Letter to Essex County Standard, in response to Gateway 120

with No Comments

We disagree with Robert Crayston (Letters, 20 January), who claims that large-scale settlements like West Tey offer “the only sustainable way we can meet our need for new houses.” As promoter of a scheme to build 17,000 houses on the site, he is clearly talking his own book.

The new town, covering up to 1,000 hectares, would engulf Marks Tey and Little Tey, and encroach on Coggeshall, Feering, Easthorpe, Copford, Great Tey and Aldham.  It would be situated near an air pollution hot spot at Marks Tey, which can only get worse with additional traffic generated by the proposed new town and the planned A12 and A120 capacity upgrades.

We believe sustainable development should limit the impact to the natural environment, through building homes near jobs to reduce commuter journeys, prioritising brownfield land and fostering urban regeneration.  Smaller developments close to, and connected to, their urban centres by excellent public transport, are preferable to vast garden communities that are little more than ‘nowheresville’ dormitories.   

CAUSE supports properly planned developments, with infrastructure first. But they must be of an appropriate scale and in the right place.   West Tey is not the right place for a sprawling new town that local communities do not want.



Robert Crayston’s letter: