Q58d. Are there areas that require protecting from development?

Support

Representation ID: 41838

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Mr George Fitzgerald

ust to add to the many objections of additional housing within the Hockley area, there is insufficient drainage, flood risk analysis of the local environment, utility provision generally, the area is gridlocked most days during minor street work activities, building 200 plus new homes will cripple the entire neighbourhood's, we will stand and fight this process, at every stage, for our futures and our children's.

Support

Representation ID: 41840

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Lesley Rogers

I have just seen the plans for proposed new houses in the Hawkwell area, this must be joke there is insufficient Doctors, Schools, and roads at present without more people and cars in the area.
The main sewer system will not cope only recently there was a sewage problem at Clements Hall.
You will be destroying wildlife and open space which we need for everyone’s mental health.

Support

Representation ID: 41842

Received: 27/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Adrian Rogers

My family and I have been living in Hockley and Hawkwell for the last 20 years and it seems there’s an ever increasing level of new houses being built in the area.
To my horror, I discover plans for a further 1200 new homes in the Hawkwell/ashingdon area. This is totally unacceptable and I strongly object. Roads, schools, hospitals etc. I don’t need to go on. Please put a stop to this madness.

Support

Representation ID: 41844

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mr David Glover

Site on Betts Farm CFS064
I am writing to voice my opposition to the site put forward for development behind Hockley Primary School (Ref: CFS064).
This would be an exceptionally bad site for any development, one of the worst put forward. Not only would it be a abysmal site for development due to lack of access, but also dangerous roads (Folly Lane), which are already struggling with current traffic levels, and congested streets around the school itself; especially bad during school drop offs.
Pollution is also a serious concern, as the site is situated directly behind the primary school. As has been proven by many studies, young children are especially susceptible to the effects of bad air quality, thus placing 200+ houses, and associated infrastructure and traffic, within yards of a school could potentially have very serious health implications. Not something one should risk.
Should any development take place the local area would lose a quite considerable section of prime agricultural land, which in a time of increasing need for food security, would appear very ill thought out. The woodlands, full of Bluebells in spring, surrounding the fields could also be damaged by any proposed development, and with a steep railway embankment and large bridge within the north east entrance to the area, health and safety would also be a concern.
The natural beauty of this area, including ancient woodlands, proximity to St Peter and St Paul's Church as well as being in an area of Hockley with great historical and ecological sites must also be considered, as well as access issues and potential reduction in air quality.

I understand this site is one of many put forward by landowners, and many (hopefully including this one) will not be selected, but I thought it was only right to put forward my opposition at an early stage.

Support

Representation ID: 41846

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: John & Carole Pocklington

Number of people: 2

We wish to object most strongly to the recent applications for more houses wanting to be built in and around our small village. We refer mainly to the huge developments CFS160 &CFS161 also CFS194 CHS169 CFS150 &CFS020 ,To go ahead with these projects would be detrimental to the area and its residents .The roads in the area are already crowded and in need of repair and would not be able to support the extra traffic. Both areas support a great deal of wildlife and the area is an open space for residents . We have lived in Hockley since 1969 and have seen it go from a lovely village to what is becoming an overcrowded environment.. We say enough is enough and it is time the council and our MP respect and take note of the people.

Support

Representation ID: 41848

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Jim Mann

New local plan (CFS064) SPATIAL OPTIONS PAPER
I OBJECT TO THIS FIELD SITE(CFS064) BEING USED FOR HOUSING FOR THE FOLLOWING CORE REASONS:
- It is precious green belt and farmed regularly.
-There would be severe impact on the level of congestion on the B1013
- The field has a locally important footpath running around its perimeter, well used for recreation by walkers. I have a small garden so use it daily for my physical & mental health - over the past 18 months it has been vital to me personally for these reasons

Support

Representation ID: 41850

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Mann

New local plan (CFS064) SPATIAL OPTIONS PAPER
I OBJECT TO THIS FIELD SITE(CFS064) BEING USED FOR HOUSING FOR THE FOLLOWING CORE REASONS:


- This is an area of green belt which is becoming smaller & smaller
- The area is in use as farmed land - again something which is in decline in this area. (Surely BREXIT/Covid/environmental problems have shown us we need more local food production not less)

-There would be severe impact on the level of congestion on the v busy B1013
- The field has a locally important footpath running around its perimeter, well used for recreation by walkers. I have very little outside space so rely on this daily for my physical & mental health - over the past 18 months it has been vital to me personally for these reasons
- I was born here & benefitted from what used to be a rural area, enjoying the ancient woodlands & it’s wildlife. We used to have an abundance of hedgehogs, adders & ancient badger setts, I want no further losses. The impact on insect life that the loss of this area would cause also needs to be seriously considered.

