Local Plan

Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on Preferred Options Local Plan - SS14: Land to the south of Battleswick Farm Rowhedge Road

Representation ID: 3205

OBJECT Labours Local Action Team and 140 others represented by Labours Local Action Team (a fox)

Summary:

Although we do no oppose housing, we do not feel this is the right area to build new developments on. Our biggest concerns are the infrastructure and traffic, the school and Drs Surgery are full. Traffic will be a major issue with the Rowhedge Wharf development already bringing in 300 homes that will add around 1000 cars to the local area.

More details about Rep ID: 3205

Representation ID: 3203

OBJECT Mr Trevor Plumb

Summary:

all the extra vehicles would result in increased air pollution, local services would not be able to cope. if the filed is included that would only be the start. Rowhedge has taken is fair share of housing

More details about Rep ID: 3203

Representation ID: 3141

COMMENT Gladman Development (Mr P Isherwood)

Summary:

See submission for full text. Summary of points raised:
Gladman believe the site area should be extended northwards of the existing access point. This would result in an increase of dwellings from 60 to 80. Gladman do not believe coalescence to be a substantive argument against this amendment.

More details about Rep ID: 3141

Representation ID: 3112

OBJECT Ms Debbie Appleton

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of points raised:
Rowhedge has already seen considerable expansion
Valuable arable farmland will be lost
No extra infrastructure capacity has been provided (doctors surgery and primary school are full and the roads are not suitable for additional vehicle movements)
Loss of privacy for Hill View Close residents due to overlooking
Impact on local wildlife

More details about Rep ID: 3112

Representation ID: 3108

OBJECT Miss Carole Rickard

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of points raised:
Development of Battleswick Farm would result in the loss of agricultural land which is of fundamental importance to future generations if they are to avoid food shortages.

More details about Rep ID: 3108

Representation ID: 3074

OBJECT Ms. Janet Livingstone

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of points:
Development of Battleswick harms the separateness of Rowhedge village with the Old Heath area.
Allowing development will give the 'green light' to further development along Rowhedge Road.
Residents have a strong emotional connection with Battleswick Farm.
An alternative site exists at Rowhedge business park which benefits from being brownfield and having good access.

More details about Rep ID: 3074

Representation ID: 3073

OBJECT Rachel Ready

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of points:
Rowhedge residents want to live in a village not a town but more development in Rowhedge harms this lifestyle choice
The proposed development will adversely impact the setting of Hill View Close
There are existing flooding issues in Hill View Close due to the water run off from Battleswick Farm
New homes should be similar to that championed by Kevin McCloud which brings communities together through building their own homes
Building on greenfields is bad for mental health and reduces sense of community which creates crime and societal problems.

More details about Rep ID: 3073

Representation ID: 3064

OBJECT Mrs Sue Chaney

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of points:
Urbanisation of villages reduces choice of living environments
Too much development too quickly
New development is disruptive -noise, dust, road rerouting
New development impact has not been assessed
Too much impact on doctor's and primary school
Loss of farmland
Impact on drainage and sewage network
New homes sets a precedent for more development

More details about Rep ID: 3064

Representation ID: 3058

OBJECT Mr & Mrs M & JM Lear and 1 other

Summary:

See attachment for full text. Summary of main points:
Rowhedge already exceeds its fair share of new build homes.
Increase in new build housing in Rowhedge and consequent impact needs consideration.
Lack of affordable housing in new developments, lack of developer financial scrutiny.
Lack of sheltered or care housing locally.
Impact on tenant farmers at Battleswick Farm.
Impact on immediate residents.
New development should preserve existing conservation and screening.
Pedestrian access is not accounted for in the Plan.
Primary school impact from Wharf development has not been accounted for and there is a lack of space for school expansion.

More details about Rep ID: 3058

Representation ID: 2989

COMMENT Environment Agency (Mr Martin Barrell)

Summary:

Housing development proposed immediately adjacent to Main River. The defended flood source shown on our mapping is tidal. However the undefended fluvial main river at this location (the Birch Brook) has only got a J-Flow outline and therefore we would suggest that further modelling be carried out to understand the fluvial flood risk, this will need to take into account new climate change allowances.

More details about Rep ID: 2989

Representation ID: 2825

OBJECT N T Collyer

Summary:

This is the thin edge of the wedge to eventually lose the green belt land between Rowhedge and Old Heath, we are still a separate village.

More details about Rep ID: 2825

Representation ID: 2821

OBJECT W Diggins

Summary:

Rowhedge cannot sustanin more traffic. Rowhedge medical practice is already fully stretched and St Lawrence school Primary School

More details about Rep ID: 2821

Representation ID: 2809

OBJECT Mr J Seear

Summary:

feel I must write to protests against the proposed housing development near to East road and Dawes Lane at West Mersea. I along with many others feel that possibly up to 1000 more residents the doctors, school and road especially the narrow Dawes Lane will not be able to cope. I feel a rethink on this proposed development should be looked into or is the deal already cut and dried

More details about Rep ID: 2809

Representation ID: 2799

COMMENT Highways England (Mark Norman)

Summary:

Development on the scale proposed here is unlikely to have a severe impact on the Strategic Road Network.

More details about Rep ID: 2799

Representation ID: 2795

OBJECT janet emery

Summary:

I object to development of Battleswich Farm, St Lawrence primary school in its current postion will not be able to accommodate more pupils. pressure on the roads the environmental impact such as wildlife habitats when farmland are lost.The wharf development in itself is a concern for flooding issues

More details about Rep ID: 2795

Representation ID: 2728

OBJECT Velma Guyer

Summary:

I object to the inclusion of Battleswick Farm projects to build more housing as it will surely cause more traffic congestion, parking space insufficiency, pollution to the wildlife and to the existing landscape of our beautiful village and its riverscape.

More details about Rep ID: 2728

Representation ID: 2622

OBJECT Mrs V Y Huckle

Summary:

I strongly object to the inclusion of Battleswick Farm, into the local plan. I feel that Rowhedge has already taken more than its fair share of development. Rowhedge has already taken more than its fair share of development and will place extreme strain on our already stretched local resources.

More details about Rep ID: 2622

Representation ID: 2572

OBJECT J & D Nicholls and 1 other

Summary:

Rowhedge has had its fair share of building and development, The strain on School,medical centre. Increased parking problems, possible risk of flooding, building would take place on prime productive farmland, and loss of green land between Rowhedge and Old Heath.

More details about Rep ID: 2572

Representation ID: 2564

OBJECT Mrs Gillian McKenzie

Summary:

Prime farm land should stay that way .Our green land is so precious to us, isn't there any brown land available for development. Lack of infrastructure ,schools and doctors surgery are full, When wharf development is complete, 300 homes could add an extra 1000 cars to the local roads. The effects this proposed development will have on wildlife, parking, light pollution. Flooding is a huge concern. I ask you consider rejecting any application for land on Battleswick Farm being incorporated in the Local Plan

More details about Rep ID: 2564

Representation ID: 2460

COMMENT Natural England (Kayleigh Cheese)

Summary:

SS14 Land to the south of Battleswick Farm, Rowhedge Road - Colne Estuary SSSI, Essex Estuary SAC, Colne Estuary (Mid-Essex Coast Phase 2) SPA and Ramsar. Upper Colne Marshes SSSI.

The allocation falls within Natural England's Impact Risk Zones (IRZ's)- all direct and indirect impacts to designated sites need to be assessed, for impacts such as recreational disturbance, water quality, water dependency and direct land take of functionally linked land. This should be fully covered by SA. Policy change may be needed after HRA completed. Green infrastructure provision is essential to reduce impacts from recreational disturbance at these sites.

More details about Rep ID: 2460

Representation ID: 2448

OBJECT Ms Clare Jarvis

Summary:

I object to the annihilation of the farmland, flora and fauna, the harm caused by increased vehicles & road safety and because further properties atop of 256 new dwellings (presently incomplete) will be unsustainable, especially in regard to local amenities.

More details about Rep ID: 2448

Representation ID: 2415

OBJECT M & B Redgewell

Summary:

The scale of growth proposed is disproportionate to the size of the village. New housing would cause air pollution, noise pollution and additional traffic. There are flooding risks at the proposal site. The school is over capacity. The GP surgery cannot expand any further. Rowhedge has received 256 new homes with no improvements in infrastructure. The land between Rowhedge and Old Heath is precious 'breathing space' and prime productive farmland.

More details about Rep ID: 2415

Representation ID: 2348

COMMENT Essex County Council (Matthew Jericho)

Summary:

Delete reference to access from Battleswick Farm. Demand for up to 18 primary aged pupils and 12 secondary aged pupils. Rowhedge Port development at Rowhedge Wharf, will produce 46 primary aged and 30 secondary aged pupils. St Lawrence CE VC Primary School operating close to capacity and, could not be expanded further. Another primary school in the area, Langenhoe Primary School or Cherry Tree Primary School would need to be expanded to accommodate this level of growth. (See also Policy SS1 - Abberton and Langenhoe). Cumulative impact of village expansion could result in need for secondary school capacity expansion.

More details about Rep ID: 2348

Representation ID: 2326

OBJECT Barbara Sanderson

Summary:

opposition to the development plans for Battleswick Farm in Rowhedge. Massive quayside development on-going, prospect of losing greenfield sites to join us to Old Heath, infrastructure inadequate, school, surgery overflowing

More details about Rep ID: 2326

Representation ID: 2312

OBJECT Mrs M D Ireland

Summary:

They are applying to build on a field that is a haven to wildlife and it floods ,do you not think with all the other building on the wharf we seriously need anymore houses. The village has no facilities for more housing. Parking and roads cannot cope. covering the filed in concrete will only cause more flooding see attached photographs taken from my back garden.

More details about Rep ID: 2312

Representation ID: 2311

OBJECT Mrs A M Streatfield

Summary:

Against the proposed plan, building houses on farmland belonging to Battleswick Farm in Rowhedge. Sad to see yet more of rural Essex disappearing from our sight and soon Rowhedge would lose its village status. Unsuitable plan, amenities, school, doctors, more traffic already congested Old Heath Road . More than enough building going on in Rowhedge at the moment.

