Core Strategy Submission Document

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.

LDF - Preferred Options - Rayleigh conurbation.
On behalf of Rawreth Parish Council I confirm that this letter is a formal response of objection to the final draft of Rochford District Councils Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Firstly, at no time has the Parish of Rawreth been included or mentioned in any "Tier" on page 33 of the document, the criteria for allocation of houses - within the Core Strategy. If it had been included it should have been in Tier 4 and this is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The Parish Council believes that to develop 550 houses in one place within area no: 144, land to the north of London Road and then to add a further 220 to the Rawreth Industrial Estate area will totally destroy the character and rural outlook of Rawreth and surrounding areas. It will destroy the residents' "strong sense of identity within their own settlement" and is, therefore, UNSOUND.
The huge development of 550 houses is totally unacceptable. The land north of London Road is good quality agricultural land which is protected by the Green Belt -GB1 - fulfils all purposes under PPG2 and should be retained as such. Once used for development this land can never be returned to agricultural use, and if you continue to erode into our Green Belt and farmland it will be lost forever.

The Parish Council believe a proportion of the houses required to be built in our area should compliment and enhance Rawreth, cause as little extra congestion to our already heavily overcrowded roads as possible and provide a pleasant environment for those people wishing to move to the area. This particular area is part of the "Gateway to Rochford" and is the "strategic buffer" between Rayleigh and Wickford. Reference is made in the Core Strategy document to "avoiding coalescence" of villages/towns, however a development of this size immediately erodes the buffer between Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford, starts coalescence, destroys the rural character of Rawreth and, therefore, is UNSOUND.

The Core Strategy Document details Rochford District Councils priorities and objectives and details how the role of the Core Strategy features in achieving these. In support of the Parish Councils observations and alternative proposals they comment as follows.
Page 5 "Fostering greater community cohesion"
Development of land between Rawreth Lane and north of London Road will not give any community cohesion at all, it will simply be an extension to the west of Rayleigh giving residents no real sense of belonging, they will live within the Parish of Rawreth, yet they will be considered as living in Rayleigh as has been proved with other developments along Rawreth Lane such as Laburnum Way.
Page 12 "Priority 5 Essex roads are safer less congested and everyone has access to essential services"

The roads and infrastructure in the Rawreth area are completely full to capacity. The A127, A1245, A129 London Road, Rawreth Lane and Watery Lane just cannot take any more traffic and the proposed development on land to the north of London Road will increase traffic to a completely unsustainable level. On numerous occasions this year incidents within and on the outskirts of the Parish have brought traffic to a standstill for hours along London Road, Rawreth Lane, Watery Lane/Beeches Road and the Hullbridge Road. It took some residents 1 ¼ hours to proceed along Rawreth Lane and into Hullbridge - a distance of 1 1/2 miles.

The proposed development at the western edge of Hullbridge, which is, in fact, largely in Rawreth would also greatly increase the traffic problems in the area. Rawreth Parish Council understand there would be a proposal to "widen/straighten" Watery Lane/Beeches Road, with a roundabout at the junction with the Hullbridge Road. This is an extremely dangerous junction even at the present time and would become increasingly so. There is also the question of where the traffic would go when it reaches Battlesbridge at the Western end, it cannot possibly cross the Bridge as this is "restricted" and in a Conservation Area, therefore, it would have to turn left and proceed to the A1245 - a very dangerous junction.

Beeches Road/Watery Lane is also shown in the document as a new cyclist route. Surely this is a conflict of interest, a road widening/straightening proposal coupled with a cycle route.
Page 33 "Tier Settlements"
Nowhere in the Core Strategy Document is Rawreth Parish actually mentioned, it features in the "all other settlements tier 4" and is referred to as "land north of London Road Rayleigh" or "West Rayleigh" yet, the housing allocation of 550 dwellings between 2015 and 2021 and the 220 planned for the Rawreth Industrial Estate is the largest that any area is taking. Rawreth Parish currently has 380 dwellings and an electorate of 812, yet the proposed housing figures are set to increase the overall number of dwellings in the Parish by 203%.
Pages 34 to 36 "The efficient use of land for housing" and "Extensions to residential envelopes and phasing"
The Core Strategy Document states that "the Council recognises the importance of making best use of brownfield land" and "whilst the Council acknowledge that the housing requirement stipulated in the East of England Plan is a minimum, it must also be mindful of the need to maintain Green Belt as far as possible" yet the proposed 550 houses on the land north of London Road will all be built on Green Belt land of high agricultural value. The document states that "the Council will direct development to the most sustainable locations on the edge of settlements having regard to:"
"The potential to avoid areas of constraint (such as areas at risk of flooding, sites of ecological importance"
"The historical, agricultural and ecological value of land"
"The potential to create a defensible Green Belt Boundary and
"The avoidance of coalescence with neighbouring settlements"
Yet these key factors all seem to have been ignored when choosing the site to the north of London Road and, therefore, the proposal is UNSOUND. The Parish of Rawreth has a history of flooding, the land in Rawreth Lane will drain into the already overloaded brook system and the Services in the area would be unable to cope with this increase in housing - drains and sewers are already working to capacity. Heavy rain earlier in the year resulted in flooding in Watery Lane and the Rawreth Brook system has been very close to flooding twice already this year. During a meeting between the Parish Council and the Environment Agency we were advised that this situation will worsen with increased housing.