Support

Representation ID: 41854

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: mr james holloway

Site Ref CFS024
I object to the above mentioned site being developed this site should and always be for the wildlife and country side
it has been like that for thousands of years you should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking of building on this land.

Support

Representation ID: 41858

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Terina Wilkinson

Objection to CFSO64
I would like to object to the possibility of any housing being built behind the community centre in Hockley site CFSO64. I co-run the pre-school attached to this area and this would mean hundreds of children would be without the facility of a pre-school, and would also take away my livelihood and community pre-school serving the many residents of Hockley already.

Support

Representation ID: 41860

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Wendy Kemp

Proposed Building in Hawkwell
I have just received notification of the proposed building in Hawkwell. I cannot believe this!!! The roads are packed as it is around here the additional traffic will make it even worse. Getting appointments for doctors and dentists is a joke with all the extra people will make it impossible.
I was born here and lived all my life here I except that we do need more housing but this!!!!!! No!!! It will change this town completely and not for the better and the thought of losing our green space is heart breaking.
I strongly protest.

Support

Representation ID: 41862

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Reynolds

CFS064. Beets farm proposed buildings.
I am a local-resident of Hockley living at Folly lane. Who will be directly impacted by this proposal.
I want to notify you of my objection to the proposed build of some 200 plus houses in the fields at the back of folly chase. Ref CFS064.
My reasons for this objection are

This will lead to anything from 200 to 400 new vehicles which will travel onto either Folly chase / lane or the Betts Farm estate. Adding to the already high level of traffic, which is now ridiculous giving the addition of the Pond Chase Estate.

Continuing erosion of green land which is actively used by locals for recreation.
Effects of this to the local badger community residing on the Pond Chase common ground.

Ongoing sewer issues. Residents of both Folly Chase and Pond Chase estate had to put up with sewage trucks and finally a pump house as the current sewer was not robust enough for the addition of Pond Chase. This new build will further add load to this already stretched utility.

Access to the site whilst construction takes place. This will no doubt add to the issues of traffic in and around the area with temp traffic lights and large vehicles. Adding damage and wear to the already poor condition of the road surface on Folly Lane.

Removal of the fields natural drainage will result in the risk to localised flooding. Look at the number of houses in Pond lane which do not have gardens but block paved drives.

My understanding is that the local community centre would move. The locals will loose yet another facility in the area.

I understand the need for the extra houses but suggest there are better sites between Rochford and Southend which would make sense to all.

I assume the council will treat any common ground play areas as they do in Pond Chase. Simply let it overgrow and fall into disrepair.

Support

Representation ID: 41864

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Anthony Pearce

Subject: Site ref CFS024
It has come to my attention that there are plans to build 39 houses to the rear of my property.
I strongly protest to this planning permission being granted as this will cause my family a great deal of distress to be overlooked into our garden.

Support

Representation ID: 41870

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Beverley Figg

Subject: Site ref CFS024

It has come to my attention that there are plans to build 39 houses to the rear of my property.
I strongly protest to this planning permission being granted as this will cause my family a great deal of distress to be overlooked into our garden as both my boys have autism and the reason we moved to this house was because we are not overlooked and the lack of noise as they can’t cope with it.

Support

Representation ID: 41874

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Ayesha Ellis

I would like to object to the proposed planning of new houses ear marked for a potential 801 houses in the sites CFs194, CFS169, CFS150, CFS020 from clients hall sports centre to Victor gardens.
I live in Victor Gardens and this road is already used as a cut through to bypass the already heavily congested Southend road. People speed down this road at all hours of the day.
An increase in houses will make this road heavily congested and heavily polluted.
This development will also infringe on the loss of footpaths and bridleways resulting In a lack of open spaces which will have a dentrmemntal affect on the mentalwell being of residents. This area is also a nesting area for Slow worms and would cause destruction to the natural wildlife like foxes and deer which inhabit this area.

The air quality would deteriorate as traffic volumes have already j creased in the area causing health problems for residents.
The schools In the area are over subscribed as are the doctors surgeries .

Support

Representation ID: 41877

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Cottee

MY objections for the Local Plan
CFS045 - 152 Houses
CFS064 - 214 Houses
CFS160 & CFS161 - 124 Houses
CFS074 - 498 Houses
CFS194, CFS169, CFS150 & CRS020 - 801 Houses
CFS261 - 4,447 Houses

My objections are: NO INFRASTRUCTURE. Do you know how hard it is for the Residence to get in to see a DOCTOR etc?

LOCATION. Proximity to existing centres. Road Congestion. Inadequate Bus Service.



