The Future of South Woodham Ferrers Why Did Residents move to South Woodham Ferrers? • The Essex Records Office based in Chelmsford has within its vaults various promotional leaflets encouraging us to move to the town in the 1980s. • Catalogue reference C/DP/11/1/18-19 • Catalogue reference C/DP 11/1/20 Literature Passages “ The new South Woodham Ferrers is a small riverside town that is being created on the banks of the River Crouch.” “The town is being created on the north bank of the river Crouch in an area bounded on two sides by tidal creeks. The rolling countryside of mid-Essex forms the northern boundary. Although the primary aim is to provide housing it is intended that by the late 1980s the completed town will have all the advantages of a small riverside town. The whole town is virtually surrounded by open space.” “ It is being built onto an established and lively community and seeks to ensure that the existing village and the new housing area will be integrated and their inhabitants enjoy all the advantages of a small country town.” “It represents an opportunity for you to buy a home-and for you and your family to start enjoying now a high quality of life-in what is to be a truly delightful environment. It is a separate community that will be limited to no more than 18,000 people” “By its nature-a small riverside town-south Woodham Ferrers can never be a major employment centre.” “ All will be able to share a real sense of community-identity and civic pride as citizens of a fine town.” Public Opinion In October 2016 with the support of City Cllr Bob Massey (who provided the box) we put a sealed ballot box in the Asda foyer. We put a voting form in the local community weekly publication-(the Focus for 2 weeks) - and town Cllr Ian Roberts put forward the arguments as to why development was a good idea. South Woodham Action Group put forward the argument against. We invited residents to vote. There were 468 ballot forms in the box that was independently opened and the votes counted by 2 town councillors: Roberts and Wyatt. The verified results were:- Not in favour of any development 387 (82.7%) In favour with the correct level of infrastructure 69 (14.7%) In favour 4 (0.9%) Spoilt papers 8 (1.7%) City Council Consultations. There have been two consultations held by Chelmsford City Council. In summary we have counted 1,003 objections raised as to why the plan is not sound. We have counted 12 in favour. There have been more objections from the South Woodham residents than any other area affected by the local plan. This plan for South Woodham is extremely unpopular and flies in the face of local democracy. “You said, We did” Following the consultations, the city council came out with the above statement. Nothing could be further from the truth as evidenced by their admission that there are many objections that they could not resolve. But they decided to just submit the plan anyway and let the inspectorate decide………… The main unanswered objections • How do the current residents stand to benefit? • Pressures on existing facilities • Road gridlock / infrastructure • Train services • Splitting Our town in two • Flooding/ Surface water run off • Secondary School • Travelling Show People How do the current residents stand to benefit? • At the start we talked about why residents moved to “a small riverside town.” Most love it the way it is but what do they get in return? • More pressures on already overstretched facilities. • CIL? We were initially told we would receive around £10M. We are now told that the figure will be £2.2M ! • This would be payable over the period of the plan which would equate to around £110,000 per annum. • This is simply not sufficient and will not be enough to improve our already overstretched facilities. Pressures on existing facilities • Currently under daily pressure • Real issues getting GP and Dental appointments NOW. • How will they cope with potentially an additional 4,000 residents? • No details in the plan suggest they would. • Unsustainable. Road gridlock / infrastructure • No dual carriageway of the A132 that was originally mooted. • The surveys accept that there will be heavy congestion due to additional developments from the Dengie peninsula adding to the traffic from the new development. • We are a commuter town and as the branch line train service is inadequate, more residents will drive to Wickford station. Unlikely BR station will cope and more traffic through Runwell and Wickford. Gridlock will be the result. • No re-route of the current ring road so all that traffic will come through our town. We cannot get out of town at peak times now!! • Compared to the plans for Chelmsford we are the poor relations. Strategic growth site 4 – North Chelmsford –which is getting a multi billion pound bypass. The plans for us are not sustainable. Splitting Our town in two • The current ring road sets out our defined northern boundary but this will not be re-routed. • This will split the new development residents from the current town and destroy our current “sense of community” envisaged all those years ago. • There are plans to put a bridge over this very busy road. Do we really think school children will always use it? • There is a real risk of human fatality not to mention the increased road kill that will result for our wildlife. We fear for our foxes, badgers etc. • If the plan is to be approved then a new ring road is essential. Why have CCC ignored this request? Developer profit ahead of resident concerns? The cost of that road may put a developer off the whole project? • Remember the start. We have a Northern boundary. No ring road means we then don’t and more concern for even more development. Train services • We are being cast as the 2nd major town after Chelmsford who of course have a good mainline train line. • We are a branch line that has an infrequent service which at peak commuter times is one train every half an hour. Our service is the first to fail when there are adverse weather conditions and often replacement bus services are not provided. • More residents make it essential to have a more regular train service with more trains particularly at the peak times commuters travel. This takes the cars off the roads to Wickford. • In our contact with the train operators they have stated there are no plans to upgrade the service on our branch line with more regular trains. • The plan without this commitment is unsustainable and is in contrast for its objectives to use public transport effectively. Flooding/ Surface water run off • We have experienced flooding in the area around the old wickford road/ the whalebone pub/ tropical wings for a number of years. No action has been taken. • There will be surface water run off from the new site and the plan states it will mitigate against this. • Question is why havent the current flooding issues been addressed? Why should we believe it will happen this time? Secondary School • At the last report we were told the one secondary school we have can take an extra 500 pupils. • 1000 houses with potentially 2000 children in the future suggests the school will not be able to cope. • Already we hear reports that the school has issues recruiting and retaining good staff and this is already affecting our children’s standard of education. How can this improve with classes at bursting point? • Again, the plan suggests a lack of thought and questions its sustainability. Travelling Show People • The town has had issues when travellers have visited in the past. The residents are naturally very concerned about any allocation this may have. • Surely if they are travelling that suggests the properties allocated will be empty for periods of time or their friends/families may use them instead. This will not foster community spirit with their neighbours. • The sites are not near to major roads and we consider they should be sited near to these to avoid the heavy vehicles they may use trundling through our rural roads. • Wrong site in relation to the road network. Conclusion • The plan has had significant objections from residents and these have not been addressed. • We are touted as a major town with considerable facilities. This is not true. We are the poor relations compared to Chelmsford. • We ask you to consider the original plan for South Woodham, the maximum number of residents, the promises made. • Please do not allow planners to put at risk what we have. • The big society was that local communities decided their futures. Please listen to what the residents have said. Leave us as “the small riverside town” that was planned and we have successfully become..