The application in Victoria Avenue Rayleigh for three houses and two bungalow is being recommended for refusal by planning officers. But their reason is on flood prevention grounds.
The full details are at the end of this report here
There is already permission for two houses and two bungalows on the site, so if this was passed it would mean one extra property.
Rayleigh Town Council make no objections to this application.
Five letters have been received from the public which cover the following points (plus a few more):
o No specific objection to the application but point out that the architects are still working to an out of date site map incorrect to the deeds and which reduces the amenity area to the dwelling adjoining No. 64 Victoria Avenue.
o Concerned at the history of the site and repeat applications, thought approval for four was the end of the matter. Consider if this application for five units passed a further application will be made for 6 then 7 dwellings.
o Consider the current application to be overdevelopment
o Congestion and parking problems on a road used as a single access to an estate and forces pedestrians to walk in the street.
o Street narrows at the point of the development o Concern at main sewer running across the site
o Application better than previous but parking still inadequate
o Speeding traffic conditions o Large Oak to the front of the site not shown in the plans and concern for its safety
o Previously approved application for four dwellings should be adhered to.
o Stated in previous application that if permission were not granted then no other application would be submitted.
o A pair of 4 bed semi detached houses would still overload the drainage and parking along Victoria Avenue
o Concern at how services will get to the rear properties as there is a stream crossing the site
o Insufficient drainage
o Loss of trees and vegetation o Noise and disturbance
o Poor layout ? overdevelopment
o Protection of wildlife
o Traffic generation/access
However the officers are only recommending refusal for the following reason:
REFUSE 1 The proposed development and the accompanying Flood Risk Assessment fails to demonstrate that the development does not increase flood risk on the site or elsewhere. The submitted Flood risk Assessment fails to take into account modelling of flood levels arising from climate change for the lifetime of the development and plans for the drainage of surface water from the site and the rates of discharge for the area. If allowed the development could result in increased flooding. Relevant Development Plan Policies and Proposals: HP3, HP6, UT1, of the Rochford District Council Adopted Replacement Local Plan
The risk of flooding from surface water is becoming more important in Rayleigh. As ground gets built on or covered by concrete, the water from heavy rains can’t be simply absorbed by the soil.
The application is on the ‘weekly’ list. If it is not called in by any councillor by Tuesday lunchtime, the scheme will be refused, simply for the flooding reason. If any councillor wanted to add any extra reasons, or alternatively to pass it, they would have to call it in for a decision at the next committee meeting.
As an update on this- The Environment Agency withdrew their objection, and the scheme has now been passed.
The old heavily vandalised bunaglow at the Victoria Road site was finally demolished earlier this week and the clear up is now well underway.
Why the loud clean up needs to be done before 8am in the morning is beyond me. I know it’s a working day but it’s the summer holidays and so many familes have young babies and children. Just want you want from 7.30am…
The plot thickens here. The ‘new development’ signs have been up for ages now, maybe a year? Then just this week a ‘for sale’ has been posted for the entire land – including the planning consent I’m sure. I guess it’s just not the right time to build, which means we’re left with a large ugly plot of land and hoardings. Just like the land adjacent to The Paul Pry. Rayleigh seems to be “littered” with half finished (or not started) builds.
It seems that the Environment Agency or whoever objected to this 2008 Developement were right, as there have been 2 floods since completion of the site, in August 2013/ July 2014. Victoria Avenue, Cheapside West & some connected roads have been affected by these floods. I’m not saying that this New Build Developement was the cause, but i wonder if the block paving drivways & tarmac road ect has created more problems for this area! Also, there was a small Brook/Stream that ran through this site, but the developers managed to hide most of it, by building the main tarmac road & block paving driveways over it!