Get involved...
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECHONEWS to 80360, or email us Click here for details »
Could a new town be answer for Rochford?
6:00am Friday 25th January 2008
Comments (9)FOR a district that prides itself on being 80 per cent green belt, Rochford has a big problem on its hands.
By 2021, more than 2,200 new homes need to be built in the district as part of Government housebuilding quotas in the South East.
So where are they built?
Some say new homes should be built near existing villages like Great Wakering, Rochford, Hockley and Hullbridge.
Others claim that would put huge pressure on schools, roads and medical facilities.
Could a new town be the answer? Hawkwell Parish Council believes it is. It suggests a new town in the west of Rayleigh would be the best policy to pursue.
Originally, Rochford District Council officers had said Rayleigh should take the bulk of the new homes, but this was changed after angry opposition.
Revised plans worked out at a private meeting of councillors cut this number by half, but meant an increase in the allocation for villages across the district, particularly Hawkwell and Hullbridge.
Hawkwell Parish Council vice chairman Vic Leach said: "There is strong opposition to any major green belt development within the parish from many residents.
"Our preferred option for all housing requirements is to create a single new community within the district, thus allowing services and infrastructure to be properly and viably provided.
"This new community would be ideally situated in the west or north west of the district to allow best access to public transport, cycleways and dual carriageways."
Mr Leach said if this option was not acceptable, development should be shared equally throughout the area, based on the size of parishes and their populations."
He added: "We expect any new development within the parish boundaries to have a minimum impact on the green belt, not increase the village footprint and that the district council will use its compulsory purchase powers to achieve this.
"Before any development is started the infrastructure should be improved, dealing with issues such as traffic, health and schools"
He added there should be a mixture of housing developments, with flats only if absolutely necessary of no more than three storeys high.
Mr Leach added: "We also expect Rochford District Council to create a direct and positive link between accommodation and employment."
Myra Weir, Hawkwell Parish Council planning committee chairman, said: "We held a couple of public meetings and it was quite clear the policy which we have adopted was what the people of the village wanted."
Former Rayleigh Town Council chairman Tony Humphries said: "My own view is development should be spread fairly across the whole of the district.
"I would never agree to 1,800 homes being built in Rayleigh, and I still cannot understand exactly where this idea came from in the first place. Over the years, Rayleigh has taken more than enough of the development in the district. I could never accept 1,800 homes even with a promise of improved infrastructure."
Your Say YourEcho
John Mason, Hawkwell says...
12:32pm Fri 25 Jan 08
If an additional 365 homes were to be built in Hawkwell then the road infrastructure in Hawkwell would have to be improved to cope with the number of additional cars per household multiplied by the number of average car movements per day. In addition there are many more homes to be built in Rochford District where car movements could cause those people to travel through Hawkwell on the feeder routes to the "A" Roads. That number of additional vehicle movements would run into thousands. If the road infrastructure were "improved" in Hawkwell to cope with that then I could forsee additional roads being built to bypass existing bottlenecks causing the loss of green space in itself together with the cost of road widening schemes. That would make a Hawkwell a place that I would not like to see. It would be unacceptable. So nobody should be suggesting that Hawkwell could have the 365 homes if the infrastructure is improved. I don't want to the developers and the planners challenged into going ahead and making the bid for big infrastructure changes for Hawkwell in the decision process.
The report from the strategic sustainability review will be available shortly at the District Council and I have been personally invited by the Chair of the sub committee to attend. It is premature to try and guess the recommendations. Let's hope that the strategic planners don't now come up with a plan that will improve the infrastructure in Hawkwell. That would ruin the environment may times over the actual impact of the allocation of the houses.
My proposal on behalf of the residents of Hawkwell is to say "NO" to the additional 365 homes and "NO" to any enabling infrastructure. I would appreciate the views of residents on this by email to john.mason@bigfoot.c
om
But the housing allocation for Rochford District must be formally planned for and it makes more sense strategically to put this allocation wherever the infrastructure is already and not where building new infrastructure would be an even bigger blight on the District.
