The Rayleigh Town Council Annual Meeting is tomorrow night Wednesday 21st at 7:30 at the Town Council offices (The Pavilion, King George V Playing Field).
The Town Council issues an Annual Statement each year in April to coincide with its Annual Town Meeting, which is a forum for the public to come and question members on any matters relating to the work of the Town Council.
I wish to protest most strongly against the proposed allocation of land off the A129 to the travelling community.
My objection to the travellers is that they are not travellers. They set up home in one place and stay there for years. They resist all attempts to have them removed from their sites, legal or otherwise, and it costs the taxpayer money to do so, along with the clearance of all the mess they leave behind.
These people do not contribute in any way to the community. They are synonymous with poor workmanship, fly tipping and other illegal activities. The rest of us who pay our council tax and live normal lives do not want to be subsidising their way of life.
They would also need access to the A129 adding to the congestion caused by too many access roads in too short a distance. Between Victoria Avenue and Little Wheatleys Drive, a distance of about 150 yards, there are no fewer than 6 (six) access roads. The most recent access road being created by the demolition of one bungalow and the erection of 14 houses. This side of Rayleigh is becoming over developed.
The proposed change of use to residential housing of the Rawreth Industrial Estate seems to me to be the start of the removal of all green belt space to the west side of Rayleigh. No account seems to be taken of the toll on facilities and resources.
I have lived in Rayleigh for over 50 years and I am sad to say I have witnessed a steady decline. Driving in Rayleigh is a nightmare with all access routes to the High Street being congested at many times of the day. With increased development the situation will only deteriorate.
M Makepeace : Welcome to onlinefocus. We’ve mentioned the two options of a traveller site because we don’t want residents left in the dark.
And we are opposing. However it’s important to bear in minds that a housing site and an industrial site would be much bigger and have a much bigger impact in terms of traffic and loss of green fields.
Alternative sites can be found for all this development.
alternative sites are already available. These are mobile home sites, these established places tick all the boxes put forward by ‘travellers’. This way they too can pay for all amenities and council tax and be just like the rest of’us’ as they puport to want.Why is this not a viable option?
i have recently moved from kent to rayleigh in which i really like, i would object to the travelers site as i have seen plenty in the surrounding areas. this is a lovely green area and should be left alone .
“Travellers” being the operative word! It seems that many of them do not want to travel – I am confused!! Also many seem to have permanent homes in other parts of the UK.
As I have said before, the Council and in particular the planning department have not considered the brown field sites and the unoccupied homes in the district before letting the developers get their greedy hands on our greenbelt. No apologies to RDC!