HIGHWAY ISSUES. Road congestion on B1013 & Ashington Road. Do you know how hard it is to use these Roads in peak times?

FLOODING. For example CS194 Hawkwell Brook is designated a tidal river by DEFRA. The Council’s report omits the floods of 1968 and 2013 from this river.

Support

Representation ID: 41883

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Cathy Chaplin

Objections to more housing in Hockley and Hawkwell
I am writing to you to share my objection to more houses being developed and built in my local area.
I believe that any further developments will further increase traffic movements on already congested road which I have to use daily for my work. The infrastructure of the area will also suffer as there will not be enough places for people to use essential local amenities such as doctors and schools which are already over subscribed. I chose to move to Hockley as it has many green spaces available for me to enjoy with my family, however with the proposed plans these will no longer exist which is a sad state of affairs not just for the people of Hockley who enjoy them but also the wildlife and the impact this will have on the environment will impact on us as humans.
Please consider the views of the local residents.

Support

Representation ID: 41885

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Coleman

I wish to register objections to some of the current planning applications being considered.

CFS 074 Large field opposite Rawal Pindi Nursury, Hawkwell
The main objection is the traffic flow onto the B1013 road will increase dramatically and cause congestion to an already busy road. Bottlenecks are already current occurrences. Will the road be widened to cope with increased traffic? Will new schools, doctors' surgeries be provided?

CFS194, CFS169, CFS150, CFS020 - Land from Clements hall to Victor gardens
Traffic flows will feed into either Ashingdon Lane or Rectory Rd. These roads were never built to take the traffic from a potential of 800 houses on what are country lanes. It will destroy green corridors for wildlife. Walking or cycling are not viable alternatives. Will the developments lead to the loss of footpaths or bridleways? Will flooding be a problem on site CFS194 in particular from Hawkwell Brook which flooded in 1968?

CFS261 Back of King Edmund School off Brays lane
Traffic flows will feed into Ashingdon Rd, which is already a busy road. The possibility of 4,447 new homes being proposed would create a traffic nightmare for Rochford. Is this green belt land, and how would this affect green corridor for wildlife?. Is the land currently being used as productive farmland?

General comments which affect all the above proposed sites are:
Air quality would further deteriorate with the introduction of unprecedented traffic increases.
Accessibility to vital services. How long are the walking distances to local services?
Education . Is there capacity for all the additional families?
Green corridors for wildlife are important. What devastation will this cause to existing wildlife?

Support

Representation ID: 41889

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Russell Beharrie

Number of people: 2

Site ref: CFS024 land north of Merryfields Avenue, Hockley, Essex
I am writing in reference to the potential building works that shall occur on the site above.

Location - It is green belt land that is at the end of Marylands Avenue of which I am resident with my wife and our 5 year old daughter. We bought the property partly because of the relatively quiet road that was Marylands Avenue. Unfortunately we have seen quite a large amount of HGV's going down to the site in question over the last year or so.
If the 39 houses were permitted then the increase on already congested roads mean that the site is unacceptable for further development.

Infrastructure - The location will generate more private car journeys and it is unlikely that bus, walking or cycling will prove a viable alternative. This gives an increased chance of bottlenecks.

Green corridor for wildlife - This site is also important for local wildlife. As a family we regularly go for walks around the block and go past this site and enjoy listening to the woodpecker and other bird sounds that come from there. It would be devastating for my little girl to go down there and only hear the sound of building works going on.

Support

Representation ID: 41891

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Paul Hughes

CFS064
I object to this field site (CFS064) being used for housing for the following reasons:
-The roads on the Betts Farm estate could see a significant increase in traffic well in excess of levels they were built for.
- There would be significant increase in pollution.
Additional traffic would be a cause for concern with the infants / junior school so close by, as many children walk.
- The B1013 is already at more than capacity and there would be a severe impact to the traffic congestion.
- General infrastructure does not exist to accommodate additional residents.
- The field is an important wildlife habitat and supports many native species. The surrounding ancient woods would be badly impacted by the development.
- it is prime green belt land and includes footpaths used for recreation by walkers.

Support

Representation ID: 41893

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Cliff Oxley

Ref CFS024
I wish to lodge my objection to the proposed new development ref above. Hockley is rapidly becoming a traffic nightmare and all of the infrastructure locally is struggling to cope with the existing populace, let alone an increase.

Support

Representation ID: 41895

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Cliff Oxley

I wish to object to the following site proposals:
CFS160,161,194,169,150,020,261.
ALL elements of local infrastructure are under tremendous pressure and an increase in the local population will dramatically worsen the environment from all aspects. Health services, traffic and air pollution, education, green areas and wildlife, will all be affected.
Please!! no more residential development in the areas under your jurisdiction.