More details about Rep ID: 2311

Representation ID: 2242

OBJECT Mr & Mrs G & T Saunders

Summary:

Green land should stay as farming land and not allow uncaring developers to ruin our lives further. parking in the village is terrible. you must not allow Rowhedge to be linked to Colchester with no green in between, quality of life has been affected with excessive noise pollution,dust and heavy plant machinery

More details about Rep ID: 2242

Representation ID: 2129

OBJECT Brice & Fremel represented by Robinson & Hall LLP (Mr Peter Le Grys)

Summary:

The Rowhedge Business Centre would make a far more preferable site for a mixed residential and community use development than other options for the village. The current use of the site is not viable and has been the subject of numerous complaints. The scheme proposed for this site would include a medical centre and other benefits for the community.

More details about Rep ID: 2129

Representation ID: 2105

OBJECT Mrs Daisy Knights

Summary:

Genuine flooding concerns to properties at Hillview Close, as shown in the attached photographs depicting the difference in just an hour of solid rainfall. Allowing development at Battleswick Farm would cause extreme flooding to the gardens and properties of numbers 73-127 Hillview Close.

Colchester Borough Council MUST seek to protect these residents and taxpayers. Please reject all proposals for Battleswick Farm.

More details about Rep ID: 2105

Representation ID: 2099

OBJECT Ms Kim Gartland

Summary:

- Very real risk of flooding to rear gardens at Hillview Close and at the bottom of Rowhedge Road/Marsh Crescent.

- Total loss of peace and privacy for all residents of Hillview Close.

- No scope for additional classrooms at St Lawrence or consulting rooms at doctors surgery; both valuable resources which stretcg to breaking point with the addition of 170+86 new homes currently under construction at the new wharf site - with this development alone Rowhedge will change dramatically; no further developments should even be considered in the knowledge of these facts - there are not enough resources here.

More details about Rep ID: 2099

Representation ID: 2095

OBJECT Mr John Sanderson

Summary:

Reasons for objection:
1- Rowhedge has already received a significant amount of development in recent years, causing disproportionate increase in size of the settlement and overloading the existing infrastructure.
2-Development will weaken the 'village' nature of Rowhedge and lessen the distinct gap between Rowhedge and Colchester
3-Overall transport links are poor and will become more congested/dangerous, etc - in the immediate area of the village but also in routes into Colchester (Old Heath/Hythe/etc).
4-Farming land should be maintained where possible, the site is generally inappropriate for development on this basis.

More details about Rep ID: 2095

Representation ID: 2094

OBJECT Mr Malcolm Waltho

Summary:

Absolutely object to this plan. Rowhedge has surrendered enough of its land to house building. The village infrastructure has been pushed to its limits. Not to long ago we fought to save our doctors surgery and that is already overloaded. Where do you propose new patients register. Our village school is filled to bursting point and our roads are already too busy.
You seem determined to push us into Colchester. Stop this now.

More details about Rep ID: 2094

Representation ID: 2086

OBJECT Ms K Taylor

Summary:

I endorse the submission made by east donyland parish council.
No provision for building here was made initially and rowhedge has already enough additional housing being developed with a paltry £153k towards affordable housing. Developers are riding roughshod over the green space and will show no qualms at continuing further closing the village/ town gap if not deterred

More details about Rep ID: 2086

Representation ID: 2084

OBJECT Ms K Taylor

Summary:

I endorse the submission made by east donyland parish council.

More details about Rep ID: 2084

Representation ID: 2082

OBJECT Miss B Sharp

Summary:

I am against any development on Battleswick Farm and surrounding area.

More details about Rep ID: 2082

Representation ID: 2078

OBJECT Angelina Cook represented by Angelina Cook

Summary:

Rowhedge has already accepted a large development which is under represented in your information, 170 houses is the first phase.There will be more.
You state we should have a green wedge between us and Old Heath, then you immediately erode this by suggesting part of Battleswick farm be put forward as an additional site.
Rowhedge's infrastruture is at present severely strained even before the current Wharf development comes on stream.
Our services- Doctors, school, drainage system ,parking,policing are under severe pressure. Use some commonsense and acknowledge the planned Wharf development should be the end of the expansion of Rowhedge.

More details about Rep ID: 2078

Representation ID: 2074

OBJECT Mr Iain Welfare

Summary:

I object to this development, as I fear it will it will give the green light to future developments linking old Heath with Rowhedge. Rowhedge is its own place and I wouldn't want it to become part of the urban sprawl of Colchester

More details about Rep ID: 2074

Representation ID: 2069

OBJECT Hina LeBoutillier

Summary:

Better alternative Brownfield site (Rowhedge Business park.

More details about Rep ID: 2069

Representation ID: 2067

OBJECT Alex Hart

Summary:

Why take away perfectly good arable land when there are other areas such as row hedge business park offering better services and amenities supporting the community that are already developed but not the commercially viable therefore employment is down in this area as the facility is primarily being used for storage

More details about Rep ID: 2067

Representation ID: 2053

OBJECT Miss Irene Patarou

Summary:

Village can't support additional housing, doctors and schools, also local amenities couldn't cope

More details about Rep ID: 2053

Representation ID: 2034

OBJECT Mr John Sharp

Summary:

Recent development at docks will already put strain on doctors, school.
Old Heath Road, has grown into a main route for traffic from the south of Colchester and traffic from the north avoiding the centre of Colchester to get to the Hythe. The Dock development will put further strain on the Old Heath Road any further traffic from houses on Battleswick Farm will lead to hold ups forcing traffic go back to going through the centre of Colchester to get to the Hythe.

The houses gardens in Hillview Close already suffer from regular flooding from the Brook.this can only get worse.

More details about Rep ID: 2034

Representation ID: 2005

OBJECT Jan Plummer

Summary:

1. This Development would be detrimental to the local environment and quality of life because it:
is historic farmland
is home to endangered species such as skylarks
is part of the distinct character of the landscape
would increase existing flooding to homes
would increase coalescence between Rowhedge and Old Heath
2. This a step too far for Rowhedge infrastructure.
3. Rowhedge Rd is a country lane and designated, cycle route in an area of rural beauty with views over the Colne. Older people exercise. It is overrun with speeding traffic. Near Old Heath it is dangerous to cross. It cannot take more traffic.

More details about Rep ID: 2005

Representation ID: 2001

OBJECT Brice & Fremel represented by Robinson & Hall LLP (Mr Peter Le Grys)

Summary:

The suggested green field site at Battleswick Farm is considered to be entirely unsuitable for this purpose, having a considerable and demonstrable impact upon the immediate neighbours and effect upon this part of the village. Detailed consideration should be given to a more appropriate site that can offer the village those benefits that have been overlooked to date.

More details about Rep ID: 2001

Representation ID: 1988

OBJECT mr john rowland

Summary:

16th September flooding highlights one of the major issues regarding building on this land.

More details about Rep ID: 1988

Representation ID: 1975

OBJECT Mr Richard Price

Summary:

There is a perfect site on Brown Field that can accommodate the new residential area on the quay. It would offer a dr surgery and dwellings for the elderly, helping the community to be productive and not over stretched. To build on Battlewix is not ideal as this is a working farm.

More details about Rep ID: 1975

Representation ID: 1959

OBJECT Mr Adrian Gascoyne

Summary:

The heritage interests and significance of Battleswick Farmhouse and its associated buildings, and the contribution of the site to their setting and significance was not taken into consideration during Colchester Borough Council's SHLAA and associated Sustainability Appraisal, as to the suitability of this site for development.

Due to the fact that the rural agricultural setting of the buildings makes a fundamental contribution to their heritage significance, harm arising from development could not be mitigated through design or landscaping; the site is unsuitable in principle for housing development. SS14 is unsuitable to carry forward into the Submission Local Plan

More details about Rep ID: 1959

Representation ID: 1955

OBJECT mrs Sarah Phillips-Pearce

Summary:

I object as this a greenfield site, and it will create too much traffic into the village. I feel a brownfield site would be much more suitable, and that we should find something nearer the top of the village to reduce the traffic while still creating more homes.

More details about Rep ID: 1955

Representation ID: 1940

OBJECT Mrs Susan Hopkins

Summary:

I strongly object to this development on an important local greenfield site. Why develop crop producing land when there are other sites offered (such as the brownfield business park in Rowhedge). We should be protecting our wildlife and supporting our farmers.
This farm land is not suitable as it suffers flooding, which will surely worsen with development and access into the village would also be a problem.

More details about Rep ID: 1940

Representation ID: 1897

OBJECT mrs caroline willacy

Summary:

1. The school and doctors surgery cannot cope with an further expansion of the village.
2. It would nothing more than criminal to build on green fields when there are other brownfield sites available.
3. It would be reckless to add to flooding problems that may end up costing the tax-payers in the future.

More details about Rep ID: 1897

Representation ID: 1883

OBJECT mr john rowland

Summary:

In summary:

1. Developing Battlswick Farm will without any doubt increase the already serious problem of flooding from Birch Brook.

2. The school cannot meet the demands placed on it already and cannot be increased in size, so any further developments would cause serious problems for any new families moving into the village.

3. The roads cannot cope very well as it is, so more homes, that leads to more cars, will only add to the current problems.

More details about Rep ID: 1883

Representation ID: 1877

OBJECT Mrs Laura Rigby

Summary:

I object to planning on this land as it will have an impact on the town as to where it is situated and would recommend another site for your consideration Brownfield site business park which appears to be the sensible option.

More details about Rep ID: 1877

Representation ID: 1876

OBJECT Mrs Barbara Smith

Summary:

Rowhedge has already accepted more than its fair share of additional housing. The village has no need for further expansion. Indeed it will have difficulty in absorbing the increased numbers agreed, given that the school and doctors' surgery have reached capacity already. More cars pouring into the gridlock, The whole proposal needs to be rejected now if Rowhedge is to retain its village character and not become just a suburb of Colchester.The lower part of the field should not be built on because of the risk of flooding. Birds and butterflies on farmland continue to fall.

More details about Rep ID: 1876

Representation ID: 1857

OBJECT Mrs Margaret Rousseau

Summary:

developing valuable farmland. Rowhedge GP surgery and primary school also old heath school are full to capacity. essential infrastructure has not been factored in, the site has flooding issues

More details about Rep ID: 1857

Representation ID: 1856

OBJECT Mrs Susan Hopkins

Summary:

I strongly object to this development on an important local greenfield site. Why develop crop producing land when there are other sites offered (such as the brownfield business park in Rowhedge). We should be protecting our wildlife and supporting our farmers.
This farm land is not suitable as it suffers flooding, which will surely worsen with development and access into the village would also be a problem.

