Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

More documents

Recommendations

Info

108 Mr W J Edgar 109 Mr C Fantides 110 Mr P Nippard 111 Mr & Mrs Curtis 113 Mr & Mrs Rowland 117 W R H Beehag 118 Mrs I Sandell 119 Mr C Gabell Much of the Green Belt is neglected horse paddocks and featureless agriculture. The 'no it's green belt' policy should be modified to development plus associated created habitat. Low maintenance once established. Barnes Common West London sort of thing. Featureless playing fields are as bad. Barnes Common includes playing fields in a landscape of 7 day a week use. Areas for local youth to bicycle, skate board, kick football, kites the area behind Waitrose petrol station was until recently the rendyvous for all sort of clapped out motor cycles, no bother to anybody. Further development implies a new major road East West, and a waste disposal site near Rochford. It's ridiculous that its not not possible to cooperate with Southend on both. Your voters chose to live in these areas ie small towns or villages and wish to keep these and do not want them developed any further as it undermines the reason we live here! This whole strategy is driven by a Government directive to construct 4,600 new homes by 2021. What is the rationale for this. Why do we need so many extra houses when there is blatantly no space to put them without encroaching green belt land or inconveniencing existing residents. Why do we not take a firm stance and say enough is enough! If we do have to proceed you should take steps to avoid any expenditure on accommodating gypsies, travellers and immigrants all of which have a detremental effect on any location for which they are sited. No doubt we can expect another inflation busting increase in our council tax to pay for this ridiculous initiative. I have only lived here a few years. I hope to live in my home for many years to come. Therefore the area is important to my family. I would like to see my son live locally and not move away. We are at the end area of the map we can't move further west only east - north and possibly south. I am not sure what Rochford has available for. Respite within the Rochford area for carers to have a break - there isn't any! Rochford should promote anything that fills this gap and encourage new business interests to look at this gap. Carers often get direct payments for this service, but can't 'spend' the money as there is nothing to access it with! It seems a waste. Supported living - is there any? The demand is there and it is an area that will grow, creating job opportunities. The learning disabled and physically disabled need more attention paid to them. I feel quite strongly that the authority needs to be very careful about planning permissions in Rochford town which allow over development; for example - the new flats in Weir Pond Road next to betting shop are in my opinion a clear case of ugly monstruosities, completely spoiling the picturesque cottages opposite - a great shame - which should never have been allowed. Please do not do anything like it again! Thank you for the consultation process, and the plans you get right. Rochford was once a pleasant place to live, not so much o now our roads are in a disgraceful state. Too much heavy traffic on roads never meant for it. Much frustration for drivers on the Ashingdon Road and Southend Road especially at commuter time and the school run. The biggest challenge facing Rochford is that with extra homes the District's road systems are totally inadequate - until the policy of resisting by-passes is ceased the roads will continue to be clogged especially during rush hour - try travelling along the Ashingdon Road, Rectory Road, Hall Road, Cherry Orchard Lane and Sutton Road at peak periods and imagine the effects this will produce with the extra homes in the district. Its time the local plan reflected sufficient roads to take the extra homes, businesses. The 'infrastructure' is mentioned a lot but the most essential of this is roads - insufficent roads mean inefficient public and private transport - in this questionnaire, why is transport not given its own section?
121 Mrs S J Attfield 122 F E Wells 123 Mr K Walcer 125 Mr D Brown & Mrs J Kirk 126 Mr J Jefferies 127 Mr G Ware I think the Council needs to look seriously at its current policies and view the long term implications of over population of the area. One wonders where a new town would be built that is not in the flood risk area, one presumes that the town would then have schools, roads, water supplies which would then not be adding to the present difficulties locally. Local affordable housing to meet the needs of local people is the issue here. It is also not viable to look at where industry could be increased, eg Rochford Business Park if there is not a skills match. We have seen in the past that Essex can be a blackspot for work and I think the council needs to show some social responsibility and take this into cinsideration. Local jobs for local people not for the overflow from London where there is plenty of work. So people move to Essex enticed by new housing to have to then travel back to London to work thus polluting the environment and making the situation intolerable, for everyone in the area. This questionnaire is all about expansions - more jobs = people = cars, more houses = cars, more industrial development = car and heavy vehicles. Where in this document is there any reference to the increasing traffic flow problems that already exist and will get worse. More individual motorist - more CV's involved in construction - Brays Lane is bad enough now with very large wood carriers racing along. Presumably the road structure is an Essex County Highways problem and you leave it to them but your housing and industrial site development policy will make the problem explode. Where is the ring road? Immigration should be stopped unless for special reasons, if it was stop there be no need for more houses, roads. There won't be a demand for it remember the United Kingdom is an island not a great land mass, no room left over the edge, like the lemmings. Southend pier should be rebuilt and with a solid construction like store and clement and a river taxi to London be use for work and tourists cut traffic as well and parking space. Wind farm off Southend would good as well, people will come miles to see it. Global warming must be an issue to be talked about for our food needs and future living space and need for water. Please do not allow Southend to build an outer ring road through the Rochford district. Why should we pay the price for their over development! Transport. Transport or rather access and conjestion are major issues in this area. During peak travel periods movement through the district is extremely slow. Examples include the Ashingdon Road and the Southend Road through Hockley as well as many others. This problem needs to be addressed if amjor developments are to take place. Simple measures such as the refuse collection not occuring during the day on certain routes. This would improve traffic flow no end. I know there will be a cost involved but surely this would be offset by less pollution caused by stationary vehicles. This is our fifth year living in Rochford and this is the first time any communication like this has been undertaken by the council that we know of. Credit must be given for this but there is not enough information made available by the council to make a good job of answering the questions you have posed on previous pages. Why not use your "matters" publication to feature information in more detail as summarized on pages 8 and 9 of your current issue?
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: 091 Ms P Bailey 092 Mrs M Hills 095
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 and 104:
321 R J Feather How will the jobs b
Page 105 and 106:
4. PROTECTION Are there any other a
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?