The District Council voted overwhelmingly tonight to support a revised core strategy of 250 new homes per year. The alternative was to abandon having a strategy altogether and leave the district vulnerable to developers. It was an unusually thoughtful debate.
Perhaps the mood of the meeting was best summed up by Tory Ian Ward, who said that the situation was like “Being given a pistol and being forced to shoot ourselves. By having a strategy we choose which part of our body gets hit.”
All the Conservatives present voted in favour (though quite a lot were absent).
Of the Lib Dems, Chris Black and Chris Lumley voted in favour; June Lumley and Ron Oatham were absent through illness.
The Rochford Residents voted in favour.
The Greens abstained.
And the $64M question, where are they going to put the first 250 homes, wouldn’t be Rayleigh would it?
In terms of greenfield sites – The first 250 are likely to be in Rochford; the land “North of London Road” is likely to be used between 2015 and 2021.
However, its not clear what’s happening with brownfield sites such as Eon.
I am sure that most people will agree that this part of Essex is overcrowded and congested, with more people, houses & cars than the area can cope with. Why then do people continue to have 3,4 or 5 kids adding to the problem ? Or is it, as I suspect, always other people to blame. This is the unpleasant truth I am afraid – whichever way you cut it. If you came home to find the bath overflowing you would not put buckets around the rim, you would turn the tap off.
Rayleigh Resident, I agree with you, we are overcrowded and congested but our beloved Tory council cannot see beyond their nose. For TEN years I have been (publicly) against excessive residential building. But our concerns are not properly taken into account. This is why I find myself moving out of Rayleigh before our council spoil Rayligh for all of us who love the town. I cannot see our district council taking our concerns seriously, that is why I am moving away from RDC!
Mike – you have missed the point completely, it’s nothing whatsoever to do with councils – Tory, Labour or otherwise. It’s about the fact that the population simply cannot keep increasing without massive impact on an already congested island and particularly in south east Essex. Where do you think all these people are going to live in the future ?. Life expectancy is ( thankfully ) increasing so what is the answer ?
Thinking of Rayleigh in particular here:
The amount of new housing coming isn’t enormous compared with the amount Rayleigh has received in the last 50 years or so. But in itself that means nearly all the easy, reasonable places to build have already been used. If you go west , you are coalescing with Rawreth, if you go north , you are coalescing with Hullbridge.
Then if you factor in the extra number of cars per household, you can see why our roads are so full.
Why is there pressure for housing here? People have moving here from London for half a century or more, in search of a better quality of life, and that is still the case. Then add in the extra demand due to increased life expectancy, people spending more time in their life single, natural increase in the national population and net immigration.
Rayleigh Resident – I”m not sure what the answers are but I don’t want to lose too many green fields, or see coalescence of towns and villages. So we need to use brownfield sites. I also suspect it involves building apartments . Not in a this-is-a-lousy-location-lets-cram-in-some-mediocre-flats-as-a-last-resort way. But more in a this-is-a-decent-location-we-can-create-some-quality-homes-at-quite-a-high-density way.
We have to have a sensible immigration policy. The Court of Human Rights together with the EU have a far from realistic view of life. I know for a fact that the Scandinavian countries have powerful right wing voice that for years have advocated a limit on immigration. Denmark, where I have friends and have visited have problems with anti-immigration opinions, these people are not necessarily racist but have a fear that their country will be overrun and the Danish way of life will be lost. In the UK we have, for years, had an open door policy and it just has not worked. Maybe the horse has bolted and the gate is still open?