More details about Rep ID: 1856

Representation ID: 1851

OBJECT Mrs Tracey Bye

Summary:

I object to this happening

More details about Rep ID: 1851

Representation ID: 1850

OBJECT Mrs E Trellis

Summary:

Building on battleswick farm would be detrimental to the village because the roads are not suitable. Schools, Doctors Surgery are full. Loss of land and Historic Buildings. Flooding would be created in the Birch Brook area

More details about Rep ID: 1850

Representation ID: 1833

OBJECT Mrs Susan Hopkins

Summary:

I strongly object to this development on an important local greenfield site. Why develop crop producing land when there are other sites offered (such as the brownfield business park in Rowhedge). We should be protecting our wildlife and supporting our farmers.
This farm land is not suitable as it suffers flooding, which will surely worsen with development and access into the village would also be a problem.

More details about Rep ID: 1833

Representation ID: 1774

OBJECT Mrs Holly Goodchild

Summary:

Keeping the identity of the village, as a village and not an extension of the town by building on green belt farmed land. Over populating our local resources like the school and doctors surgery and our already busy roads.

More details about Rep ID: 1774

Representation ID: 1766

OBJECT Dr Max Hickman

Summary:

1. Rowhedge is a unique village separate from Colchester with a strong sense of identity
2.The site is beautiful rolling farmland unlike the brown field site at the wharf.
3. Building will be a wedge leading to an eventual coalescence with Colchester
4. Small impact on housing needs. Big impact on quality of life and identity in Rowhedge.

More details about Rep ID: 1766

Representation ID: 1762

OBJECT Mr Kevin Knights

Summary:

This development will have a negative effect on the facilities available to residents in Rowhedge. We already have the Wharf development that will exceed capacity in our school and Doctors surgery. These further dwellings will add to this and add more traffic to the road infrastructure. I expect these new dwellings to negatively affect the broadband service in the village which is bad for business due to poor connection speeds. The additional concrete jungle will add to flooding worries that have affected the bottom of the village. This could lead to flooding at my parents house.

More details about Rep ID: 1762

Representation ID: 1759

OBJECT Mrs Sarah Sprackling

Summary:

I object strongly to this proposed plan due to the negative impact on the rural and agricultural nature of the area; the lack of infrastructure, schooling and healthcare locally to facilitate yet further population expansion and evidence that there is little or no local support for the development. I am greatly concerned that consultation on planning is later completely ignored in the interests of developers. I have seen no evidence of anyone locally supporting this development.

More details about Rep ID: 1759

Representation ID: 1754

OBJECT Mr John Waddington

Summary:

I strongly object to the proposal to build 60 houses on this greenfield site in Rowhedge which will endanger the wildlife that live on it. If all the farmed land in this country is flattened for housing what will be left to grow food on? There is a brownfield site, which is not conducive to the residents or its location, offered for development. Surely this is a much better option for the village especially as I understand that it offers land for the development of a doctors surgery.

More details about Rep ID: 1754

Representation ID: 1751

OBJECT mr geoff nelson

Summary:

The development already approved for the docks will put a strain on the doctors surgery and the local school, this development will only add to this. Build on the side of the A12 where a new town can be built that does not overload current infrastructure...

More details about Rep ID: 1751

Representation ID: 1750

OBJECT Mrs Martine Green

Summary:

I feel Rowhdge has already taken more that its fair share of development with its inevitable effects on the school, surgery, wildlife, flooding, traffic congestion, parking, light pollution and object to the inclusion of Battleswich Farm into the Local Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 1750

Representation ID: 1749

OBJECT Mr Angus Kerr

Summary:

Please see attached letter

More details about Rep ID: 1749

Representation ID: 1747

OBJECT Ms Susan Brice

Summary:

Strongly object to building unnecessarily on an important greenfield site in this village that my daughter and grandchildren live in.
The green spaces around villages should be protected and while I appreciate the need for more housing, there are more suitable sites to use, like the Business Park in the village, which is a underused brownfield site.

More details about Rep ID: 1747

Representation ID: 1739

OBJECT Ian Whiscombe

Summary:

Unnecessary development of a greenfield site. We moved here recently because of the village feel and gorgeous views.

So many alternative and suitable sites.

More details about Rep ID: 1739

Representation ID: 1738

OBJECT Mrs. E. Appleton

Summary:

With the large development currently under way at the wharf site, there will be NO possible provision for children to be educated within the village, making properties across Rowhedge undesirable to young families. How can transporting children in cars across town at rush hour to the nearest school with a place possibly be what the Planning Department envisions for Colchester's future?

Building on viable green belt farmland, again, how can that be desirable?

Proven and real risk of flooding and water table disturbance to the existing properties within Hillview Close plus total loss of garden and rear property privacy.

More details about Rep ID: 1738

Representation ID: 1725

OBJECT Mr&Mrs Doug & Toni Clay

Summary:

Our objections to building on Battleswick Farm are:
- the village infrastructure (schools, doctors, pre-school, etc) are insufficient to accommodate more residents;
- we will lose valuable farm/green belt land;
- trees and hedgerows will be demolished;
- wildlife will be affected (this week we have seen lizards, bats, deer, foxes, badgers and dormice in the field);
- Birch Brook is a Red Flag Flood Risk Zone;
- bungalows in Hillview Close will be overlooked due to gradient aspect of the field;
- Rowhedge is a village, please don't connect us to Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 1725

Representation ID: 1714

OBJECT Paul Bowtell

Summary:

1. Pressure upon an already stretched infrastructure.
2. Access taking away more land to the Old Heath side of the proposed development.
3. Increased traffic on Rowhedge Road.
4. Inevitable follow through that the whole of the land between Old Heath and Rowhedge will be built upon

More details about Rep ID: 1714

Representation ID: 1711

OBJECT Mrs Shelley Knights

Summary:

Rowhedge is a beautiful village. With current building of new homes at the wharf, this proposed development for more houses on greenland will stretch the school and GP surgery too far. Alternative brownsites should be used.

More details about Rep ID: 1711

Representation ID: 1661

OBJECT Mr Richard Grieve

Summary:

The use of arable land for housing development in a village where resources are already stretched is not in keeping with the local plan or National Planning Policy.
The village's resources are already under pressure by the development at Rowhedge Docks. Both the Surgery and local schools are at capacity. Old Heath Road is not equipped to cope with additional traffic.
Birch Brook floods on a regular basis. If this land is built on, the runoff and flooding will increase accordingly.
This application is but a speculative approach by an aggressive developer.
I strongly object to the inclusion of SS14 in this plan.

More details about Rep ID: 1661

Representation ID: 1632

OBJECT Mr Joe Appleton

Summary:

- No educational places at Rowhedge School once the wharf has been developed. Existing and new village schoolchildren will have to be driven across town, or use the woeful half-hourly bus service, ever increasing the demand on East Colchester's residential roads.

- Doctors surgery, which also serves surrounding rural villages, will also become overwhelmed.

- Loss of precious green space and natural border from Old Heath.

- The surrounding fields of the farm will be lost due to the underground works needed to provide waste water, sewage and utility facilities. This is a total waste of viable farm land.

- Flooding concerns.

More details about Rep ID: 1632

Representation ID: 1495

OBJECT Katharine Tollett-Cooper

Summary:

My objects are based on the following:

1) I believe that some of the houses at the lower end of Rowhedge Road are already classed at risk of flooding for insurance purposes. Therefore, regardless of any policies that the developers implement the increase in concrete will inevitably have an impact on surrounding properties.

2) The village is already undergoing a massive development. To continue to increase the size of the village will totally change the character of the village.

3) The local school and doctors are massively underfunded / oversubscribed. The implications to them are substantial.

More details about Rep ID: 1495

Representation ID: 1479

OBJECT Miss Julie Owen

Summary:

Please read my representation above!

More details about Rep ID: 1479

Representation ID: 1462

OBJECT Miss Rebecca Perrin

Summary:

To protect the space between the village and Colchester, and ensure that Rowhedge remains a village. Approval of more houses (along with properties currently being built on the wharf), would only bring more in the future, putting strain on the small local amenities in Rowhedge built for the small capacity. The green land areas around Rowhedge is part of what makes Rowhedge feel so special, secluded, peaceful and a treasure of Colchester to be preserved.

More details about Rep ID: 1462

Representation ID: 1438

OBJECT Mr Paul Doyle

Summary:

The proposed development will negatively impact the character of the local community, and residential amenities of nearby residents. Local infrastructure - already under pressure - will be affected negatively, and there is no evidence of any consideration of environmental factors specific to the site and its immediate surroundings. For these reasons, the proposed site should be rejected.

More details about Rep ID: 1438

Representation ID: 1430

OBJECT Gareth Wood

Summary:

Far too much traffic with insufficient infrastructure to support the village. Valuable arable land being used for housing is utter madness. Please rethink this awful strategic planning.

More details about Rep ID: 1430

Representation ID: 1422

OBJECT Mrs Iris Fremel

Summary:

As much greenfield land as possible should be protected across the country, but particularly surrounding villages and especially when there are other more suitable brownfield sites being offered for community focussed developments in the village. Many residents complain about the industrial tenants on the business park and believe it is not conducive to the residential area it borders.
Battleswick farm is a working farm, with ancient hedgerows, producing vital crops - we must protect it.

More details about Rep ID: 1422

Representation ID: 1420

OBJECT Mrs C Wood

Summary:

I strongly object to the use of Battleswick Farm for even more housing. Due to an increase in pollution. The traffic will obviously increase and the busses that come into the village are a nightmare as they are far too big!
As a village we lack services - the school, doctors, shop and post office are already too small to cope.
The village is under too much pressure with the increase in housing at the Wharf.
Use brownfield site (Rowhedge Business Park) instead of destroying yet another green area of arable land. Haven't we lost enough countryside?

More details about Rep ID: 1420

Representation ID: 1399

OBJECT Mrs Angela Marshall

Summary:

Doctors can no longer cope with any additional patients. School is completely full. Rowhedge is already congested with traffic and additional housing will create more danger on the roads. It is also a big loss of sustainable farmland. I therefore strongly object.

