A 500-HOME “mini-town” can be built on a site to the north-west of Rayleigh after councillors approved the plans following a heated debate.

More than 150 objectors packed Rochford District Council’s Rayleigh offices to hear the planning committee discuss Countryside Properties’ proposals for land north of London Road.

As the chamber was full, some objectors were sent to an upstairs room to watch the debate viaa video link.

The meeting heard the protesters’ case against the plans, with some councillors backing them, before the application was narrowly approved by 15 votes to 12.

Several objectors stormed out in disgust at one point, as a motion to throwout the planswasdefeated.

Downhall and Rawreth Lib Dem councillor Chris Black raised concerns about extra traffic the new homes would generate. He said Countryside had submitted an improved plan since its first application in January,buthestill opposed it.

He said: “It’s too easy to get swept up in the big things here and forget the principles.

“It hasn’t changed that much. I oppose it for the same reasons I did in January.

“Countryside isn’tthevillainhere– the council didn’t carry out the traffic assessment we should have. I’m even more concerned now than I was in January.”

Mr Black said although more had also been more done to prevent flooding, hewasn’t convinced other issues, including traffic, and pressure on local schools and amenities had been addressed.

However, Keith Gordon, an independent councillor from Rochford, backed the plan, saying: “I voted for the previous application.

“Downstream flooding is not a problem and the Environment Agency will not support an appeal against this, soIcannotsupportcouncillor Black."

Mr Gordon asked for individual councillors’ votes to be recorded, an thiswasagreed.

Mike Lambert, on behalf of the developer, argued Countryside had addressedallfourgroundscitedwhen the planwasrefused in January– lack of sports provision, flood risk, roads and pressureon secondaryschools.

He added: “We have listened and fullyaddressed these issues.

“The traffic impact would be on London Road and we have made a clear commitment to tackle this.”

Echo:

Action group: The big issues have not been addressed

RAYLEIGH Action Group members spoke out against the plan at the meeting.

The organisation was set up to cordinateresidents’ fight against 500 homes being built between Rawreth Lane and London Road. Jim Cripps, pictured left, spoke at the meeting.

He said: “We have heard tonight the developer had the opportunity to have a third go at the flooding aspect.

“No attempt has been made to look at the site construction traffic. This is not a short-term situation. The site traffic will be there for ten years – 15 years if other sites in the core strategy go ahead.”

Rawreth parish councillor Alistir Matthews suggested measures proposed would not cope with flooding in the area. He added: “It should be a condition that all infrastructure should be in place before any houses are constructed.”

Why didn't Rayleigh's MP attend the meeting? 

RAYLEIGH’S MP did not appear to attend the crunch housing meeting.

Mark Francois, the Tory MP for Rayleigh and Wickford, told the Echo in January he objected to plans for 500 homes in Rayleigh.

But residents say they are disappointed he did not make himself known at the planning committee.

Campaigner Linda Kendall said she was deeply upset.

She said: “My feeling is that it’s the biggest issue in Rayleigh for decades and he is the MP and he couldn’t be bothered to be there.

“A lot of people were very upset that he wasn’t there. He did send a letter of objection in saying that it shouldn’t be passed and his views were the same as in January. I think he made a very good case in January but he was worried about being at the meeting last night.

“Ordinary people have been totally ignored. When they have to have a secret meeting, excluding the press and public, you have to ask, what society are we living in?”

Mark Francois, didn’t comment on why he didn’t attend, but said: “Rochford District Council have now given approval to this planning application. It would appear that the developer, relatively late in the day, has offered some additional infrastructure to accompany the proposed housing and if the development is now to go ahead it will be important to make sure that any commitments such as these relating to the Rayleigh development are honoured.”