Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

050 Mrs J Samuels
If you increase man-made recreational opportunities you reduce natural environment beauty spots. There are already
sports clubs, golf courses, plentiful parks and the seafront all in close proximity to Rochford district residents.
Council should be seeking to protect all and every piece of Green Belt and to keep each town and village with its own
051 Mrs D Langdon character. A bungalow down Ronald Drive (Rayleigh) needs looking at it is outo f character with the rest.
We should be trying to keep the green belt. Also reducing the number of cars in use on our roads. Public transport should
be made cheaper, reducing pollution and lessening the danger from cars. New housing should provide affordable and
052 Mr & Mrs D Lench rented housing, replacing big, expensive properties the proportion in unbalanced.
053 E Winn Yes
The Roach Valley and Hockley Woods are the only true natural areas within the Rocford District and should be conserved at
054 Mr & Mrs Todman all cost.
055 Mr V Hawtree Please try to protect as much as you can
The river that runs along Purdeys in rear of the factory shop could be tidied and utilised, perhaps somehow to be an area to
056 Mr S Lee
visit. Perhaps tables and benches so that Purdeys staff could sit during their lunch break or just for loacl residents?
057 Mrs J Williams Protection should come first before development. It is vital to preserve character.
058 M J Jackson No further encroachement should be allowed into Green Belt of the Roach Valley which is an area of greal local beauty.
060 Mr S J Herbert Recreational facilities are a good thing so everybody has the chance of enjoying the pleasant surroundings.
061 Mr G W Slaughter Leave it as it is
Protection is highly desireable. The areas in the Roach Valley which are 'green belt' must remain so, but there are areas
such as Stambridge Mills, and the old brickwork in Cherry Orchard Way which need improvement and could become
062 Chris Taylor
recreational areas.
Could the general public have more easy access to the sea walls to enjoy the views of the water and birds (with only a short
063 Mr B A Stammers walk from their cars).
Each town and village has its own distrinct character: Rayleigh has been overdeveloped and has lost a lot of its character
and is now in a kind of limbo neigther a village as it was 40 years ago or a town. Especially in the newly developed areas,
064 Mrs S Smith
no community or community centre. No other area should be over developed as Rayleigh has been.
Recreational opportunities should be created within reasonable walking distanct to preclude the parking requirement -
065 Mr T Bennett
except maybe for safe bicycle parking.
All green belt land, historically intersting buildings should be protected and preserved. Existing sports and leisure areas,
066 Mr G Langhorn should be fully utilised before looking to use other land.
067 J D Carr
I am not sure where upper Roach Valley ? ? ? It is at Sutton Road or by the Rochford Town ? ? ? And yes ? Could be made
but would assume cooperation of the water or river board could be required. Would agree that current approach is ?
068 Mr & Mrs McDermott There seems to be little protection of land once greedy developers start casting their eyes over it!
The woods, country park (Cherry Orchard) are wonderful and seem to be used responsibly by most people (ie not too much
damage, litter etc). Upper Roach valley? Stambridge, Paglesham, Canewdon? What recreational opportunities are
069 Mrs B Buckland proposed? Country walks, picnic areas, wild-life trails - would be beneficial. A green burial site is a good idea.
Existing open spaces, woods and footpaths are splendid areas for peace and recreation. I am against vast commercial
070 P Robertson
recreation sites.
072 Mr & Mrs S J Painter The Green Belt must be protected - no more building!