Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

More documents

Recommendations

Info

329 Mrs M J Snowdon 330 P Mansbridge 331 Mr A C Cooper 332 Mr & Mrs Jones 333 Mr & Mrs Hopkins 335 M J Darkins 336 Mr D L Howard 337 Mrs J Crocker I consider this area is becoming rapidly over developed with the facilities for travveling without a car getting more and more difficult. There are many older people and also youngsters under driving age who have to rely on the rapidly diminishing bus services. It seems build more houses and take off the transport in the policy. Overall this is a pleasant area to live in but how long can this balance be maintained? We are in danger of being over developed eg Rayleigh. Much of this development does not add to the community spirit and can create social problems. If more people live in an area therefore more money should be raised to provide the infrastructure and facilities the people need. We have to face issues such as i) The development of Southend Airport. ii) The Northern relief road - but not with lots of roundabouts and a housing development on each one defeating the object of moving traffic. iii) The lower Thames crossing. iv) The improvement of public transport. The development of 'bus only' routes cutting out the bottlenecks eg Eastwood Road going via Grove Woods. A more imaginative approach to linking communities such as opening up back roads thus preventing all traffic being funnelled into the few 'main' roads. 2 local suggestions for Hockley/Hawkwell: 1) The 2 industrial factories along the main road in Hawkwell just before Potash Nursery provide valuable local employment. However, parking is a problem. Employees park cars on the roadside verge (as you might expect). Why not build a long layby here to facilitate the parking. This would tidy up the area and make for safer parking - no good pretending people won't use cars. 2) Hockley Spa Road - compulsory purchase the back yards of the shops from Bramerton Road to Somerfield and create one long carpark. Similar to behind Potters). Before anymore infilling and building is even considered infrastructure needs a total overhaul as higher densities of homes requires far better roads etc. than we have at the moment. The Government etc. would like more people to use public transport and cut the use of cars but are unwilling to provide a viable public transport system, when did you last use a bus etc regularly, most journeys are impossible to make and prohibitively expensive and uncomfortable service providers need a good shake up and to lose their monopolised hold on local communities. To build and create new larger housing sites would completely destroy the existing character of this area. North West Rayleigh has already absorbed our 200 new houses and anymore would destroy the area. To have these new developments spread evenly and fairly throughout the district would allow them to be absorbed more easily - the necessary supporting infrastructure would benefit the whole community. Ref: The Planning process being considered, this carpet building is a bad idea a mass in one small pocket = schools = doctors = access for vehicles x amount of houses = 3 times more cars etc. Therefore, spread the developments more fairly. With regard to the proposed swamping of our part of Essex with the proposed 3000 homes. I reluctently suggest that if I have to choose one of the three distasteful options, it would be the option one ie spread them fairly throughout the district. I think that Rawreth has already suffered enough, its time someone else took a turn. I understand that Rochford District Council have been told by the Government to build another 3000 houses within the District. Please, I ask not all in one place, Rawreth. Spread them fairly throughout the district. Rayleigh, Hawkwell, Rochford, that would be fair, not one place. Not Rawreth fairly all around the district.
338 Mr & Mrs Saunders We have been informed that the Government have told Rochford District Council to build 3000 houses in the district. Of course we realise this has to be done to house people but we request that they are spread fairly throughout the district not in one place, and that place being Rawreth, we have far too many houses here already so much so the infrastructure can not maintain the houses which are already here. We have lived along Rawreth Lane for the last 35 years and each year it gets progressively worse, what with volume of traffic and also the speed of which the traffic travels along the Rawreth Lane. If you have to build new houses, please do so that they are SPREAD FAIRLY across the district. I understand Rochford District Council have been told by Government to build another 3000 houses within the district. Rawreth can't cope with housing now - road chaos, only one utilities don't seem to cope now. Out of the three options I want 339 Mrs J Robertson them spread fairly around the district. I understand that you have been instructed by Government to build 3000 more houses in the district. Of the options available, surely the fairest to us all would be to distribute them fairly thoughout the area. The idea of putting them all in one place would be sheer stupidity. As for putting them all in Rawreth, which I am given to understand is an option, should definitely be a no-no. The roads for starters, just couldn't cope, is the infrastructure in place for such development. Please 340 Miss A M Churchley make my views known. 341 Mr & Mrs Latter I want them spread fairly all around the district. It has come to our attention that the government has told the Rochford District Council to build 3000 homes in our area, and that the Council are considering building them all in Rawreth. We already suffer more traffic than our roads can take and have very few amenities for the amount of Community Tax we pay, what happens to these amenities when we have to share them between a further perhaps 5,000 residents? Surely it would be much fairer to share this new housing around the 342 Mr & Mrs Willey whole district and not just dump them all in one area. We look forward to hearing your views. We have been informed that the Government have told Rochford District Council to build 3000 houses in the district. Of course we realise this has to be done to house people but we request that they are spread fairly throughout the district not in one place, and that place being Rawreth, we have far too many houses here already so much so the infrastructure can not maintain the houses which are already here. We have lived along Rawreth Lane for the last 35 years and each year it gets progressively worse, what with volume of traffic and also the speed of which the traffic travels along the Rawreth Lane. If 343 Mr & Mrs Giles you have to build new houses please do so that they are spread fairly across the district. We understand that within the planning process there are three options at present being considered by Rochford Council. 1. Spread them fairly throughout the District. 2. Spread them around the 3 main centres of Rayleigh, Hawkwell and Rochford. 3. Put them all in one place. We feel to put 3000 houses in one place is totally unreasonable, especially in Rawreth where the roads are already becoming congested due to the recent new developments. In our opinion the only sensible solution 344 Mr & Mrs B Craddock would be to spread them over as wide an area as possible throughout the district. I am in receipt of a circular from Lyn Hopkins (Rawreth Parish Councillor) written to make local residents aware of the Governments directive telling Rochford District Council to build another 3000 houses within the District. The circular gives advice on the three options at present being considered by RDC and recommends that residents submit the option they would prefer. Although I am not in favour of any further large scale housing development, especially in Rawreth and Rayleigh, because the infrastructure is already saturated. My only choice is to spread them fairly thruoghout the district. 345 Mr A J Stone Please record my views under this category.
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: 322 Ms J Hitchcock 323 Mr T Beebee
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?