Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

More documents

Recommendations

Info

354 Mrs Smith 355 Mr K Vingoe 356 Mr & Mrs D Dobbin 357 Ms V O'Malley 358 Mr & Mrs England 359 Mr New 360 Mr A J Eisenhauer 365 Mrs H J Springham 366 Mr S J Springham 369 Mr & Mrs Gauden 370 Mr G Biner Yes, with so many offices and industrial estates vacant already for a long time, do we really need more built? The road infrastructure in and around Rochford is abysmal, very busy and pot holed, patched to death. Use and improve what already exists. Why are there so many new car centres springing up everywhere not many people can afford new cars. Much of the Distict's employment is still provided in London and our surrounding districts. The nature of the availability of employment also changes as a result of national trends. 1. The Parish Council would suggest that consideration could be given to the existing provision on some industrial estates with the possiblity of change to residential accommodation and industrial and commerical provision elsewhere. 2. Many existing estates perdominate in large warehouse type buildings and consideration should be given to their conversion to provide more appropriate accommodation for smaller and 'start-up' businesses. 3. The airport, while offering existing and potential future growth, could with the alteration and expansion provide additional jobs. In all the calculations there should not be an assumption that all new jobs will be manual ones. Space would also be needed for offices, technical areas, health and other service areas as well as professional, academic and leisure. Ideally any development that takes place should be near or adjacent to existing employment centres and it is most important to fill gaps in the existing areas - High Streets, empty factory units, etc - before new developments take place. Important factors are convenient and efficient communications - transport (buses, road, AND PARKING) and telecommunications. Many people also work from home these days and this may reduce the need for additional land use, although this is currently not statistically significant. Obviously jobs should be close to where people live, so that we don't damage the environment with people using their cars travelling lots of miles, public transport should be free to encourage people to use cars less. Industrial estates are not suitable you can't get in or out of them. Build new town at Rawreth and jobs will be created by the town infrastructure plus can work in London, Chelmsford or Colchester via road or rail with ease. Expansion or use of existing on old industrial estates and business parks would seem to be the best answer. It would enable existing services to be more fully used. Remove innate eyesore, avoid overspill and ribbon development. The brownfield sites are available for jobs/commerce and an existing industrial estates even with the expected growth in Southend Airport traffic which will probably tail off after the 2012 Olympics anyway. Rayleigh, Hockley etc is prime commuter belt to London etc. 3,000 jobs therefore not needed in this area. There is not guarantee that jobs created in RDC would be filled by residents of RDC. A lot of Makro employees come from Canvey, Benfleet etc! Does not council examine employment profiles in its own district. Rochford, Rayleigh etc are dormitory areas the greater majority of people travel out of the area for work. 3000 new jobs are not required. There are plenty of areas of the country where jobs could be created and businesses encouraged to move to reduce the strain on our area. One issue that should be considered is the traffic volumes and parking disturbances on the neighbouring residential areas and the safey issues to pedestrians that these problems bring. Maybe we should be more selective as to what industries and commercial developments we encourage to use the designated land. For example, should we not be encouraging small local businesses, as opposed to giving up all of our land to big national companies.
4. PROTECTION Are there any other areas or features that the Council should be seeking to protect? Is the Upper Roach Valley a good area for increasing recreational opportunities? Have we got the balance right between protection and development opportunities?
Page 1 and 2:
ROCHFORD DISTRICT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
Page 3 and 4:
Rep No Contact Name General comment
Page 5 and 6:
024 Mr P Williams 025 Mrs P Clifton
Page 7 and 8:
050 Mrs J Samuels 051 Mrs D Langdon
Page 9 and 10:
069 Mrs B Buckland 070 P Robertson
Page 11 and 12:
091 Ms P Bailey 092 Mrs M Hills 095
Page 13 and 14:
121 Mrs S J Attfield 122 F E Wells
Page 15 and 16:
144 Mr C Bambury 145 Mr A Lysons 14
Page 17 and 18:
159 Mr & Mrs J Collins I do not hav
Page 19 and 20:
177 Mr J East 178 Mr D Livermore 17
Page 21 and 22:
198 Mr J Clamp 200 Mr T O'Shea 201
Page 23 and 24:
222 R Luck 225 Mr P Court 227 Mr &
Page 25 and 26:
246 Miss M Saward 248 Mr A Presslee
Page 27 and 28:
259 Mr M B Rogers 260 Mr & Mrs Will
Page 29 and 30:
272 Mr A Patton 273 Mr J Wilson 274
Page 31 and 32:
300 Mrs Upson I have answered this
Page 33 and 34:
322 Ms J Hitchcock 323 Mr T Beebee
Page 35 and 36:
338 Mr & Mrs Saunders We have been
Page 37 and 38:
357 Ms V O'Malley Perhaps the gover
Page 39 and 40:
1. HOUSING Where should land be rel
Page 41 and 42:
014 D Hanrahan I do not agree furth
Page 43 and 44:
040 Mr D Huskisson The Ashingdon Ro
Page 45 and 46:
070 P Robertson Rayleigh and the su
Page 47 and 48:
102 Mr T Newton Firstly why are you
Page 49 and 50:
130 Mrs S Martin 131 Mel Bennett 13
Page 51 and 52:
160 Ms S Barnes No green belt shoul
Page 53 and 54: 189 Mr G Gooding 190 Mr G J Tinsey
Page 55 and 56: 215 Mr T R Thompson 216 Mr & Mrs D
Page 57 and 58: 237 Mr Sanders We should not be rel
Page 59 and 60: 263 Mr P Kneen 264 Mr K Coleman 265
Page 61 and 62: 286 Mr L F Knight No more housing w
Page 63 and 64: 319 Mr M Lang Not down in this corn
Page 65 and 66: 355 Mr K Vingoe 356 Mr & Mrs D Dobb
Page 67 and 68: 2. AFFORDABLE HOUSING Have we got t
Page 69 and 70: Mr R Huckett & Ms C Mobbs Affordabl
Page 71 and 72: 065 Mr T Bennett Affordable (truly
Page 73 and 74: 104 B Aspinall In my opinion the cu
Page 75 and 76: 145 Mr A Lysons There is no wy I ca
Page 77 and 78: 180 Mr R Swain Local jobs are usual
Page 79 and 80: 213 Mr M Wheeler 215 Mr T R Thompso
Page 81 and 82: 251 Mr B Guyett - Chairman We agree
Page 83 and 84: 287 Mr R Forster Cannot comment as
Page 85 and 86: 327 Mrs C Taylor 329 Mrs M J Snowdo
Page 87 and 88: 3. JOBS Where can we find land for
Page 89 and 90: 021 Mr P Jermyn There is enough spa
Page 91 and 92: 063 Mr B A Stammers Broardband mean
Page 93 and 94: 113 Mr & Mrs Rowland Apprentaships
Page 95 and 96: 158 Mr & Mrs White 159 Mr & Mrs J C
Page 97 and 98: 193 Ms S Swift Should be on sites v
Page 99 and 100: 236 Mr & Mrs Beattie Transport link
Page 101 and 102: 274 Mr S Mckinnon Employment where
Page 103: 321 R J Feather How will the jobs b
Page 107 and 108: 026 Mr A Lantaff As stated earlier
Page 109 and 110: 073 Mr S Learmouth I believe strong
Page 111 and 112: 136 Mrs G E Chase Protect our areas
Page 113 and 114: 178 Mr D Livermore Protect all of t
Page 115 and 116: 228 Ms A Henderson I think the coun
Page 117 and 118: 261 S A Skinner 262 Ms L Parish I w
Page 119 and 120: 301 Ms K Kelly 4.3 Protection and e
Page 121 and 122: 354 Mrs Smith This side of the rive
Page 123 and 124: Rep No Contact Name Character Comme
Page 125 and 126: 052 Mr & Mrs D Lench Too many expen
Page 127 and 128: 106 Ms P Melito Rochford should alw
Page 129 and 130: 166 G W Fleming All aeras must be m
Page 131 and 132: 204 Mr R Gould As before 205 Mrs Wh
Page 133 and 134: 251 Mr B Guyett - Chairman No, you
Page 135 and 136: 301 Ms K Kelly 4.9 Good design and
Page 137 and 138: 359 Mr New The district is short of
Page 139 and 140: Rep No Contact Name Energy & Water
Page 141 and 142: 046 Mr & Mrs J Cripps See 1.0 - why
Page 143 and 144: 093 Mrs M J Owoo I think you are do
Page 145 and 146: 140 Mrs J Davies If you are referin
Page 147 and 148: 181 Mrs M R Hutchings What do you m
Page 149 and 150: 224 Mr K S Gee Water - there are se
Page 151 and 152: 263 Mr P Kneen Whilst Swan Hill ack
Page 153 and 154: 307 Mr J Snow Extra development mea
Page 155 and 156:
7. LEISURE, TOURISM & COMMUNITY FAC
Page 157 and 158:
027 Mr B Fuller Leisure facilities
Page 159 and 160:
069 Mrs B Buckland 070 P Robertson
Page 161 and 162:
112 A J Smythe Green Burial sites -
Page 163 and 164:
156 J W Collins Rochford does not n
Page 165 and 166:
190 Mr G J Tinsey New facilities sh
Page 167 and 168:
235 L W Lewis There are not enough
Page 169 and 170:
268 Mr S Crussell We don't really h
Page 171 and 172:
317 Mr D Harris Having attended a '
Page 173 and 174:
359 Mr New I do not see this as a t
Page 175 and 176:
Rep No Contact Name CPO and Plannin
Page 177 and 178:
057 Mrs J Williams Developers shoul
Page 179 and 180:
102 Mr T Newton Compulsory purchase
Page 181 and 182:
158 Mr & Mrs White Some compulsory
Page 183 and 184:
196 Mr A E Hodges The voluntary app
Page 185 and 186:
246 Miss M Saward No this is not fa
Page 187 and 188:
306 Mr E C Cook See comments under
Page 189 and 190:
362 Ms M Power Circular 1/97 provid
show all

Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?