Support

Representation ID: 41902

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Adam Lyons

I am writing to formally object to the proposed plans to build any additional housing on site CFS064 (as referenced within Rochford District Council’s New Local Plan, and as part of the Spatial Options Consultation).
I live on Westminster Drive which is part of the Betts Farm estate in Hockley and would be directly impacted by any houses built at CFS064 (between Folly Chase and the Community Centre, the latter of which is approximately 100 yards from my house).
The reasons for my objection can be broken down into a number of specific areas (with any references to external documents / links provided at the end of this complaint letter):

Surface water, adequate drainage and the risk of localised flooding
I would firstly like to reference Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064. The appraisal document uses a scale of 1-5 (with 1 being ‘worst performing’ and 5 being ‘best performing’).
Under the heading of ‘Critical Drainage Risk’ the appraisal acknowledges that this site only scores a ‘2’ meaning that it is already known that this site poses a substantial risk of critical flooding if developed upon.
Also, Essex County Council’s online Flood Risk tool (when set to my address or street) clearly shows that there already a “medium risk of flooding from surface water” not just on my road, but to varying degrees all around the area that surrounds CFS064.
Put simply, information available from both yourselves and Essex County Council already shows that there are drainage issues and surface water flooding risks within the area. If development is approved on site CFS064, the land which is currently fields and farmland (i.e. a good soakaway for excess water) will be concreted over for housing and do precisely the opposite - increasing surface water runoff and making the risk of flooding worse, especially for properties on my road.
Further, I understand that Rochford District Council’s New Local Plan is intended to set the strategy for the District until 2040. It therefore appears appropriate to take into account medium and longer-term considerations and factors for the area, such as climate change. With increased flooding across Western Europe (as seen in the news this summer and as per an article I have linked to below) it is widely accepted that extreme weather events (including extreme rainfall) are expected to increase in severity and frequency in the future.
It is for all of these reasons above that I most strongly object to the development of CFS064 on the basis of insufficient infrastructure to protect against, and unacceptable risk to protect, existing properties and the surrounding area.

The impact on existing roads / infrastructure within Betts Farm and B1013
The proposed development of CFS064 will introduce up to 214 houses. This will create additional traffic and congestion which will all have to pass on to Folly Lane and the B1013 in Hockley. Both of these roads are already busy and congested at almost all times of day and will only be made worse by the introduction so much additional housing.
Referring again to Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064, the appraisal acknowledges under the ‘Access to Bus Services’ heading that the site scores a ‘1’ (i.e. worst performing). Given the distance that CFS064 would be from local amenities and the Council’s own assessment of public transport to the area above, it is therefore reasonable to assume that the vast majority of these houses are going to have to drive to access other parts of Hockley including the main high street.
Further, if an access road is to be granted alongside the Hockley Community Centre (connecting CFS064 to the Betts Farm estate) this will create the same problem for Betts Farm as well. The Betts Farm estate already has a large number of cars continuously parked on the roadside due to a lack of driveway space (indeed, I believe this problem was so substantial that the Council had to introduce permit parking restrictions around Hockley Primary School). Therefore, using this same reasoning, the idea of adding any additional housing on site CFS064 becomes a completely unacceptable proposal.

Green / Environmental Concerns
Referring again to Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064, this appears to be one of the areas where the Council has acknowledged that the development would have the greatest impact.
Under both the headings of ‘Impact on Ancient Woodland’ and ‘Impact on Local Habitats’ the CFS064 site scores a ‘1’ (i.e. worst performing) on both aspects. Further, assuming I have read the map of metropolitan green belt areas correctly, this area is also a protected green space.
Hockley as a village is characterised by the surrounding woods, fields, green spaces, footpaths and walkways. This is made even more distinct when comparing Hockley to the neighbouring built-up towns of Rochford and Rayleigh. Protecting the green spaces, wildlife and nature in this area should be considered a priority and one of the most important features that we should protect in this district.
Summary
I hope I have set out, and provided evidence to support, the reasons behind my objections to building any additional housing at site CFS064. Any external documents or links have been referenced below.
References:
Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064 https://rochford.oc2.uk/document/212/28498#d28564



Essex County Council online ‘Flood Risk’ tool

https://flood.essex.gov.uk/know-your-flood-risk/check-if-you-re-at-risk-of-flooding/

Please enter ’26 Westminster Drive, SS54XD’ into the tool, to see how the Flood Risk currently relates to my road and property.


