There’s still time to comment on the council’s latest consultation on the core strategy.
You can find all the stuff on the consultation here
In particular you can download the document that we are being consulted on here (299k)
The closing date for replying is 5:00 pm on 11th July 2011. So you still have time to comment – and you can see some of the responses so far here
This was discussed last night at Rawreth Parish Council . Although they naturally concentrated on the west of the district, they did think about aspects that affect the whole district – and they praised District Councillor John Mason for his efforts. They were also concerned that last years consultation seems to have been completely ignored and shelved.
Putting it simply, the District Council are proposing building on ‘land north of London Road’ , the Parish Council prefer a smaller site in the centre of Rawreth. And the Parish Council felt that the District’s consultation document was unfairly weighted in favour of the “North of London Road” site. Also they feel that the risk of flooding hasn’t been addressed properly.
We can certainly see why the Parish Coucnil feel like this.
For example the document says one of the good things about their proposed site is that:
The quantum of development that can be delivered in this location provides sufficient economies of scale to fund/develop
facilities required by the community, including a primary school, public open space and other community facilities.
- but actually there’s got quite a lot of open space already in this area. And even if 770 houses were built here, that wouldn’t require a new primary school – especially as St Nicholas School in Priory Chase was especially designed to have the capability to expand.
Also the document says about their site:
Some areas within this location are within flood zone 3, however it is likely that development can be accommodated outside of
the flood prone area.
It’s only ‘likely‘ that development will be out of the flood zone?! Are the district council implying that it would be OK for some of the housing to be built in the flood zone?
Meanwhile the document seems to miss out a lot of the good things about the Rawreth site:
It doesn’t mention it’s convenient for Battlesbridge Railway Station
It doesn’t mention that drainage from this site would go directly northwards into the River Crouch, instead of adding to the problems of Rawreth Brook.
It doesn’t mention the site is on two bus routes that might even get an increased service if more houses were there.
It doesn’t recognise that a development could completely be on brownfield land, rather than on green fields. ( if it was smaller than the 550 -770 proposed north of London Road