Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Search representations
Results for Hawkwell Residents Association search
New searchObject
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H2 General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4027
Received: 17/12/2008
Respondent: Hawkwell Residents Association
RE: Objection to 300+ houses proposed for Hawkwell Village/Parish
As a resident and voter in what is currently a green and pleasant village, I wish to object to the proposed development of 300+ houses village/Parish on the following basis:
There is in our opinion, an unfair allocation of homes throughout the district especially in the Hawkwell area.
We are concerned that all of the 330 houses could be centred in one place changing the nature of the village; we believe it would be better to spread them throughout the Hawkwell area.
The B1013 - cannot cope even with the advent of recycling Lorries, let alone more traffic. Extra traffic from what will be a developing airport facility (not considered as part of this strategy.)
Extra demands on schools, dentists and doctor surgeries (already under pressure to service current levels as current patient ratios show) this linked with an increasing older population demographic.
Lack of public transport - Hockley and Rochford have rail stations, Hawkwell does not. Buses as you are aware are an issue as well.
Rochford District Council have received planning application(s) for up to 20,000 more houses to be built east of Rochford, which I would assume need all the necessary infrastructure to be put in place as part of that development. Why not put our allocation into that "pot" they could create a whole new community as part of that development. This may appear as "not in my backyard," but I feel no "infrastructure" improvements will happen as part of a piecemeal development from various builder(s) within Hawkwell.
The document repeats the word sustainability, we are concerned that the interpretation of sustainability has been insufficiently addressed and clarity is needed to what it is meant by this key term in the document. The additional homes will put an enormous strain on the infrastructure of our area, particularly the road system, which has not been addressed in the document. Our main concerns include...
-Loss of green belt in our area, which would change our village into a town.
-Additional vehicles on the roads including proposed additional airport traffic.
-Additional demand on our doctors and dentists.
-additional demand on schools and social services.
-Bus services. It is now proposed to reduce the 7 and 8 to one bus an hour.
-Additional demand on gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Inclosing I fell we are being railroaded into accepting this proposal without a proper top down review of the wider picture within our district as a whole include
JAPP The Airport Development(S)
Core Strategy
The Site Allocation Document
RE: Objection to 300+ houses proposed for Hawkwell Village/Parish
As a resident and voter in what is currently a green and pleasant village, I wish to object to the proposed development of 300+ houses village/Parish on the following basis:
There is in our opinion, an unfair allocation of homes throughout the district especially in the Hawkwell area.
We are concerned that all of the 330 houses could be centred in one place changing the nature of the village; we believe it would be better to spread them throughout the Hawkwell area.
The B1013 - cannot cope even with the advent of recycling Lorries, let alone more traffic. Extra traffic from what will be a developing airport facility (not considered as part of this strategy.)
Extra demands on schools, dentists and doctor surgeries (already under pressure to service current levels as current patient ratios show) this linked with an increasing older population demographic.
Lack of public transport - Hockley and Rochford have rail stations, Hawkwell does not. Buses as you are aware are an issue as well.
Rochford District Council have received planning application(s) for up to 20,000 more houses to be built east of Rochford, which I would assume need all the necessary infrastructure to be put in place as part of that development. Why not put our allocation into that "pot" they could create a whole new community as part of that development. This may appear as "not in my backyard," but I feel no "infrastructure" improvements will happen as part of a piecemeal development from various builder(s) within Hawkwell.
The document repeats the word sustainability, we are concerned that the interpretation of sustainability has been insufficiently addressed and clarity is needed to what it is meant by this key term in the document. The additional homes will put an enormous strain on the infrastructure of our area, particularly the road system, which has not been addressed in the document. Our main concerns include...
-Loss of green belt in our area, which would change our village into a town.
-Additional vehicles on the roads including proposed additional airport traffic.
-Additional demand on our doctors and dentists.
-additional demand on schools and social services.
-Bus services. It is now proposed to reduce the 7 and 8 to one bus an hour.
-Additional demand on gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Inclosing I fell we are being railroaded into accepting this proposal without a proper top down review of the wider picture within our district as a whole include
JAPP The Airport Development(S)
Core Strategy
The Site Allocation Document
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H2 General Locations and Phasing - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 4177
Received: 16/12/2008
Respondent: Hawkwell Residents Association
The Hawkwell Residents Association has discussed the RDC Core Strategy document and wishes to put forward the following points:
Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution was an unfair method of consultation.
There is in our opinion, an unfair allocation of homes throughout the district especially in the Hawkwell area.
We believe the required additional homes should be built as a new village with self-contained services in the west of Rochford from a new access road to the A1245 (old A130). This is by far the best location for access to the existing trunk road network and would eliminate the detrimental effect on the rest of the district.
Our concern is that we are being asked to respond to this document in isolation, without considering the impact of the JAAP report regarding Southend Airport and the Site Allocation Development.
The stated government policy of 60% brown field first before green field seems to have been reversed, with many potential sites for building being of a green field nature.
We are concerned that all the 300 houses could be centered in one place changing the nature of the village, we belive it would be better to spread them throughout the Hawkwell area.
That comprehensive consultation takes place with ECC, other district councils, local parish/town councils, residents associations and other interested parties in and around our district.
The report continually talks about sustainability and we are concerned that no definition of sustainability has been made and we would seek clarification on this point. The additional homes will put an enormous strain on the infrastructure of our area, particularly the road system, which has not been addressed in the document. Our main concerns include:
Loss of Green Belt in our area, which would change our village into a town.