More details about Rep ID: 1399

Representation ID: 1378

OBJECT Mrs Jennie Farrell

Summary:

I fully object

More details about Rep ID: 1378

Representation ID: 1373

OBJECT Mr Philip Marlow-Mann

Summary:

My objection to include Battleswick Farm land in the Local Plan is based on the ability of the village infrastructure to accommodate it and the long term damage to the character of the village. Taken with the planed 256 additional houses from the Wharf program this represents a 30% increase in village size. It is also a dangerous precedent for future development. The existing and much needed farmland is necessary to maintain the separation from Old Heath & preserve Rowhedge village status for future generations. CBC has a very real responsibility to take this into account in its determination.

More details about Rep ID: 1373

Representation ID: 1370

OBJECT Mr Philip Marlow-Mann

Summary:

My objection to include Battleswick Farm land in the Local Plan is based on the ability of the village infrastructure to accommodate it and the long term damage to the character of the village. Taken with the planed 256 additional houses from the Wharf program this represents a 30% increase in village size. It is also a dangerous precedent for future development. The existing and much needed farmland is necessary to maintain the separation from Old Heath & preserve Rowhedge village status for future generations. CBC has a very real responsibility to take this into account in its determination.

More details about Rep ID: 1370

Representation ID: 1307

OBJECT East Donyland Parish Council (Mrs Nicki Matthews)

Summary:

This letter represents the Objection of East Donyland Parish Council to site allocation SS14 in the Draft Colchester Local Plan and the corresponding proposal to alter the village boundary of Rowhedge to accommodate the change of use of the site from agricultural to residential. Colchester Borough Council is asked to reconsider its proposal to allocate the site, subject to policy SS14, for 60 homes in the Draft Local Plan and reject the proposal to alter the village boundary to include SS14 as a development site.

More details about Rep ID: 1307

Representation ID: 1296

OBJECT Mrs Samantha Partridge

Summary:

Why use more of our beautiful green country side when there is a brownfield site close by that is perfectly adequate.

More details about Rep ID: 1296

Representation ID: 1295

OBJECT Mr Michael Lewis

Summary:

Alternative area brownfield site, it's important to retain the green area around the village.

More details about Rep ID: 1295

Representation ID: 1286

OBJECT Mrs Rachel Buchanan

Summary:

Greenfield site. Overdevelopment in Rowhedge.

More details about Rep ID: 1286

Representation ID: 1281

OBJECT Ms Patricia Curran

Summary:

Do not build homes on a working farm but look to build homes with new travel, educational and nhs infrastructures that can be built at the same time. Do not try to squeeze as many people as possibly into small spaces causing crime rates to increase. Do not build homes on a high risk flood site, causing more floods for residents.

More details about Rep ID: 1281

Representation ID: 1280

OBJECT Mr Jon Betts

Summary:

Rowhedge Business Park is a more suitable site for development based on it's location and other factors that would be included in it's development. Adding congestion to the centre of Rowhedge is a bad idea. I also understand that the request to develop the Rowhedge Business Park has been deemed bad as it will affect employment there. There are very few employees and many business parks around Colchester with vacant buildings. How can this be a factor?

More details about Rep ID: 1280

Representation ID: 1279

OBJECT Mr Jon Betts

Summary:

Rowhedge Business Park is a more suitable site for development based on it's location and other factors that would be included in it's development. Adding congestion to the centre of Rowhedge is a bad idea. I also understand that the request to develop the Rowhedge Business Park has been deemed bad as it will affect employment there. There are very few employees and many business parks around Colchester with vacant buildings. How can this be a factor?

More details about Rep ID: 1279

Representation ID: 1273

OBJECT Mrs Caroline Rose

Summary:

As a resident of Hillview Close I strongly object to Battleswick Farm being used for 60 homes, the village is already at full capacity and will not cope with any more. We also have huge issues with water and natural springs and building more homes will upset the water tables further. We chose to move to Hillview close for it's peace and if we feel like in the middle of an estate we will have to move again, incurring financial loss.

More details about Rep ID: 1273

Representation ID: 1264

OBJECT Mrs Hayley Barker

Summary:

We live on an already very busy road and this development willl only make it worse. Also with the news that Middlewick Ranges will now be developed I do not see how our area would cope. I also worry about flooding in the area especially as that field is on such a hill.

More details about Rep ID: 1264

Representation ID: 1261

OBJECT Claire Duffy Copywriting (Mrs Claire Duffy)

Summary:

There is a much better site for this, at the business park next to Donyland House, which is an existing Brownfield site. This would stop the destruction of a greenfield area and any business can easily move into the expanded Whitehall Industrial Estate. Surely this is an obvious alternative, environmental solution?

More details about Rep ID: 1261

Representation ID: 1241

OBJECT Mrs Lise Jachwitz

Summary:

There are not enough school places, nor capacity in the surgery to accommodate any more dwellings in Rowhedge. As well, these green areas is what makes this village unique, and building on them will change Rowhedge's identity as a rustique village close to Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 1241

Representation ID: 1226

OBJECT ms karen macabuag

Summary:

I object to any and all Green field sites being used.
Farms are for the production of food, and should be exempt from ever being used for Building Homes.

More details about Rep ID: 1226

Representation ID: 1221

OBJECT Claire Huxter-Price

Summary:

I oppose the development because it is a Green Field Site, which is a working farm and a more suitable alternative in Brown Field Site in Rowehedge has been offered and which I understand is also offering space for a new Dr surgery and/or services that the village require to support the new developments that are currently underway.

The village needs more support to carry the new residential area being built and remain harmonious and to retain its independence.

More details about Rep ID: 1221

Representation ID: 1178

OBJECT mrs Sheryl Dunningham

Summary:

There are already over 200 properties currently under construction in the village and further development will put additional undue pressure on local amenities such as the doctors surgery, school and pre-school.

The considerable increase in traffic will further add to existing congestion in the village.

Wildlife will see their habitat disappear to make way for housing.

These points will all have a negative impact upon the village environment.

More details about Rep ID: 1178

Representation ID: 1174

OBJECT Mr Philip May

Summary:

This isn't about solving the housing crisis - it's greed pure and simple.
There is no serious commitment to make any of this new housing affordable and no regard at all for the effect on our community. The school, gp surgery are already full to capacity. Not to mention impact on road congestion. This will only get worse when the the Bloor homes devolpment at the far end of the village takes effect. Another 60 houses at Battleswick will be disastrous!

More details about Rep ID: 1174

Representation ID: 1164

OBJECT Mr Peter Franklin

Summary:

Education provision within the village will become saturated and then closed to applications from existing and "new" Rowhedge children with the wharf development of some 200+ properties alone. NO provision has been made for further education places with this development and there is no further space on the school site for additional classrooms,

The doctors surgery will also become full once the wharf houses are built.

For these reasons alone the proposal should be refused. Taking into consideration genuine privacy and flooding concerns for those living in Hillview Close, the conclusion of the Local Plan Committee must be to protect Battleswick Farm.

More details about Rep ID: 1164

Representation ID: 1115

OBJECT Mr John Dove

Summary:

My wife and I regularly visit Rowhedge by car, to eat in the Anchor public house. We think that it is very important for the green space to be maintained between Colchester and Rowhedge, in order for Rowhedge to retain its separate identity. It is also important that Colchester retains as many green spaces as possible for the sake of the environment.

More details about Rep ID: 1115

Representation ID: 1113

OBJECT Mr John Heddle

Summary:

I have lived in Rowhedge for 15 years and I wish to object most strongly to the proposed building of 60 houses on part of Battleswick farm. The village does not have sufficient resources to cater for further development.

Surely the Planning Officers understand this....

John Heddle

More details about Rep ID: 1113

Representation ID: 1111

OBJECT Mrs Carol Szmyr

Summary:

I feel that Rowhedge has already had its fair share of new housing. As yet no provision has been made for schools and doctors. If more housing is agreed for this site it could prove disastrous for not only rowhedge but also old heath. And a precedent would have been set leaving the landowners free to apply for permission to build on surrounding fields in the future. This could result in Rowhedge becoming just another suburb of Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 1111

Representation ID: 1090

OBJECT Miss Rachel Blowes

Summary:

I think this will have a negative impact on the community of rowhedge, the roads won't be able to cope or the school or the doctors surgery. we need to save the local green areas.

More details about Rep ID: 1090

Representation ID: 1081

OBJECT Mr Lee Fremel

Summary:

Replace the Battleswick farm site with Rowhedge Business park as a much more suitable site both in terms of location and the community amenities being offered to be housed on this (low employment) site.

More details about Rep ID: 1081

Representation ID: 1073

OBJECT Mrs Lorna Arrowsmith

Summary:

SUMMARY

Water run/off/flooding
Traffic increase
Footpath access to Hillview Close
Housing already in the Quays
Decrease in property value
School full
GP surgery full
Lack of facilities
Loss of prime farming land
Security issues
Natural spring issues to existing properties.
through more building.
Increased noise levels.
Lack of privacy, and possible light obstruction to properties at Hillview Close,( being lowest level)
Increase to health, through more airwaves and microwaves through electricity, pollution and drainage.

More details about Rep ID: 1073

Representation ID: 1072

OBJECT Mr Alan Taylor

Summary:

I feel most strongly that this development will be the first step towards a large infill which will eventually amalgamate Rowhedge within the boundary of Colchester forming a continous strip of building from the town centre to the Roman river and therefore destroying Rowhedge as a village community with some history which is held in very high regard by both local residents and visitors alike and has done so down through the centuries.

More details about Rep ID: 1072

Representation ID: 1036

OBJECT Mrs D Warren

Summary:

Points already numerously made:
Schools are Full
GP surgeries are Full
Traffic is a major issue along Old Heath Road - Rowhedge Road - this would increase it tenfold
Colchester is overflowing with new homes ... there is no need for more. There IS A NEED for Schools, Doctors Surgeries etc ... the basic infrastructure.
Rowhedge is a lovely COMMUNITY VILLAGE ...
Let the environment live ... let the community BREATHE!

More details about Rep ID: 1036

Representation ID: 1033

OBJECT D Antoniou

Summary:

Parking? Over stretched doctors surgery and school.
Flooding. Impact on wildlife, loss of hedgerows.