Page 42 "Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation"
This section details the need for an allocation of 15 pitches by 2011, it also states that they "will examine the potential of current unauthorised sites to meet this need" and that "sites will be allocated in the west of the District" The west of the District is in fact Rawreth, but yet again the Parish name has not been detailed. The Parish already has an unauthorised site which is the subject of an enforcement case and although well kept is on the brow of a hill on a main highway with restricted access which Essex County Council have already raised concerns about, this is not a site that should be considered as part of the requirement due to its location, but also, why is the allocation of all 15 pitches being detailed to one area?

Page 43 to 44 "Appendix 1"

Details of all the infrastructure to accompany residential development is listed, yet there are no detailed costs, have these been done? And are these achievable? Large numbers of housing in one area, as stated in the infrastructure requirements, will necessitate a new primary school. County figures suggest that there will be surplus places in Rayleigh schools even with new housing. Obviously these will be in the wrong parts of the town so increasing the risk that an existing school could close .It makes sense to spread the development in smaller sites around the town, avoiding closure and preventing unnecessary provision of a new school.

Page 57 "Strategies, Activities and Actions - The Green Belt"
The document states that "The Council will continue to support the principals of restricting development in the Green Belt, as set out in PPG2 and will preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt" it further states that "a small proportion of the District's Green Belt will have to have its designation reviewed to allow development" The entire development of 550 houses planned for land north of London Road is all on Green Belt land as is the land at Hullbridge, how does this equate to a "small proportion"?
The Councils own Policy GB1- Green Belt Protection states "The Council will allocate the minimum amount of Green Belt land necessary to meet the District's housing and employment needs" and that they will "direct development away from the Green Belt as far as is practicable and will prioritise the protection of the Green Belt land based on how well the land helps achieve the purposes of the Green Belt".
This area of land confirms all 5 purposes of the national PPG2 - Green Belt:-
It prevents the unrestricted sprawl of western Rayleigh
It provides a barrier to prevent the ultimate merging of Rayleigh, Rawreth and Wickford
It assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
It preserves the setting and special character of historic towns
Assists in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
Rawreth Parish Council have observed that there are a number of sites that were put forward in the "Call for Sites" that are pre-used brownfield land in the Green Belt land, and as such would prove beneficial and in their opinion should have been considered for development. Their non-inclusion as "brownfield" sites makes the current proposals UNSOUND:
Site No; 73 Hambro Nursery a site of approximately 3.93 hectares, coupled with the adjacent site Clovelly, would provide between 200 and 250 houses in an area of approximately 4.85 hectares this area would have good access directly from the A1245 and if expanded north westward to include land up to and around the Village Hall, approximately another 2.08 hectares could produce between 50 and 80 further houses. This area could be accessed either from the slip road (Chelmsford Road) to the south of the Nevendon Garage or from Church Road.
Both of these sites would remove the need for extra traffic along the A129 and Rawreth Lane which are both already operating well over maximum capacity. This development would require a footbridge for pedestrians, cyclists and horses over the A1245.
Rawreth Parish Council believe these proposals would be sensible infill of these areas and would be on "Brownfield" sites where current businesses are not particularly progressive and would not result in the loss of many jobs. Our figures are quite conservative and we believe that if these sites were chosen a much reduced number of houses would need to be built "North of London Road" on Green Belt land.
Phase 2 - With regard to the houses that are proposed for the Northeast corner of Rawreth/Hullbridge, the Parish Council are concerned that any development would cause considerable extra congestion to the immediate roads. We understand that the thoughts are to "straighten" and improve parts of Watery Lane and Beeches Road to provide access to and through Battlesbridge - a conservation area. Recent experience of deep flooding in Watery Lane with the road closed for several days on 3 occasions in the early part of 2009 proves that this proposal is completely unsustainable. The local drainage systems simply cannot take the amount of run-off experienced now and with further development this would increase the problem.
If this development is to go ahead, the Parish Council believe that a relief road should be built, from the end of Watery Lane, skirting to the west of the Rayleigh Park Estate, crossing Rawreth Lane at a mini-roundabout and entering a vastly improved A129 at approximately Lower Barn Farm. This would take any necessary traffic in and out of the area efficiently.
The Parish Council further believe that the Michelins Farm site No: 49 would be an ideal site for the Rawreth Industrial Estate. This would adjoin proposed industrial sites within the Basildon District and would provide excellent road and transport links. Rawreth Parish Council also proposed that the land opposite Michelins Farm could be used to re-site the illegal Gypsy/Traveller site that is currently situated on the busy A1245. The land opposite Michelins Farm would not only be a much safer site for Gypsy/Traveller pitches, but the correct use of the land would also ensure the environmental improvement of the site as a whole.
All of the above proposals were submitted to Rochford District Council, but they were not taken into consideration in the final draft resulting in the predominant use of Green Belt land for development, bounded by already congested roads and, therefore, the proposals are UNSOUND.