Additional vechicles on the roads including proposed additional airport traffic.
Additional demand on our doctors and dentists.
Additional demand on schools and social services.
Bus services. It is now proposed to reduce the 7 and 8 to one bus an hour.
Additional demand on gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Assuming the proposals go ahead with the current allocation of homes and the inevitable increase in airport traffic, we would like to see improvements to the infrastructure in and around Hawkwell to create a more sustainable environment. We would expect the necessary infrastructure to be in place before the commencement of any new development and to include the following:
Replacement of Rectory Road Railway Bridge giving two-way traffic.
Upgrade the B1013 Hall Road and provide missing and upgrade existing pavements.
Proper main road street lighting for the B1013 Hall Road and B1013 Rayleigh Road.
A cycle path route from Rochford through Hockley to Rayleigh.
A new pelican crossing in B1013 Main Road near Tudor Way.
Return to two buses an hour in both directions for the 7 and 8 services between Southend and Rayleigh.
Improvements to all services including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Increase capacity at all the local schools in the area.
Increase capacity at all the local Doctors and Dentists and hospital services in the area.
Increase ambulance, fire and police emergency services.
Provide and run a youth club in the Hawkwell area.
To provide and run allotments in the Hawkwell area.
To extend the existing Cherry Orchard Park to Mount Bovers Lane and Hockley Woods.
Replace the existing Hockley Spa roundabout with a wider traffic light junction complete with pedestrian cross lights.
Install a double mini roundabout at Station Road and Station Approach junction with Spa Road for Hockley Station.
Install a mini roundabout on the B1013 at Folly Lane.
Make up/upgrade Plumberow Avenue through to Lower Road in Hockley complete with pavements, main road street lighting and a mini roundabout at the Lower Road junction.
Upgrade Watery Lane/Beeches Road in Hullbridge from Lower Road complete with pavements, main road street lighting and a mini roundabout at the Lower Road junction.
Our members and residents are very concerned about the additional homes proposed in the Rochford District Council Core Strategy. Please find attached our response as requested by the 17 Dec 2008.
The Hawkwell Residents Association has discussed the RDC Core Strategy document and wishes to put forward the following points:
Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution was an unfair method of consultation.
There is in our opinion, an unfair allocation of homes throughout the district especially in the Hawkwell area.
We believe the required additional homes should be built as a new village with self-contained services in the west of Rochford from a new access road to the A1245 (old A130). This is by far the best location for access to the existing trunk road network and would eliminate the detrimental effect on the rest of the district.
Our concern is that we are being asked to respond to this document in isolation, without considering the impact of the JAAP report regarding Southend Airport and the Site Allocation Development.
The stated government policy of 60% brown field first before green field seems to have been reversed, with many potential sites for building being of a green field nature.
We are concerned that all the 300 houses could be centered in one place changing the nature of the village, we belive it would be better to spread them throughout the Hawkwell area.
That comprehensive consultation takes place with ECC, other district councils, local parish/town councils, residents associations and other interested parties in and around our district.
The report continually talks about sustainability and we are concerned that no definition of sustainability has been made and we would seek clarification on this point. The additional homes will put an enormous strain on the infrastructure of our area, particularly the road system, which has not been addressed in the document. Our main concerns include:
Loss of Green Belt in our area, which would change our village into a town.
Additional vechicles on the roads including proposed additional airport traffic.
Additional demand on our doctors and dentists.
Additional demand on schools and social services.
Bus services. It is now proposed to reduce the 7 and 8 to one bus an hour.
Additional demand on gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Assuming the proposals go ahead with the current allocation of homes and the inevitable increase in airport traffic, we would like to see improvements to the infrastructure in and around Hawkwell to create a more sustainable environment. We would expect the necessary infrastructure to be in place before the commencement of any new development and to include the following:
Replacement of Rectory Road Railway Bridge giving two-way traffic.
Upgrade the B1013 Hall Road and provide missing and upgrade existing pavements.
Proper main road street lighting for the B1013 Hall Road and B1013 Rayleigh Road.
A cycle path route from Rochford through Hockley to Rayleigh.
A new pelican crossing in B1013 Main Road near Tudor Way.
Return to two buses an hour in both directions for the 7 and 8 services between Southend and Rayleigh.
Improvements to all services including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewers and surface/storm water drainage.
Increase capacity at all the local schools in the area.
Increase capacity at all the local Doctors and Dentists and hospital services in the area.
Increase ambulance, fire and police emergency services.
Provide and run a youth club in the Hawkwell area.
To provide and run allotments in the Hawkwell area.
To extend the existing Cherry Orchard Park to Mount Bovers Lane and Hockley Woods.
Replace the existing Hockley Spa roundabout with a wider traffic light junction complete with pedestrian cross lights.
Install a double mini roundabout at Station Road and Station Approach junction with Spa Road for Hockley Station.
Install a mini roundabout on the B1013 at Folly Lane.
Make up/upgrade Plumberow Avenue through to Lower Road in Hockley complete with pavements, main road street lighting and a mini roundabout at the Lower Road junction.
Upgrade Watery Lane/Beeches Road in Hullbridge from Lower Road complete with pavements, main road street lighting and a mini roundabout at the Lower Road junction.