More details about Rep ID: 1033

Representation ID: 1016

OBJECT Ms Sharon Mills

Summary:

I object to this development. The village is already growing at an alarming rate, with the existing development of the Wharf (it is due to swell by almost a third). Its present infrastructure cannot cope with another development, both the school and doctors surgery are already at capacity. Rowhedge is a quintessential riverside village and its residents embrace its rich history and culture. I foresee that we are destined to become a mere suburb of Colchester and the residents of Rowhedge do not want this. Building on 'green field' sites such as Battleswick Farm impacts local life and wildlife habitat.

More details about Rep ID: 1016

Representation ID: 1012

OBJECT Alli Kury

Summary:

Insufficient infrastructure or anemities to sustain further development of Rowhedge village, Further development would have negative impact on schools and GP provision in Old Heath, Cherry Tree, Monkwick and Barn Hall / Newtown. Colchester General Hospital already in special measures, further development and associated potential increase of residents in catchment would be unsustainable in respect of emergency care. Loss of farmland at Battleswick will be detrimental to local wildlife and reduce valuable green space.

More details about Rep ID: 1012

Representation ID: 1011

OBJECT Miss Louise Abbott

Summary:

I feel that Rowhedge has in the past made way for substantial new build developments and is currently undergoing another such development at the former dock yard for 250+dwelling. Rowhedge has done more than its fair share for the local and national quotas for housing. Enough is enough. Also I am against any development which closes the gap between Rowhedge and Colchester, an important green belt for the village lifestyle not to mention the environmental impact it would have.

More details about Rep ID: 1011

Representation ID: 1010

OBJECT Miss helen goffin

Summary:

Rowhedge already has issues with the doctors and school those issues alone surely are a good enough reason to not build these proposed houses.
Not only that the already over crowded roads do not need anymore traffic on them and the quiet village would essentially loose that feel.

More details about Rep ID: 1010

Representation ID: 1003

OBJECT Mr Adrian Taylor

Summary:

The constraints on the available facilities within the village render this application unsuitable. The village school, the Surgery and other facilities do not have the capacity for further intake. Traffic problems, which already plague the village, will only be exacerbated, especially around the Coop shop in Regent Street. While the proposed site is within walking distance of this area, and the Front, it is self evident that many of the new residents would use a car to travel to these areas.

More details about Rep ID: 1003

Representation ID: 999

OBJECT Mrs Walls

Summary:

Rowhedge has been developed extensively, the flats at Marsh Crescent and along the riverfront, and now there is the Wharf Development of 300 homes well underway. The preferred option to build on the above mentioned land is of great concern. Firstly, any further development will destroy the character of the village; the farmland in question enhancing the rural character of the village, which any more development would destroy. In addition, it seems that the impact of the Wharf Development has not even been considered at all, the obvious implications being the increased traffIC

More details about Rep ID: 999

Representation ID: 982

OBJECT mr andrew harley

Summary:

This proposal is in the wrong location. Wait until the impact of the Wharf development is understood before allowing further development. There are likely to be negative impacts upon local infrastructure from the wharf development. Other concerns expressed about the environmental impact of additional homes in terms of wildlife and noise impacts.

Birch Brook becomes a torrent after heavy rain- the additional homes will compound.

More details about Rep ID: 982

Representation ID: 977

OBJECT Donna Hill

Summary:

Rowhedge is a village with a very strong identity. No village should become just another suburb of Colchester. Have the planners thought about how everyone (including all the new people in the houses being built on Rowhedge Wharf) are going to get out of Rowhedge and past Old Heath school at rush hour. Plus have you tried to get through the Hythe and Whitehall industrial estate at a busy time? This has a knock on effect to the infrastructure of this side of Colchester as well as Rowhedge.

More details about Rep ID: 977

Representation ID: 972

OBJECT Ms Emma Hopper

Summary:

The Wharf development puts pressure on infrastructure in Rowhedge already - increasing traffic, noise, lack of parking, capacity of nursery, school , surgery are stretched to the limit. Quality of life for current residents would be impacted negatively by further developments.
Rowhedge functions as recreational area for Colchester and surrounding places. Village character would be lost completely by further developments. Current building noise and traffic due to Wharf development are already impacting on residents' quality of life. Please reject proposal.

More details about Rep ID: 972

Representation ID: 971

OBJECT Mr Tom Richardson

Summary:

I Object: School & Surgery cannot cope
Where will these people work, or won't they ?
Car traffic already overwhelms the roads
Sewage works is already overflowing all year round
We do not want to fill in the remaining green space between Rowhedge & Colchester.
Only beneficiaries will be the developers, again.

More details about Rep ID: 971

Representation ID: 961

OBJECT Mr Ian Shepherd

Summary:

I object to the CBC Local Plan proposal SS14 to allow residential development on the Battleswick Farm greenfield site on the basis of the environmental damage that will inevitably occur due to old field boundaries which could meet 'Important Protected Hedgerow' criteria, and a further increase in the already high risk of Birch Brook flooding. Ecological damage could also be caused affecting rare and protected species in and around the Brook. This further unwanted development in Rowhedge will inevitably place an unsustainable burden on local amenities and infrastructure which is already at capacity. In summary no more residential development!

More details about Rep ID: 961

Representation ID: 958

OBJECT Mrs Sarah Burke

Summary:

Wildlife in this area include Cuckoos woodpeckers watervoles which are endangered species. This site is on a hill with a brook at the bottom which has been known to flood the social club regularly.The environment agency has a red flag high risk flooding for Hillview properties which back on to this field, more building would make this area Flood as the brook can become a small river in wet weather. The infrastructure such as local schools and Doctors surgery are full. The farmland is very productive and it would be silly to build on as we also need to eat.

More details about Rep ID: 958

Representation ID: 957

OBJECT Mrs Heather Rankin

Summary:

There will be too many houses on Rowhedge if this is to go ahead, the school, doctors surgery etc., etc., are over full as it is, the village is too small to have more housing, would need more shops, and another school or the present school made bigger which would spoil the village, would also need another doctors surgery as present one would not cope with more patients, I strongly object to these plans

More details about Rep ID: 957

Representation ID: 956

OBJECT Paul Kinsey

Summary:

Water run/off/flooding
Traffic increase
Footpath access to Hillview Close
Housing already in the Quays
Decrease in property value
School full
GP surgery full
Lack of facilities
Loss of prime farming land

More details about Rep ID: 956

Representation ID: 917

OBJECT Mr Alan Hale

Summary:

This proposed development is totally wrong and should NOT GO AHEAD Rowhedge is a VILLAGE and needs to stay as a VILLAGE not to be swallowed into an ever increasing MONSTROUS Colchester TOWN

More details about Rep ID: 917

Representation ID: 906

OBJECT Mr Sean Burke

Summary:

This area sustains alot of wildlife such as water voles, cuckoos, shrews,bats,to name a few, this site has a steep incline down to the brook at the bottom which has a risk and has swollen dangerously high regularly. when buying my property in 2015 the environment agency put a red flag as high risk of flooding. the local infrastructure cannot cope .the village school and the school in old heath are at near capacity and the drs surgery is small and near full. the large development at the wharf which has caused flooding already.this is a village so stop

More details about Rep ID: 906

Representation ID: 897

OBJECT Mr Francis Wadley

Summary:

As a resident of Rowhedge, and a native-borne Colcestrian, I consider this proposed development an unwarranted waste of valuable agricultural land, which will expand our village towards Colchester and no doubt form a toehold for joining the two in future.
We already have a considerable quantity of brownfield land, on which residential development is already taking place, which, although justifiable, will put very considerable strain on our local infrastructure. Our school, our surgery, our roads, are already full, and it occurs that with the 250-odd dwellings scheduled to be built, Rowhedge has perhaps suffered enough.

More details about Rep ID: 897

Representation ID: 891

OBJECT Mrs Eunice Broom

Summary:

We are losing far too much of our beautiful countryside and rural farms to profiteering planners.The countryside in this area has diminished in size over the past 18 years.Will there be any left in 18 years time.We need to preserve and respect our countryside.Rowhedge has embraced a large number of new builds without complaint. This time, we say NO because we do not wish to become a suburb of Old Heath. We value our village status and will do everything necessary to see that the proposed build does not happen. Our public services will NOT cope!

More details about Rep ID: 891

Representation ID: 884

OBJECT Mr Graham Sims

Summary:

I am totally against any further development in Rowhedge and especially on this one remaining 'green belt' between Rowhedge and Old Heath - Battleswick Farm. We already have an oversize development at the Rowhedge Quay with 160 dwellings. The traffic and infrastructure can barely take it as it is without even more cars on the roads.PLEASE DON'T DESTROY MORE PRECIOUS OPEN FARMLAND!! ROW HEDGE AND COLCHESTER HAS JUST ABOUT HAD ENOUGH OF HIGH DENSITY BUILDING!!!! GIVE US A BREATHER!!!!!

More details about Rep ID: 884

Representation ID: 843

OBJECT Ms Polly Randall

Summary:

Flood risks/inaccurate proposal in comments re coalescence with Colchester and impact on services/facilities

More details about Rep ID: 843

Representation ID: 768

OBJECT Mrs Gillian Bennington

Summary:

Mrs Gillian Bennington
Leave our village alone, it cannot cope with anymore houses!
Building will have an effect on road safety, flooding, wildlife & we have more than enough houses as it is.
I have lived in Rowhedge for over 30 years, it is a lovely place to live please don't spoil it any further.

More details about Rep ID: 768

Representation ID: 747

OBJECT Mrs Samantha Dudley-Hayes

Summary:

Rowhedge doesn't have the means to cope with the existing quantity of residents let alone the future ones coming with the dock development, so the proposed 60 home (we all know that it will end up being more) will push the doctors and school to breaking point. The existing road structure will also have problems, including traffic through Old Heath/New Town and the Hythe. I can look out over these fields and love to see the wild life (foxes, deer and many different sorts of birds) and have very fond memory's of picking strawberrys as a child on this farm.

More details about Rep ID: 747

Representation ID: 739

OBJECT Philip and Angela Cass

Summary:

The environmental, historic integrity and infrastructure issues make this development untenable.
Hundreds more vehicle journeys will be added at peak hours, flooding for Hillview Close will be worsened and privacy will be compromised, Rowhedge will lose its separate nature and identity as a village community.
The farm site will lose the historic integrity it has maintained for 800 years and either housing or trees and hedgerows will have to be destroyed to provide new access.
The already overwhelmed surgery and full primary school will not be able to cope with the influx from the wharf development let alone this additional burden.