BBC article on the extreme rain in Europe and the link to climate change https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58309900

Support

Representation ID: 41904

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Caroline Punt-Bragg

Objection to CFS064
I am writing to formally register my objection to the proposed plans to build any additional housing on site CFS064 (as referenced within Rochford District Council’s New Local Plan, and as part of the Spatial Options Consultation).
I live on Westminster Drive which is part of the Betts Farm estate in Hockley and would be directly impacted by any houses built at CFS064 (between Folly Chase and the Community Centre, the latter of which is approximately 100 yards from my house). It is clear from the council’s own site assessment report, referenced in this letter, that the development would be severely detrimental to the local area.
Having read the assessment report in detail, I wanted to bring attention to several specific areas that demonstrate why this proposed site should not be built on.

Surface water, adequate drainage and the risk of localised flooding
I would firstly like to reference Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064. The appraisal document uses a scale of 1-5 (with 1 being ‘worst performing’ and 5 being ‘best performing’).
Under the heading of ‘Critical Drainage Risk’ the appraisal acknowledges that this site only scores a ‘2’ meaning that it is already known that this site poses a substantial risk of critical flooding if developed upon.
Also, Essex County Council’s online Flood Risk tool (when set to my address or street) clearly shows that there already a “medium risk of flooding from surface water” not just on my road, but to varying degrees all around the area that surrounds CFS064.
Put simply, information available from both Rochford and Essex County Council already shows that there are drainage issues and surface water flooding risks within the area. If development is approved on site CFS064, the land which is currently fields and farmland (i.e. a good soakaway for excess water) will be concreted over for housing and do precisely the opposite - increasing surface water runoff and making the risk of flooding worse, especially for properties on my road.
Further, I understand that Rochford District Council’s New Local Plan is intended to set the strategy for the District until 2040. It therefore appears appropriate to take into account medium and longer-term considerations and factors for the area, such as climate change. With increased flooding across Western Europe (as seen in the news this summer and as per an article I have linked to below) it is widely accepted that extreme weather events (including extreme rainfall) are expected to increase in severity and frequency in the future. Given the international concern over climate change in the coming decade, the council’s suggestion to remove green space and build further in a way that you yourselves acknowledge would increase flooding risk is quite frankly disgusting. The risk associated with this development is unacceptable.

The impact on existing roads / infrastructure within Betts Farm and B1013
The proposed development of CFS064 will introduce up to 214 houses. This will create additional traffic and congestion which will all have to pass on to Folly Lane and the B1013 in Hockley. Both of these roads are already busy and congested at almost all times of day and will only be made worse by the introduction so much additional housing.
Referring again to Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064, the appraisal acknowledges under the ‘Access to Bus Services’ heading that the site scores a ‘1’ (i.e. worst performing). Given the distance that CFS064 would be from local amenities and the Council’s own assessment of public transport to the area above, it is therefore reasonable to assume that the vast majority of these houses are going to have to drive to access other parts of Hockley including the main high street.
Further, if an access road is to be granted alongside the Hockley Community Centre (connecting CFS064 to the Betts Farm estate) this will create the same problem for Betts Farm as well. The Betts Farm estate already has a large number of cars continuously parked on the roadside due to a lack of driveway space (indeed, I believe this problem was so substantial that the Council had to introduce permit parking restrictions around Hockley Primary School). Therefore, using this same reasoning, the idea of adding any additional housing on site CFS064 becomes a completely unacceptable proposal.

Green / Environmental Concerns
Referring again to Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064, this appears to be one of the areas where the Council has acknowledged that the development would have the greatest impact.
Under both the headings of ‘Impact on Ancient Woodland’ and ‘Impact on Local Habitats’ the CFS064 site scores a ‘1’ (i.e. worst performing) on both aspects. Further, assuming I have read the map of metropolitan green belt areas correctly, this area is also a protected green space.
Hockley as a village is characterised by the surrounding woods, fields, green spaces, footpaths and walkways. This is made even more distinct when comparing Hockley to the neighbouring built-up towns of Rochford and Rayleigh. Protecting the green spaces, wildlife and nature in this area should be considered a priority and one of the most important features that we should protect in this district.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, access to green spaces has become essential to the physical and mental health of many in the United Kingdom. A recent ONS report (see below) showed that green spaces, such as the proposed site of CFS064, have become used much more widely for exercise and have been fundamental in supporting health and wellbeing throughout the pandemic. Given the crisis in obesity levels in the UK and the difficulty many have in accessing GP and mental health services, denying people access to the green space that for many has been their lifeline for 18 months is clearly unacceptable.
Summary
It is clear from the council’s own assessment of the site that the damage to the local area would be far to great for building to go ahead, and the attached sources here further support this. The environment and the needs of thousands of current residents should clearly take precedence over 214 new builds.
References:
Rochford District Council’s initial appraisal of CFS064 https://rochford.oc2.uk/document/212/28498#d28564

Essex County Council online ‘Flood Risk’ tool

https://flood.essex.gov.uk/know-your-flood-risk/check-if-you-re-at-risk-of-flooding/

Please enter ’26 Westminster Drive, SS54XD’ into the tool, to see how the Flood Risk currently relates to my road and property.

