DETAILS - Lack of consultation, failure to take local views into account

This paragraph lists ways in which Rochford Council have reputedly consulted Hockley people and taken views into account in preparation of HAAP Submission document. These claims are not justified, nor legally compliant with their own documents.

RDC Statement of Community Involvement January 2007 says RDC's techniques for consultation include consideration to timing; venue of public meetings to ensure accessibility; public exhibitions in libraries, shops; Rochford District Matters quarterly newssheet to keep people uptodate with local planning issues; newspapers; website. HAAP procedures have not complied with that. History to date, including for Submission, follows.

Initial 'placecheck' (walkabout) was carried out by some officials apparently in February 2008, of which Hockley residents and traders were unaware. HAAP Issues & Options January 2009 foreword refers to "What you told us?" Firstly, 'we' didn't; secondly most Hockley people disagreed with the claims made in that foreword on their behalf, which were therefore not sound nor in compliance with 2007 SCI.

At a Hockley Parish Council meeting one discovered that HAAP Issues/Options document had been initially discussed and approved for consultation at a meeting in Hullbridge, not Hockley.

There were no public notices around Hockley issued by RDC about HAAP. You only check the 'website' for a consultation when you have learned from publicity it is there.

Consultation ran reasonably from February to 30 April 2009, but a small reference to it in middle pages of Rochford District Matters appeared half way through March.

Locals objected strongly to wholesale HAAP redevelopment proposals at their own meeting in Eldon Way. So a revised Issues/Options consult was published late November 201l (in time for Christmas, New Year and bad weather, not good "timing").

No Preferred Option stage apparently followed. Complaint from residents' association produced an exhibition July-August 2012 in Hockley library, which was a puzzling mix of 2009 and 2010 HAAPs, not reflecting local responses to earlier issues.

At RDC Executive committee 14.3.12 Members voted to "accelerate" preparation of Rochford, Rayleigh and Hockley AAPs to public examination 2013. Report proposed to "give some priority" to HAAP to bring forward to February 2013, whilst that for Rochford and Rayleigh "could be well into the future" which was agreed - note concentration on changes to Hockley. Report also noted "need for regeneration, redevelopment". All this didn't comply with earlier responses to HAAP.

At LDF Sub-committee 21.3.12 re the 3 AAPs, Members emphasized need for protection, no change for Rochford and Rayleigh. But re choice of District or Town centre for Hockley, report proposed the latter, for regeneration, which they accepted. Portfolio holder said 'District' (basic needs for a small centre) was a "disservice to commerce", for which investment was needed. In fact District centre had been proposed by RDC's own Retail and Leisure Study 2008, to protect from further expansion, so this decision did not comply with RDC's own document, all in contravention of RDC SCI 2007.



At Rochford council meeting 27.11.12 where Pre-Submission consultation document was approved, Portfolio holder said Hockley was marked by empty shops, which is untrue which he should have known.

Submission document consultation runs from 29.11.12 to 25.1.13, including Christmas period, New Year and bad weather, not good "timing". It was also claimed that Submission consultation would be publicized in Hockley library and Hockley Parish Council notice boards. In event, there was one tiny notice in the library and none on the notice boards. Approval of Submission document for consultation on 27.11.12 was too late to enter edition of Rochford District Matters newssheet, from which it is therefore absent.

By comparison, Rochford and Rayleigh AAP placecheck, Issues/Options reports and probably coming submission one also, though both those AAPs are of limited impact on the towns compared with effect of HAAP on Hockley, have been well publicized and Submission consultations will be March-April 2013, both later than that for HAAP and at a more sensible time of year.

Core Strategy quotes Retail & Leisure Study 2008 as saying Hockley has great potential. In fact latter document says the opposite. It is apparent that outcome of HAAP process has been pre-determined from the outset. There has been no real consultation over HAAP, so the Submission document in this regard is not legally compliant, nor sound, as demonstrated above.