Sirs,

We have previously raised objections to the HAAP, by e-mail and presume that despite the note on the RDC website methods other than use of the online link remain valid (we cannot be alone in finding the online "facility"
unhelpful).

Where we refer to option 2 and or 3 it refers to all variations of these options unless stated otherwise

Firstly we believe that the council should be clearer on the reasons for the necessity of the plan. We understand that this is two-fold:-
1) without a plan the council is stranded when refusing planning permission (particularly for housing and commercial development)
2) The council wishes to press ahead with housing development (despite national government withdrawing the requirement for 3,000+ homes in the are), because national government offers a council tax matching incentive, which will double the council's income from any housing development. This is referred to in the final pages of the document "Funding & Delivery - New Homes Bonus". Report also fails to mention other approved housing developments and proposals that have or are taking place at present and how many houses are actually being built in the area or have been built in last decade. These need to be offset against RDC's insistence in pressing ahead for more housing. Options 2 and 3 are unacceptable because of the extensive

Introduction - low density nature and reasonable character are mentioned yet several of the options (2 & 3) seek to completely destroy this and should therefore be rejected.

Firstly observe that the document is incorrect and out-of-date in places.

Pg 4 Retail Study - Alldays is now occupied; a second "supermarket" opened (although currently closed following a fire it is presumed it will re-open); planning application has been submitted to Factory Shop car park (which surely should be refused, given that other alternative locations exist and one of the main issues with Hockley is the lack of parking in the High St.

Noted that all the maps of Hockley show Spa roundabout as "give way" on all sides - this is incorrect vehicles exiting Spa Road and Woodlands Road are required to stop.


Pg 4 and options 2 and 3 are insistent on the provision of further office space there are however several office locations awaiting letting (around Spa Roundabout and Kilnfield House are prime examples.

Still on pg 4 - improvements to frontage are mentioned, but nothing about considering potential to use historic style shopfronts to try and keep in line with older premises e.g. Spa and avoiding neon signage

Physical context and much of the report fails to mention that B1013 is already the busiest B road in Essex, continued development all along the road e.g. opp Rayleigh Cemetery and various in fill sites, plus proposals for Hall Road and Ironwell Lane will only lead to more traffic, as will any development in Hockley and Hawkwell. Any development should therefore be on a small scale 10's or 100's of dwellings are not acceptable.

Pg 8 Consultation feedback whilst agree with most comments questionable whether there are enough participants for this to be representative.

Pg 10 Foundry Industrial estate is not mentioned - existing businesses should be encouraged to stay, but consideration (if housing really must
occur) give to conversion of unoccupied premises. Area next to Station platform on South side, now proposed as a car park would also make suitable housing option - curious as to why this hasn't been explored - are there proposals to widen the rail network for freight?

Pg 14 Framework - consider moving Health facility at Eldon Way to site near Jones practice surgery/library - believe this was in original HAAP, but hasn't been carried over. Land to west of Eldon Way along Sap Road could all potentially be converted to housing.

Option 1
This offers very few benefits and doesn't go far enough in protecting the area. As with the whole of the document it is unhelpful in not naming the current occupier of the premises where changes are envisaged e.g the warehouse style premises at 2 Main Road and 34-40 Spa Road? It also isn't explained how established businesses are meant to adopt the plan.

Opening up the parking is a good idea, but with the Funeral Parlour at former Alldays site is likely to prove impossible there for the present.

Enhancing green pedestrian link between Bramerton Road and Eldon Way - Wasn't even aware there was a green link that's how well used that is

Why however, to ease stress on the road has a through road from Eldon Way to the Station not been considered - this would link two industrial sites provide additional access to the leisure facilities and remove some of the issues around the station. Indeed may be worth considering that this should be the only way of driving to the station - make station approach exit only and introduce waiting area?

What is "secondary road treatment" pg 22?

Would question planting of additional trees only seem to attract litter and dog's mess at the moment

Option 2 Unacceptable as it stands. If the council insist on building further premises, why are they to be built on some of the few attractions to Hockley i.e. Monkey Business and the Bowling Alley? Surely better use would be conversion of some of the premises on the Foundry Estate, particularly Kilnfield House, which is only partially occupied and would fit in as flats with the existing flats in the area (all of which actually were an improvement to what was there before).

We also have reference to more office space, but the existing office space is not utilised (Spa roundabout and Kilnfield House for example.

Again why only a pedestrian link to station from Eldon Way and not a road?
Why not provide pedestrian link from High St and open up existing Car Parks to rear of most of these properties - as with area behind shops on Main Road which is always utilised. Could link not also run though Pub beer garden or Old Fire Station area?

Pg 26 what is stronger frontage - meaningless phrase.

"a is even worse - development makes it look like a city suburb (perhaps preparation for Southend getting City status and Rochford being swallowed
up?) Where do all these premises go and in respect of the sorting office especially the jobs?

Major concern is that the redevelopment of Eldon Way is merely an excuse to try and move business to airport in order that the council can justify the
(over) development of the surrounding green belt there. Why are Council even considering movement of business attractions to Hockley e.g. Bowling and Monkey Business, just need to make access easier and these elements will surely bring trade.

Pg 35 C - why not housing if housing is necessary D - consider road entry/exit via Eldon Way to Station and exit only from Station Approach and/or alternate one-way on that Road and Spa Road between Station Approach and Eldon Way Evening/Morning

E - what about deliveries of stock etc

Option 3 - as with 2 this represents significant over development and is unacceptable in current form.

Pg 42 - Replacement of poor quality building on Southend Road - which one not specified New homes in churchyard curious option - access for cars etc and how does this fit with development proposed on Factory Shop car park?? Seems to be unnecessary cramming

Pg 44 table top crossing - doesn't mention whether the comparable sites are actually as busy as this road (very much doubt it) - one of the major issues at Spa roundabout is that drivers often commit offences (speeding, mobile 'phones etc), fail to signal correctly and fail to use the roundabout as intended (cut across). Simple improvement may be to introduce a flexible bollard to ensure vehicles navigate properly at low speed?

Pg 53 6 replacing existing business with so many houses, no consideration of infrastructure requirements, drainage and effluent waste - (flooding and power problems exist on the Betts Farm Estate of this nature and will surely be mirrored here).

Pg 59 - doubtful this would work, insufficient vehicles turning right from Southend Road to permit vehicles to exit Spa Road. Also poor sight lines for vehicles turning left

Pg 63 varying heights are a nightmare for elderly and partially sighted especially in poor weather. Further problems would occur if there is a repeat of the recent lack of gritting of surrounding roads and pavement areas.

Pg 68 Without repeating previous arguments there seems little justification for further office building when can't let existing. How is it justified that demand is strong - there are several sites that are long term vacant - Alldays only recently occupied, Butchers recently occupied as a taxi office (why they needed such a big space - perhaps they though they could park in it); Greengrocers, Electrical Store and further back on Main Road old Chemist, plus various sites opposite Potters.

All in all seems council want too many houses and to move established businesses without properly considering how to make pedestrian access and movement easier and therefore proposals should be rejected.