BBC article on the extreme rain in Europe and the link to climate change https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58309900

ONS article on the importance of green spaces https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/howhaslockdownchangedourrelationshipwithnature/2021-04-26

Support

Representation ID: 41906

Received: 19/10/2021

Respondent: Sharon Funk

Re: Objection to CFS194, CFS169, CFS150, CFS020

I wish to object to the above development proposals of 801 houses stretching from Clements Hall Sports Centre to Victor Gardens and St Mary’s church in Rectory Road, back to the railway line, for the following reasons:
... r> Location: Hawkwell West is away from the existing centres. Road congestion, lack of public transport with an inadequate bus service. CS194 is green belt productive farmland and we cannot afford to lose it. Both areas feed onto already congested roads, namely B1013 via Rectory Road and Ashingdon Road.

Highway issues: the development could increase traffic movements by 50% on the current 2019 counts which further could represent an increase of over 90% since 2008. Both unacceptable and unsustainable for further development.

Infrastructure this location will generate more private car journeys and it is unlikely that bus, walking or cycling will prove a viable alternative. The location is currently inaccessible and any new road created from the demolition of houses in Rectory Road will create a bottleneck.

Loss of green corridor for wildlife: where will the wildlife go, including that created by the displacement of habitat at Clements Gate?

Public footpaths and bridleways: I often walk through these paths around these fields – it is a pleasant walk, being able to breath in fresh air and enjoy the peace/bird song and better than using a car or walk along the already busy, polluted Rectory Road – no more with 800+ houses!!

Flooding: Hawkwell brook is designated a tidal river by DEFRA. Flood zone is high. Local knowledge disputes the claim that the Hawkwell Brook defences have protected against the 100-year flood event. There were significant Hawkwell Brook flood events in 1953 (the water course was moved as a result), 1968 and 2013. These have been omitted from the Flood Record.

Air quality: Air quality will decrease further. Traffic volumes have increased by 34.5% increasing air pollution. Additionally, during lockdown, it made you realise how terrible the situation is, not only with the pollution but the constant noise of the traffic, along Rectory Road and the very busy B1013 Main Road.

Poor accessibility to vital services: walking distances using a mid-point on Rectory Road to Hockley rail station, Hockley, Hawkwell Parade range up to 30 minutes – of course lots of people are going to drive increasing further the problems above with traffic.

A cycle path would not be feasible – there is no linkage to the only cycle path along Ashingdon Road, cycling along Rectory Road is unsafe and not feasible.

Education/Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals/vets etc – I have grave concerns about the impact on all these services – schools/NHS/vets etc are already at capacity.

I do hope you will take into consideration the local residents views and understand that building new homes in Hawkwell is just not a viable option.

Re: Objection to CFS074 – south of Mount Bovers Lane, Hawkwell

I wish to object to the above development proposal of 498 houses at Mount Bovers Lane, opposite Rawal Pindi nursery.

Location: Hawkwell West is away from the existing centres. There is already road congestion, lack of public transport with an inadequate bus service. This field is often used to walk to Gusted Hall woods or beyond and is a lovely area, to destroy it will be saddening.

Highway issues: the development could increase traffic movements by 50% on the current 2019 counts which further could represent an increase of over 90% since 2008. Both unacceptable and unsustainable for further development.

Infrastructure this location will generate more private car journeys and it is unlikely that bus, walking or cycling will prove a viable alternative. It will feed onto the already congested B1013 - each home could have 2 cars or more.

Loss of green corridor for wildlife: where will the wildlife go? Wildlife has already been displaced due to the houses at Clements Gate. This area must have loads of wildlife – birds, badgers, foxes, squirrels, insects etc.

Public footpaths and bridleways: I often walk around this area on towards Gusted Hall woods, it is a pleasant walk, being able to breath in fresh air and enjoy the peace/bird song not to mention the view from the top of the field (where the bench is). It is also popular with horse riders. It is saddening that this will be destroyed.

Flooding: is there a flood risk?

Air quality: Air quality will decrease further. Traffic volumes have increased by 34.5% increasing air pollution. Additionally, during lockdown, it made you realise how terrible the situation is, not only with the pollution but the constant noise of the traffic, along the very busy B1013 Main Road.

Poor accessibility to vital services: walking distance to the nearest station/towns means lots of people are going to drive increasing further the problems with traffic, especially with the poor No 8 bus service. Cycling along the B1013 is unsafe.