As for a new "town" out to the East, in association with a Southend/Rochford Relief Road or By Pass, I understand that the sustainability figure for developers to provide that major road would have to be in the region of 12,000 additional houses in Rochford District which is many times higher than the proposed allocation. So the most likely place is in the West.
Dan, North Leigh says...
4:49pm Fri 25 Jan 08
Cllr Chris Black, Rayleigh, www.onlinefocus.org says...
5:28pm Fri 25 Jan 08
West Rayleigh and Rawreth have taken most of the new big developments in the last 20 years - and with the exception of Sweyne Park, we have gained little in the way of extra amenities.
The District Council even encouraged the selling off of playing fields in West Rayleigh to create a park elsewhere.
This time round we desperately need some fairness in the allocation of new housing. There is enough land in all parts of the district to fair shares for all without impacting too much on any particular neighbourhood.
John Mason, www.rochfordessex.co
m says...
8:34am Sat 26 Jan 08
The Government has told Rochford District Council that it must adopt a professional approach to strategic sustainability planning. It is an objective analysis and assessment based on data and information. Whatever this report says it cannot be ignored. That will be politically expedient. It is not our fault, we have no choice. Such a report wiil not start with a notion of "Fair Shares For All" nor will it end with it and neither will it appear in the middle!!
The fairly abrupt decision made by the Rochford District Conservative Group to significantly reduce the number of new homes that the District Council might propose to be allocated in Rayleigh was an expedient decision to quell the internal concerns of the Tory Rayleigh Councillors who were being tormented by the Rayleigh Liberal Democrats and the residents of Rayleigh. Remember it was a POLITICAL PROPOSAL not a COUNCIL DECISION .
But will the next Rochford District Council public consultation on the Local Development Framework be before or after the May Local Elections? I can't answer that but one can speculate.
Getting back to strategic sustainability planning. Infrastructure is going to be very expensive. It takes a lot of new houses to pay for what is necessary. The developer pays, remember, because there's no public investment ever going to come from the Government for the infrastructure. So expect that the professional study will recommend building any enabling infrastructure on existing higher level infrastructure which could support more development. A major build of infrastructure, in the form of a Southend?Rochford By Pass for a new town in the East, for example, is only really sustainable at 12,000 new homes. So the probability for this plan comes back to the West, Rayleigh.
The "Fair Shares For All" approach to the allocation of new homes should be recognised just being a political expedient in response to the noise that was being generated in Rayleigh.
I could be quite wrong of course and I expect to be told so.
Cllr Chris Black, Rayleigh www.onlinefocus.org says...
10:12am Sat 26 Jan 08
"Fair Shares For All" is something that Rayleigh Lib Dems have been saying for quite a long time time now, and maybe one or two Rayleigh Tories are now adopting the idea as well.
Of course I will look at the professionally produced officers reports very carefully. But I don't always agree with them - for example, the one a few years ago that said we should have sports pitch provision in Rayleigh below the national standard.... if the officers had come to a different conclusion that might have blocked quite a bit of development in that area.
Cllr Chris Black, Rayleigh says...
10:17am Sat 26 Jan 08
APR, Benfleet says...
12:56pm Sat 26 Jan 08
It's only a matter of time.
Ian Jordan, Rayleigh says...
4:42pm Sat 26 Jan 08
"This new community would be ideally situated in the west or north west of the district to allow best access to public transport, cycleways and dual carriageways."
Not much public transport or cycleways in West Rayleigh
Councillors Myra Weir and Vic Leach are
In this section
- Pollution levels tested after 200 fish die in river
- A127 to be widened at Progress Road to beat the jams
- New housing plans delayed until 2015
- Police hunt alleyway attacker
- Car fire in Canvey
- Road closed in Rayleigh after water pipe bursts
- Woman cut free from car crash in Canewdon
- Passenger injured after car overturns on A130
- Did you film dad's stabbing on your mobile?
- Youngsters make their mark on future of our town
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
APR, Benfleet says...
8:41am Fri 25 Jan 08
Which has probably been the intention all along.