More details about Rep ID: 739

Representation ID: 713

OBJECT Mr Steve Fowler

Summary:

There are already close to 300 new homes being built on the old wharf site in Rowhedge. There has been no improvements to the infrastructure in the village to cope with this.
To propose another 60 homes is irresponsible as it will put even more pressure on the local facilities.
It will also cause several years of noise and disruption to the surrounding households and spoil the aspect of many houses that currently look out onto open fields.
There are also future plans to develop the land adjacent to the wharf so any further development in the village is not appropriate

More details about Rep ID: 713

Representation ID: 665

OBJECT Miss Vickie Heddle

Summary:

Rowhedge village housing is due to increase a great deal already with the doc development. The doctors surgery and school cannot cope with yet more new builds. The houses in hillview close will suffer.
This plan is not wanted or needed!

More details about Rep ID: 665

Representation ID: 648

OBJECT Ms Angela Burgess

Summary:

Total objection to building on the land at Battleswick farm, joining the dots to the hideous urban sprawl that Colchester has become, without the infrastructure to support it. Rowhedge village is already poised for the influx on the wharf development. The school and doctors surgery inundated . Before this has been completed we are now being subject to the threat of further building. The area needs protecting for future generations to enjoy.

More details about Rep ID: 648

Representation ID: 646

OBJECT Mr Chris McCarthy

Summary:

A close knit village with pending re-development of vast brown field site already in progress. Local infrastructures will not cope with planned developments let alone this extra development. Road commute journeys across the Colne River are already to capacity with lengthy delays and a EU measured environmental pollution. Traffic count past local primary schools will increase with an correlative accident probability. Cross-road at the old Walnut Tree pub will become an accident hotspot. Fresh water run off into Birch Brook from this development will increase flooding risk downstream. As a Westerly side valley village roof lines will obscure evening sky.

More details about Rep ID: 646

Representation ID: 645

OBJECT Miss Janet Hulse

Summary:

Do not make our lovely village of Rowhedge into a town! I strongly object to the prospect of the proposed development and new houses being built in our village! We are already having to cope with more houses being built and our woodland being destroyed. Rowhedge is at full capacity now and our GP surgery and school is full. It is impractical and unfair to build more houses. Green fields need to stay as green fields please.

More details about Rep ID: 645

Representation ID: 643

OBJECT Mr Geoff Lawrence

Summary:

There are no school places available for the 170 new homes on the docks let alone a further development of 60 houses. T
The only road access to Rowhedge from Colchester is via Old Heath Rd which is already "bunged up" most days.
I know from experience that, at rush hour it can take 40+ minutes to get to the A12, either Ipswich or London bound.

More details about Rep ID: 643

Representation ID: 640

OBJECT Mrs Susan Rose

Summary:

I object strongly to this proposed development due to the fact that as a resident for over twenty years and also in employment in this VILLAGE, I feel that with the wharf development (which is on a brown site, therefore acceptable), is more than enough housing. Development on a green site is in no way acceptable. This land supports such a wide range of wildlife, deer, badger, fox and too numerous variety of birds, of which I see on a daily basis. Also the village infrastructure will buckle under the extra weight if the housing goes ahead.

More details about Rep ID: 640

Representation ID: 639

OBJECT Mrs Zoe Ridgewell

Summary:

There is no need to develop on this land and put more pressure on this village, in terms of our facilities. This is a charming little village which is quickly being developed and losing our uniqueness. With the marshlands many years ago and now the neglected docklands being built on it will soon be like the rest of colchester. NO MORE DEVELOPMENT

More details about Rep ID: 639

Representation ID: 638

OBJECT Miss Rosie Appleton

Summary:

Proposal is in direct contravention of all the Green Belt Land policy stands for - to protect countyside, wildlife, to preserve the setting & character of historic towns; Colchester is the most historic town in the country, East Donyland is in the Domesday book, and yet we are having to defend valuable farmland against development.

There will be an enormous privacy infringement for the residents of Hillview Close, as well as the exacerbation of current flooding problems.

School will be at capacity as there are already 264 new houses being built, as will Doctors Surgery.

More details about Rep ID: 638

Representation ID: 628

OBJECT Brenda Smith

Summary:

Recent developments have already had an impact on the amount of traffic in and out of the village. Battleswick farm will add to this extra traffic. No investment in the infrastructure of Rowhege. New residents might find it difficult to register with Doctors Surgery . St Lawrences and Old heath Schools are full. Battleswick Farm is not a good site for development.

More details about Rep ID: 628

Representation ID: 617

OBJECT Rodney Appleyard

Summary:

This development will destroy the character of the village. We view areas like this as areas of natural beauty and do not wish to see any more farmland taken away.

The over-development could cripple local services provided by the school and the medical practice which will damage harmony within the village.

There is a better option on the table from The Rowhedge Business Centre which is more in the interests of local people.

More details about Rep ID: 617

Representation ID: 615

OBJECT Mr Michael carter

Summary:

NO WAY WE DO NOT WANTED HOMES ON THIS LAND. OR ANY MORE HOUSES IN ROWHEDGE

More details about Rep ID: 615

Representation ID: 553

OBJECT Mrs Fernanda Huckle

Summary:

I'm declaring my objection to this appalling plan of transforming a green belt natural barrier that adds character to this village and protection to wildlife not to mention the possible turn into chaos of oversubscribed education, health and traffic problems, already existing currently. We have enough construction, destruction, pollution, floods etc coming our way with the added houses by the Wharf that will surely add strain in the services provided in the village and do not need this extra development. Please respect this location heritage and wildlife sustainability.

More details about Rep ID: 553

Representation ID: 547

OBJECT Mr Toby Peecock

Summary:

I object to this application because:

Birch Brook, that runs across downhill from this site overflows regularly, flooding gardens in Hillview Close and Rowhedge Road.

This proposal to build on agricultural land would erode the green belt that separates village from town.

Those living in Hillview Close would no longer have a hill view from their back gardens. The elevation of this development would be highly oppressive.

Development of Rowhedge docks is already poised to increase the population of the village by a third. A further 66 would add an intolerable burden to local amenities, and to the already congested streets of Old Heath.

More details about Rep ID: 547

Representation ID: 545

OBJECT Mrs Melanie Chase

Summary:

I object because our property that is adjacent to birch brook already floods regularly and this will be exacerbated.
I am concerned about the considerable increased road traffic coming through old heath road which is already struggles in peak rush hours.
Rowhedge is already accommodating considerable amounts of new homes on its dock development which will stretch local education and health facilities.
The village character will be compromised with even further development, and the Battleswick farm site is 'green field site' and part of the agricultural belt that separates Rowhedge from Colchester which is precious.

More details about Rep ID: 545

Representation ID: 544

OBJECT Mr Richard Keeble

Summary:

School full, GP full, already over 200 new dwellings going up in Rowhedge, already over 1000 traffic movements leading into Rectory Road. Should any development go ahead at Battleswich Farm, traffic would join Fingringhoe Road at Old Heath creating traffic congestion. There is no NEED for the developing of Battleswick Farm. This would be the thin edge of the wedge should it be approved.

More details about Rep ID: 544

Representation ID: 532

OBJECT Mr Phil Appleton

Summary:

Since the early 2000's Rowhedge has accepted many new dwellings and hundreds of new people.
The Ironworks (126) Browns Yard (28). Sundry small developments High St (6), Darkhouse Lane (18) small plots & garden grabs etc brought nearly 200 new addresses in that short time span. The doctors and school are now full, neither can expand capacity within their current footprint. Traffic and parking are already dire. Rowhedge is already stretched to its limit yet barely a brick has been laid of 256 new builds on the docks and another 60 are proposed, on prime farmland too. NO MORE !

More details about Rep ID: 532

Representation ID: 523

OBJECT Miss Sarah Brice

Summary:

This site is unsuitable for development due to various natural springs and water courses under it and the flood zone along the brook. Unnecessary use of valuable greenfield site on a farm that is active and well managed. Poor access into the village and no community/village facilities suggested, demanded or offered. The fear is that allowing a portion of this greenfield site for development will open the door for the rest of the farm to be developed by professional development agents.

More details about Rep ID: 523

Representation ID: 438

OBJECT Mrs Linda McCullough

Summary:

I object to the land to be used for development- the development will affect the local environment and character of the village which has over the last 16 years had over 300 homes built within its confines. Flooding, sustainability concerns, damage to the natural environment with the proposed access road. The village has to stay a village.

More details about Rep ID: 438

Representation ID: 410

OBJECT Ms Julie Saunders

Summary:

Main concerns are:
Traffic, impact on local services, reduction in green space between Colchester and the village, increased flooding on Rowhedge Road.

More details about Rep ID: 410

Representation ID: 394

OBJECT Miss Michelle Small

Summary:

I object to new housing being built on the farmland as rowhedge has already increased in size with the quayside being developed and now the docks. The local infrastructure is already strained and unless a new school,and Doctors surgery is built will add even more problems.
It will also change the character of the village and will lose its village appeal. It may cause environmental problems to local widelife.

More details about Rep ID: 394

Representation ID: 393

OBJECT MRS JEANETTE ALDERTON

Summary:

I strongly object to any further housing development in Rowhedge.Our small village just cannot cope with more people and traffic.To use the green belt land of Battleswick Farm would take away our identity as a village and we would become nothing more than an appendage to Colchester.The current development on the wharf will overstretch the school and GP surgery as it is, without adding more houses.This can only have a detrimental effect on this once tight knit community.

More details about Rep ID: 393

Representation ID: 380

OBJECT Mr Ian Rose

Summary:

As a lifelong Rowhedge resident, I am appalled that Battleswick Farm is even being considered for building works. This area is a vital green 'Barrier' between the village and the urban sprawl of Colchester and is a host to a great deal of wildlife. Rowhedge is already at breaking point with the new developments currently being built and infrastructure will not be able to cope. We don't need any more housing, we need our fields and wildlife.

More details about Rep ID: 380

Representation ID: 369

OBJECT Mrs Fiona George

Summary:

This development will be extremely detrimental to the local community. Further to the existing developments already in place, my main concern is that another site will not be able to sustain the existing limited facilities that are designed for a small village.
The village of Rowhedge has a small village school which is at full capacity and the roads are not going to be safe for traffic which will become gridlocked even more than it is now.