Education/Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals/vets etc – I have grave concerns about the impact on all these services – schools/NHS/vets etc are already at capacity.

I do hope you will take into consideration the local residents views and understand that building new homes in Hawkwell is just not a viable option.

Re: Objection to CFS045 – Belchamps, Hawkwell

I wish to object to the above development proposal of 152 houses at Belchamps.

Location: Hawkwell West is away from the existing centres. There is already road congestion, lack of public transport with an inadequate bus service. Belchamps is an area we cannot afford to lose. It will feed onto the already congested B1013.

Highway issues: the development could increase traffic movements by 50% on the current 2019 counts which further could represent an increase of over 90% since 2008. Both unacceptable and unsustainable for further development.

Infrastructure this location will generate more private car journeys and it is unlikely that bus, walking or cycling will prove a viable alternative.

Loss of green corridor for wildlife: where will the wildlife go? How many trees/hedges will be destroyed? Wildlife has already been displaced due to the houses at Clements Gate.

Public footpaths and bridleways: I often walk around this area on towards Gusted Hall woods, it is a pleasant walk, being able to breath in fresh air and enjoy the peace/bird song. It is saddening that this will be destroyed.

Flooding: is there a flood risk?

Air quality: Air quality will decrease further. Traffic volumes have increased by 34.5% increasing air pollution. Additionally, during lockdown, it made you realise how terrible the situation is, not only with the pollution but the constant noise of the traffic, along the very busy B1013 Main Road.

Poor accessibility to vital services: walking distance to the nearest station/towns means lots of people are going to drive increasing further the problems with traffic, especially with the poor No 8 bus service. Cycling along the B1013 is unsafe.

Education/Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals/vets etc – I have grave concerns about the impact on all these services – schools/NHS/vets etc are already at capacity.

I do hope you will take into consideration the local residents views and understand that building new homes in Hawkwell is just not a viable option.

Re: Objection to CFS045 – Belchamps, Hawkwell

I wish to object to the above development proposal of 152 houses at Belchamps.

Location: Hawkwell West is away from the existing centres. There is already road congestion, lack of public transport with an inadequate bus service. Belchamps is an area we cannot afford to lose. It will feed onto the already congested B1013.

Highway issues: the development could increase traffic movements by 50% on the current 2019 counts which further could represent an increase of over 90% since 2008. Both unacceptable and unsustainable for further development.

Infrastructure this location will generate more private car journeys and it is unlikely that bus, walking or cycling will prove a viable alternative.

Loss of green corridor for wildlife: where will the wildlife go? How many trees/hedges will be destroyed? Wildlife has already been displaced due to the houses at Clements Gate.

Public footpaths and bridleways: I often walk around this area on towards Gusted Hall woods, it is a pleasant walk, being able to breath in fresh air and enjoy the peace/bird song. It is saddening that this will be destroyed.

Flooding: is there a flood risk?

Air quality: Air quality will decrease further. Traffic volumes have increased by 34.5% increasing air pollution. Additionally, during lockdown, it made you realise how terrible the situation is, not only with the pollution but the constant noise of the traffic, along the very busy B1013 Main Road.

Poor accessibility to vital services: walking distance to the nearest station/towns means lots of people are going to drive increasing further the problems with traffic, especially with the poor No 8 bus service. Cycling along the B1013 is unsafe.

Education/Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals/vets etc – I have grave concerns about the impact on all these services – schools/NHS/vets etc are already at capacity.

I do hope you will take into consideration the local residents views and understand that building new homes in Hawkwell is just not a viable option.

Support

Representation ID: 41908

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Steve Wright

Number of people: 2

Proposed development CFS194, CFS169, CFS150 & CFS020. Hawkwell
It has been brought to our attention that there is going to be a proposal of development at this site.
As we have just moved to this address just a couple of months ago for its charm and rural feel but still close to large towns and amenities, you can assume we are not happy about this.
Looking back in the history of this site this proposal has been declined at least once and I can’t see that anything has changed within the local area that would change this?
The site proposed is still Greenbelt with abundant wildlife inclusive of badgers, bats, pheasants, squirrels, woodpeckers amongst others that we have seen in the short time of living here.
The road that will feed this new development the B1013 is not sufficient for the current amount of traffic let alone for another 801 dwellings with at least 2 cars per household.
The area is also used constantly for local recreation and well-being of current residents which includes footpaths, bridleways and woodland and fields.
The area directly behind us is also a designated flood warning area which I would think is not an ideal area for 801 new dwellings.
It is also still a productive farmland area that I have been told the owner does not want to sell as well as existing businesses that would be closed that are at the end of Windsor Gardens.
So as you can see by our points there seems to be a lot to lose and the only gain is to line the pockets of greedy property developers and officials.
We do not agree to this and feel that the council will not go forward with this and agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere of this mass development of every green field in this area.

