Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

Rep No Contact Name Protection Comments
001 Mr I Haines Stambridge Mills and Upper Roach Valley is a natural and ideal area for recreational development relax protection sensibly
Where ever possible increase recreational opportunities, but again don't leave it to the money makers to exploit there is no
real reason the Council could not manage this area so that its affordable to all; so many people cannot afford to use such
002 Mr & Mrs Hawes places as Clements Hall for example
Probably need to protect areas already designated open areas. Don't need "contrived" country parks. Just need open
003 Mr A Cooper
countryside for everyone to use however they want.
004 Mr M Cubitt GREEN BELT. The current government sicken me by their arrogant and stupid disregard for it.
007 Ms P Pemberton Not sure!
Existing green belt should be protected as far as possible, particularly the area including Hockley Woods, Grove Woods,
Edwards Hall Park and Cherry Orchard/Jubilee Park which provides a valuable recreational area for the densely populated
areas surrounding it. There are also other areas which should be preserved such as the salt marshes alongside the River
008 Ms S Woolhouse Crouch which are a haven for wildlife.
010 Mr A Devlin I think the balance is fine
The balance seems to be about right given the current population level - however, with an aging population you may find
011 R F Wise
that recreation will not be in such demand in the future.
013 Etchells No development should be allowed in any area where there is liable to be flooding.
In this world of global warming protection and education about our rural areas is paramount. Recreational is a plenty so is
014 D Hanrahan
the damage done to their areas. Please don't send good money after bad. Balance must favour protection.
Yes parks and gardens. I do not think it is right that dogs are allowed to poo and wee where our children play. Where is the
Upper Roach Valley? As this is the first time I have been asked, also I have not monitored the Council decisions till now! I
015 F A Robinson
cannot answer this part of the question.
A network of interconnected path for walking, jogging, cycling would be useful. I don't understand why we can't walk the
016 Mr R Fuller
length of the Crouch from Battlesbridge to Wallasea Island and then across to Foulness.
Along the area of Eastwood Road. Yes providing public transport is adequate and providing we can supply a bus after 4pm.
017 Mr L A G Dunford Yes.
018 Mrs Gaunt All areas should be protected not just Roach Valley, parks, fields we need them all. We need the space and fresh air.
019 Mrs L Allen Embrace places like Battlesbridge and Hullbridge
There should be swathes of protection between developments. Not one patch of development and one patch of protected
020 Mr & Mrs Appleton land.
021 Mr P Jermyn All the countryside should be protected
022 Mr R Huckett & Ms C Hockley Woods and the Upper Roach Valley needs protection.
023 Ms C J Christopher Support increased recreational use (within reason) of Roach Valley - balance good.
Is Battlesbridge yours? Oh why is the authorities control of that village so poor. Properly cared for it can mature into an
equal of Snape Matlings in Suffolk. Sadly, so far, an opportunity is being ignored. Can the Stambridge Mill area be blended
024 Mr P Williams
into a tourist area/local beauty spot?
025 Mrs P Clifton Yes so far