More details about Rep ID: 369

Representation ID: 360

OBJECT Mrs Janice Halajko

Summary:

- School is facing huge increase in pupil applications, with the construction of 170 houses plus an additional 86 properties to the Wharf site. Will become overscribed with these properties alone - there is no space for any further extensions within the building.

- Battleswick Farm, as a greenbelt space, provides a vital resource of home-grown food and a habitat for foxes, badgers, birds and other wildlife.

- Local roads, particularly Old Heath Road, Whitehall and New Town, cannot cope with existing traffic at rush hour times.

- Huge loss of privacy to Hillview Close residents plus extreme flooding risks to rear gardens.

More details about Rep ID: 360

Representation ID: 317

OBJECT Dr. Chris McCully

Summary:

Lack of infrastructure, esp. sewage. How and where will new sewage be treated? Damage to arable land and environment (localised run off from tarmac, driveways, new roads). Damage to flora (esp. hedgerows) and fauna (foxes, badgers). Potential parking problems along Rowhedge Road and in village. Bad precedent for yet further development in the village, when present infrastructure (surgery, schools) are already close to or exceeding capacity.

More details about Rep ID: 317

Representation ID: 316

OBJECT Monika Schmid

Summary:

Please tell Colchester Planners that I strongly oppose this development for the following reasons:
- Valuable arable farmland will be sold off and potentially lost.
- Both the Old Heath and St Lawrence primary schools are already close to capacity and any development must facilitate additional places. Otherwise existing educational facilities will be compromised.
- The Rowhedge GP Surgery is close to capacity. A large scale development will overburden local General Practitioner services to the detriment of local residents.
- Without considerable up-front investment the infrastructure in the area is not viable and cannot take a large-scale development of housing.

More details about Rep ID: 316

Representation ID: 309

OBJECT Mrs Anita Lawrence

Summary:

Copied from Gov site re planning practice guidance:
The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.
Rowhedge is already supporting a major development which does not include additional services/amenities. Developing this 'allocated' Green Belt will contravene the very essence of it being identified as Green Belt in the first place. It will have an UNREASONABLE IMPACT on local services, facilities and infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 309

Representation ID: 308

OBJECT miss vivian smith

Summary:

Objection to development of existing high grade farmland to residential homes. Under what legislation?
Location impractical due to traffic volume on rural road
Undesirable and objectionable to character of existing community.
Rowhedge Village has a distinct character which is already under threat from Rowhedge Wharf development.
Needs Impact Assessment of existing expansion, before any further developments.
Battleswick Farm has potential to offer enhanced tourism, recreation, leisure opportunities
Battleswick Farm land has potential to offer further employment opportunities within tourism / well-being / creative / film & television industries.
Need to enhance Rowhedge as a place of interest.

More details about Rep ID: 308

Representation ID: 307

OBJECT Mrs Getaldine Springett

Summary:

This development will put even more pressure on the local school and preschool. I am very concerned that if this goes ahead my children will have to travel across Colchester to go to school. Places are limited and there will be an influx after the new development on the warf is complete. The doctors surgery will also be put under further pressure.
There will be an increase in traffic to the local area.
I am also concerned about the impact this may have on the local environment and wildlife.
Are there no other alternatives to building on this valuable piece of farmland?

More details about Rep ID: 307

Representation ID: 293

OBJECT Mr Colin Harvey

Summary:

As a resident of Rowhedge, I and many if not all residents object to the total change to the character of our village. We have already have an ongoing development at the site of Rowhedge Docks for approx. 300 properties, this is already going to increase the population of the village significantly, stretching the use of the medical centre, school places and other infrastucture. Traffic of any development south of Colchester will increase traffic flow through the town to get to the A12, or through the Hythe area that is already at full capacity.

Mr C A Harvey

More details about Rep ID: 293

Representation ID: 229

OBJECT Mrs Noreen Renders

Summary:

At present this small village has a primary school that is full, there is limited provision for under 5's the doctors surgery do their best but are oversubscribed, there are just 2 shops and the streets are narrow to say the least. More homes would stretch the existing capacityto breaking point. This would not only mean current residents would be disadvantaged but also any person wishing to move here.

More details about Rep ID: 229

Representation ID: 228

OBJECT Mr. Paul Warner

Summary:

I think most of the blatantly obvious reasons for stopping the development have already been put forward there is now another one. Post Brexit we are being told that small farms are the way forward as we will be losing our EU subsidies, this is the Government talking, so let them listen to themselves!

More details about Rep ID: 228

Representation ID: 215

OBJECT Ms Janne Secretan

Summary:

Apart from the village growing at an alarming rate without suitable infrastructure to support the growth, access to and from the site on a bend into a 40mph road seems foolhardy if not dangerous. Anyone who has travelled to town via Old Heath road at almost any time of the day will be aware of the difficulties due to the narrowness of the road and the inevitable delays due to parkied vehicles. Whether the employment opportunities are to be in town or further afield the use of old Heath road is inevitable.

More details about Rep ID: 215

Representation ID: 213

OBJECT Mrs Nicola Parmenter

Summary:

I object.
Rowhedge is big enough and already has new houses currently being built as we speak.
This will put extra pressure on the doctors surgery, schools etc as it is.
another 60 houses is approx another 120 cars and Rowhedge is already a nuisance with cars parked along the roadsides.
The land is beautiful leave it how it is.

More details about Rep ID: 213

Representation ID: 185

OBJECT Mr MARTIN HALL

Summary:

I genuinely believe Rowhedge and its infrastructure simply cannot cope with another development such as this. Both the school and doctors surgery are already at capacity. The brook at Hillview Close already floods residents gardens after heavy rainfall and the run off from an additional 60 houses and access roads will only compound the issue. I cannot see how you can 'improve pedestrian connectivity' when it does not exist in the first place. Surely all 'brown field' sites (Abbots Road Co-op site?) should be considered before destroying viable, valuable and sustainable agricultural land and associated wildlife habitat. I strongly object.

More details about Rep ID: 185

Representation ID: 172

OBJECT Mrs Anna Appleyard

Summary:

Ripping up a field of food to build housing is ludicrous. Our village is due to increase in size by almost a third, due to approved building plans. We cannot take any more housing. The school, doctors and roads are at capacity. I say "no" to building on historic Battleswick Farm.

More details about Rep ID: 172

Representation ID: 170

OBJECT Mr Lee Scordis

Summary:

As local councillor for the area and Old Heath I would object to this development.

Currently there is not the infrastructure to support more housing, such as school and GP places. Traffic will also be an issue. With 60 houses it is likely this will add 120 cars to the road.

Battleswick is also a very historic sight, a place that has been farmland since the 13th Century.

More details about Rep ID: 170

Representation ID: 156

OBJECT Ms Anne Jones

Summary:

1. Rowhedge already has substantial development underway on brownfield sites, which very soon will increase our population by a third and put our infrastructure (already at capacity) under severe strain.There is insufficient resource to support further development.
2. This proposal is to build on a greenfield site. Ancient fields, hedgerows and trees, relied upon by protected wildlife, will be irretrievably lost through the development of both site and access route.
3. Development of this site will eat into greenbelt between Colchester and surrounding villages. Initial erosion like this could be the thin end of the wedge.

More details about Rep ID: 156

Representation ID: 148

OBJECT Mrs Sue Goodwin

Summary:

Picturesque, undulating land. If built on will cause flooding problems to existing homes. Need to protect River Colne area for visitors and leisure activities and preserve countryside for future generations. It won't just be housing. With housing comes health and safety, road widening, traffic controls, footpaths, street lighting. The ruination of our lovely countryside. Enough is enough - look for brownfield sites.

More details about Rep ID: 148

Representation ID: 142

OBJECT miss louise jacobs

Summary:

Colchester Council can't deal with the problems we have at the moment such as flooding, schools, nhs, traffic.
Why create a whole lot of new problems when they cant manage what is currently going on in our town?
they need to take careful consideration in the problems that building on the farm will incur.
Better still come up to the farm and see how bad it floods when my horses are ankle deep in water and i use sandbags to stop the flooding!!
NO NO NO NO NO!!!

More details about Rep ID: 142

Representation ID: 134

OBJECT Ms Eileen King

Summary:

1. Rowhedge has already had its fair share. Danger of losing village integrity.
2.Pressure on existing facilities
3.Building on greenfield sites should be discouraged.
4.Increased traffic on already clogged roads
5. Special character of Rowhedge as a riverside village with no through roads- needs preserving

More details about Rep ID: 134

Representation ID: 127

OBJECT clive needle

Summary:

1. Post "Brexit", agricultural land should be retained for necessary national food production.
2. Road junctions nearby would be dangerous and unsuitable for extra traffic.
3. The brook is a valuable habitat.
4. Rowhedge is accepting large rapid growth, the impacts of which should be assessed before any further development is considered.
Therefore I strongly object.

More details about Rep ID: 127

Representation ID: 122

OBJECT Mr Gareth Stevens

Summary:

Stop further housing building in Rowhedge which is the wrong place, which will destroy the community and cause traffic congestion, delays, stress and increased travel costs to most of Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 122

Representation ID: 110

OBJECT Mrs Jane Page

Summary:

Rowhedge cannot take any further development.

This land should not be developed on.

More details about Rep ID: 110

Representation ID: 108

OBJECT Mr Peter Mills represented by Mr Peter Mills

Summary:

More services are needed, also need to be more spread out. Dormice are present.

More details about Rep ID: 108

Representation ID: 107

OBJECT Ms Susan Allen

Summary:

The consultation is not inclusive - it only allows for on line comments at its presentations.
The information on the Travel to Work Patterns was distorted a) because it was taken from the 2011 consensus and b) because it included Harbour - an area 2 miles from Rowhedge along the river's edge, where there is a totally different lifestyle and work pattern.
The info gained from our Village Plan shows that out of 196 respondents 92% travel to work by car, motorbike or scooter.... our village infrastructure will be overwhelmed by more properties and residents.

More details about Rep ID: 107

Representation ID: 93

OBJECT mrs zoe harris

Summary:

say NO!