Support

Representation ID: 41913

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Joshua Mann

Re: CFS064
I OBJECT TO THIS FIELD SITE(CFS064) BEING USED FOR HOUSING FOR THE FOLLOWING CORE REASONS:
-The field is part of the rapidly declining green belt, which also plays a role in agriculture
-Its footpath is important for many parents and their children in getting to school, who would otherwise have to drive. The extended strain on the roads by the school is especially dangerous to young kids at the school who run across the roads.
-The wide array of wildlife will be under threat from losing their habitat, losing many native animals.

Support

Representation ID: 41917

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Gorsuch

New local plan (CFS045) SPATIAL OPTIONS PAPER
I OBJECT TO THIS FIELD SITE(CFS045) BEING USED FOR HOUSING FOR THE FOLLOWING CORE REASONS:

- As a long-standing facility the use and training for young people Belchamps has been invaluable.
- Impact on local infrastructure & B1013
- For a rural/residential area the air quality is already very poor, how would this help?

Support

Representation ID: 41919

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Dietmar Mair

As a resident of Rectory Road, I herewith object to the earmarking of CFS194, CFS169, CFS150 and CFS020 for development.

The infrastructure in Rochford is simply not able to handle such big developments. Doctors are overstretched, water systems are not able to cope and the roads are not designed for such an increase in traffic.

If anything, I suggest looking into the option of constructing a link between the Potash roundabout directly to the A127 to avoid filtering all commuting traffic through Hockley and Rayleigh.

Support

Representation ID: 41926

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Kenneth Thompson

Concerning COL38 (previously adopted and maintained by the district and parish council as a play space)
• This has been used as a public amenity area since I have lived at Malvern Road, 1984. It is a safe local play space for children.
• There is a well established public footpath across that piece of land. There was a successful objection to a bridleway being declared across the space. Many of the users of it as a footpath gave evidence for the public enquiry to oppose its adoption as a bridleway. The use as a footpath has been facilitated by the provision of a gateway to allow pedestrians but prevent horse riding. I request this to be added to the definitive map to protect it for the future.
Concerning CFS023
• The proposed access road along Harrogate Drive is two narrow to provide a full width access for vehicles and a footpath without being considerably widened. Any widening must avoid taking away the hedge and ditch running along the back of the houses of Malvern Road. Already part of the ditch has been filled in to make a turning space. The filling in of ditches and the destruction of hedge rows is very detrimental to wildlife.
• In that hedgerow are several mature ash trees that have shown conservable resistance to ash dies back. Several ask tree have been lost to die back and it is important to retain the genetic diversity of any ash die back survivors.
• To not retain a hedge row would create security, privacy, light pollution and noise problems for the house adjoining the access road.
Whilst I recognise that there is a need for additional housing no infrastructure planning is being discussed. Those discussions must take part in parallel as they are totally linked.
For example to use CFS023 effectively one could provide vehicle access down to Lower Road not Greensward Lane. COL38 could provide a cycle path for schoolchildren and residents to the schools, station and Hockley village. The nature of vehicle use is changing dramatically therefore providing a strategic network plan of safe footpaths, cycle paths and bridleways that work together and keep all user safe plus would provide an excellent backbone for the planning of housing development and address many infrastructure objections to any planning.

Support

Representation ID: 41928

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr M J Southam

New Local Plan CFS024
I would like to contribute my opinion to the proposed development plans for Site Ref CFS024 (Land north of Merryfields Avenue, Hockley).
Firstly, I do not feel there will be any benefit to the local residents or surrounding area by implementing development of this site - it is a green belt area, currently the habitat of various flora and fauna, which provide an essential refuge for not only pollinating insects such as bees, but also for bats, birds and other insects.
Secondly, the issue of water run off has caused numerous issues over the recent years, and the introduction of additional housing (with the required paved areas) will only exacerbate the already problematic issue of overflowing ditches within Maryland nature reserve.
The issue of increased traffic, both pre and post construction will doubtless add to the chronic situation of potholes, which it seems are largely ignored until a local election is imminent.
As an aside to this, there seems to be a total disregard for speed enforcement along Plumberow Avenue, which is a school route, for the local primary and secondary schools - one weekend of observation would confirm speeds in excess of 50 mph regularly witnessed along an allegedly 30 mph route.
Obviously, some of the proposed new houses will expect to be able to send their children to these schools, which will once again add an additional burden to the already over capacity class sizes.
Thanks for your consideration of these issues and please remember the local residents will use their votes to reflect opinions in the council elections.