many other sites in Rochford district that if developed, would not cause irreversible damage to ancient woodlands. The site has many animals, plants and trees that call it home; which would be destroyed. The proposed access is too narrow to handle two-way traffic, with no room to widen.