More details about Rep ID: 93

Representation ID: 92

OBJECT Mr Philip George

Summary:

problems it will create:
transport
school
medical practice
flooding
removal of trees on a historic site

More details about Rep ID: 92

Representation ID: 91

OBJECT simon crouchman

Summary:

the village is already too congested. The school is overcrowded and you can't get in the doctors. The roads in and around Rowhedge, Old Heath are already
over crowded and this will only make things worse. This
development will also invade the privacy of the residents of Hillview Close who will have their gardens overlooked by the new houses. As the land at battlesbrook farm is higher than hillview close the gardens and downstairs windows in the proposed new houses will be level with the upstairs bedroom windows in hillview.

More details about Rep ID: 91

Representation ID: 90

OBJECT Mr Richard Helliwell

Summary:

Rowhedge already has two large developments under way that are set to increase the size of the village by a third. This additional development will place an additional burden on the already over capacity infrastructure . Furthermore it will erode the green belt that separates the village from Colchester and will no doubt be seen as opening the opportunity for further development in this greenfield area. I am also concerned that the existing entrance to Battleswick farm is narrow and will be difficult to open into a safe entrance without significantly damaging historic buildings, trees and hedgerows.

More details about Rep ID: 90

Representation ID: 80

OBJECT Mr Geoff Lawrence

Summary:

Rowhedge is already taking on 170 more houses which are being built on the old docks. The local primary schools are full and the doctors surgery is over subscribed. The roads leading to & from Rowhedge are already crammed & with the docks build these small & windy roads are to get even busier.

More details about Rep ID: 80

Representation ID: 74

OBJECT Mr David Palmer

Summary:

Rowhedge village is small, the local infrastructure of services is already at capacity, approval has already been granted to build on brownfield sites without increasing those capacities - either locally or centrally. In addition to this issue the proposal is to obtain change of use & build upon a greenfield site. Either of these considerations is enough to warrant refusal, both would surely merit withdrawal of the proposal.

More details about Rep ID: 74

Representation ID: 70

OBJECT Lisa McPhee

Summary:

Rowhedge doctors surgery and school are already full. .. Adding more houses is only going to make this worse. The roads are already busy without adding more houses with cars.

More details about Rep ID: 70

Representation ID: 69

OBJECT Lisa McPhee

Summary:

Rowhedge doctors surgery and school are already full..... Adding more houses is only going to make this worse. Plus the roads around Rowhedge are already busy with cars and won't be safe for the children.

More details about Rep ID: 69

Representation ID: 68

OBJECT mrs s foster

Summary:

I would object to any further substantial development in the village. To the best of my knowledge the school has already had problems accommodating children who actually live in the village and the dr surgery is full. This is currently without taking the dock development into account. The local infrastructure will not cope

More details about Rep ID: 68

Representation ID: 67

OBJECT Mrs Krystal Crawford

Summary:

I am a resident in Hillview Close, I strongly object as having lived here for 8 years I value the views of the farmland and peaceful village lifestyle that attracted me to purchase our property. The development will have a large impact directly on us.

More details about Rep ID: 67

Representation ID: 66

OBJECT Mr Darren Clark

Summary:

Rowhedge is already having houses being built on to rapidly at the wharlf and numbers are and will increase beyond what the schools, doctors and play groups can handle, so more houses will create big prblems for the village and even the high amount of traffic that we will have, its aready a struggle to move in certain areas .

The farm land is a wonderful area and part of the countryside so please leave it that way

More details about Rep ID: 66

Representation ID: 65

OBJECT Mrs Karen Clark

Summary:

I am concerned for the flood risk for all of the current houses in Hillview Close, these gardens already have flooding issues. With these houses it would be even greater.
Rowhedge Wharf is creating a 3rd recent new build development and without this the surgery and school are full. When this is finished this village won't be able to cope - let along another set of houses to go up!
I believe that their must be many more options for these 60 new homes.

More details about Rep ID: 65

Representation ID: 63

OBJECT Mr Jonathan Eckersley

Summary:

Representation of no more than 100 words? Gee, thanks. To surmise:
School = Full
GP = Full
Infrastructure = Inadequate
Flooding = Inevitable
Pollution = Inevitable

Replacing farmland with conurbation is never a good idea; fields become roads and fresh air becomes polluted. This is Greenbelt, an officially designated belt of open countryside in which all development is severely restricted, usually enclosing a built-up area [Old Heath] and designed to check its further growth.
Please do not let this development go ahead, let Rowhedge remain a village surrounded by countryside and not be absorbed in to greater Colchester thereby losing it's identity.

More details about Rep ID: 63

Representation ID: 52

OBJECT Mrs Marie Walter

Summary:

I totally Object. This is a community already being pushed to the limits! No no no!!!!!!!

More details about Rep ID: 52

Representation ID: 48

OBJECT Sebastian Warner

Summary:

An increase in homes, population and vehicles will devastate our village .... we do not have the health or education services, not the parking or roadways to manage such an increase. This proposal is unsustainable within the constraints of Rowhedge boundaries and facilities. hill view will no longer be 'Hill view' it will be Estate view!! Surely Rowhedge has done its bit for Colchester with the wharf development currently under construction. Rowhedge should stay a collage not turn into a small town.

More details about Rep ID: 48

Representation ID: 47

OBJECT Mrs Zoe Green

Summary:

Rowhedge would not benefit from Anymore houses being built, the school and doctors are already at capacity. The proposed land is a historical piece of Rowhedge and many people would be unhappy to see this destroyed for more houses. Also Rowhedge is a village which has a lot of appeal being one, building more houses would ruin that too.

More details about Rep ID: 47

Representation ID: 44

OBJECT Mrs Nina Crouchman

Summary:

Already has a large development being Built
The traffic increase on an already busy road will cause accidents.
The School can not cope with more children.
The flooding issue
Doctors is already extremely difficult to get an appointment.

More details about Rep ID: 44

Representation ID: 33

OBJECT Alison Walls

Summary:

Rowhedge has seen significant development already. The obvious impact of the Wharf Development from increased traffic and over population has not been considered. Any further development of Rowhedge given the inadequate infrastructure is unsustainable and wholly irresponsible. In addition, there is the flood risk to properties in Hillview Close where the brook flows along garden boundaries.There seems to be a policy of over development and then consider the consequences later.

More details about Rep ID: 33

Representation ID: 23

OBJECT Mr Julian Brett

Summary:

More traffic on already heavily used roads. Protected species - bats, sparrows. Village already being developed with over 400 new dwellings.

More details about Rep ID: 23

Representation ID: 22

OBJECT Ms Helen Went

Summary:

Too much pressure on our already stretched infrastructure.

Flooding issues from the Brook at Hillview Close.

Protected species of wildlife rely on this area.

Noise pollution for current residents.

Loss of character and identity of our village.

More details about Rep ID: 22

Representation ID: 21

OBJECT Mrs Charlotte Sanderson

Summary:

This village has ALREADY supported new development on areas which were left unloved (such as the scrapyard and old wharf area) - it has meant the village has grown and the services to support local people has suffered. Local farm land enhances the characteristics of the village, its not an eyesore or under-used. The doctors surgery is full, the school and early years provision is also full - all without the additional houses being finished on the wharf development. Further housing on Battleswick Farm would further cripple the village.

More details about Rep ID: 21

Representation ID: 20

OBJECT Mr. Paul Warner

Summary:

Basically Rowhedge has already taken enough development and should remain independent from the monster that Colchester has become.

More details about Rep ID: 20

Representation ID: 18

OBJECT Heather Doyle

Summary:

Facilities in Rowhedge (such as school) already at capacity,

Rowhedge already has one substantial housing development underway - why are we being targeted again? Character of the village being eroded by further development

Potential to set a precedent with other developers trying to develop sites adjacent / next to the Battleswick Farm development.

We don't want to end up fused to Old Heath - we want rural village life - not mass housing estates. That's why we moved here!

More details about Rep ID: 18

Representation ID: 17

OBJECT Mr Owen Broadway

Summary:

When buying a family home me and my partner wanted a house in a nice little safe village away from Colchester, if this goes a head Rowhedge will be linked to Colchester , Also can you please let me how and why Colchester Counsil are giving permission for a developer to build on greenbelt land ? Are Colchester Counsil just destroying destroying ever beautiful village ? Also with Bloor homes also building 500 plus units do you not think this is enough.

More details about Rep ID: 17

Representation ID: 16

OBJECT Mr David Walter

Summary:

-What schools will these 60 houses worth of children (bearing in mid there are already 170 houses worth to think of)
-What doctors surgery will they use?
-How can Rowhedge accommodate 1000 additional residents. We have two small shops, two small pubs and a hairdressers
-Don't use farmland, it's ridiculously backwards.

More details about Rep ID: 16

Representation ID: 15

OBJECT Mrs Claire Broadway

Summary:

I strongly object to the prospect of the proposed development of 60 new houses being built in our village! We are already having to cope with houses being built and trees being uprooted in the beautiful woods now you want to destroy our farm lands, over flow our already full GP surgery and school! It is impractical and unfair for this to go head! We are a village. You will make us a town!

More details about Rep ID: 15

Representation ID: 14

OBJECT Mr. J Knights

Summary:

Traffic issues due to far smaller employment opportunities; further developments will add more cars at rush hour travelling across town to work, hospital and other amenities not found here in the East.

There are very real privacy and flooding concerns for the residents of Hillview Close should any development be passed.

Our small village school will struggle to cope with children anticipated from the existing wharf development; there is no further room for any extra classrooms on site.

Rowhedge must now be considered now at its development limit and entirely unsuitable for further housing.

Our limited and precious countryside must not be sacrificed.

More details about Rep ID: 14

Representation ID: 13

OBJECT Mrs Daisy Knights

Summary:

Totally unsuitable location, bordered on two sides by existing housing which will make privacy issues a huge concern for all. A deep stream runs along the border to Hillview Close; this stream floods the gardens of HVC and the road at Marsh Crescent during intense rain, with the field providing much needed relief.

Rowhedge has already had much development and is yet to feel the impact of the 170-dwellings on the old wharf site, with the second phase currently at application stage. It is inevitable that School and Doctor resources will become very stretched with these developments alone.

More details about Rep ID: 13

Representation ID: 6

OBJECT Miss Rachel McCullough

Summary:

Increased air and noise pollution, Ruin village life and tranquility, Aesthetically displeasing, increased danger/risk, More suited for for the access to be closer to Old Heath allowing the Village to keep a Village feel.

More details about Rep ID: 6

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult

Related Articles