Planning - Summary of all comments - Amazon Web Services

215 Mr T R Thompson
216 Mr & Mrs D Strong
217 F H Wall Esq
218 T Wiggins Esq
219 Mr J Amey
220 Mrs S Clarke
221 Mr G Hoy
222 R Luck
223 C Morris
224 Mr K S Gee
There is far too much traffic now and I feel there are inadequate schools, services and public servants such as police,
hospital workers to cope with any new housing around Rochford at all.
We agree with the council that development should be concentrated on the three main settlements within the District. We
further believe that there is scope for development to the south of Rochford town. Whilst this is not an allocations
consultation we bring to your attention the site detailed on the attached plan as evidence that there are areas immediately
adjacent to urban centres which can be succesfully re-developed to integrate with existing service provision. We do not
believe that there is scope for a new town development within the district.
We strongly believe that land should be released from the greenbelt to accommodate development. We agree that land
should be released on the boundaries of the three main settlements as set out in the draft document. We further feel there
is scope for release from the greenbelt on the north east boundary of Ashingdon (see attacted plan). The east side of
Ashingdon has the most potential for growth and ability to intergrate with the existing service provision particularly if the
land to the west of the settlement will form a strategic gap seperating it from Hawkwell. We do not consider a new town an
option within the district. We would prefer a release of greenbelt rather than increased crowding in the urban centres. The
extension of the green belt boundary to a more defensible position squaring off uneven areas would be the best way
forward.
We strongly believe that land should be released from the greenbelt to accommodate development furthermore residential
development should be allocated to minor settlements to enable support of existing services and possible regeneration of
village centres. We believe that 10% of the housing allocation for minor settlements is not sufficient to allow growth to
existing villages. We would prefer a release of greenbelt rather than increased crowding in the urban centres. The
extension of the green belt boundary to a more defensible position squaring off uneven areas would be the best way
forward. We believe the following land at Great Wakering offers potential for a sustainable expansion of the village.
Green belt should remain green belt and none of it should be used for development. Otherwise what's the point of having
green belt in the first place? Our current road network struggles to cope with current volumes so I strongly believe only
brownfield sites should be used for development.
Land should be released from the green belt, but infill only, preferably. No land should be released for a new town if
possible. There is a piece of land in The Chase in Ashingdon for which I attach a plan which would be ideal since there is
the infrastructure to accommodate building starter or retirement homes.
There is already too much building work. No land should be released from green belt areas. Schools, roads, police and
other services should be in place before new housing. This has obviously not been a consideration recently!
I strongly feel green belt land should be preserved at all costs. Whereever are you going to fund enough land to create a
new town. The idea is laughable!
No no no its not as simple as that all the necessary facilities must come also doctors - dentists - schools, shopping car-parks
and 'big roads'. Do not want Rochford to become a concrete jungle it is already too crowded and populated.
No land should be released from Green Belt in the Rayleigh area, over 600 houses have already been builtin the Rawreth
part of Rayleigh.