Tourism

Renaissance Southend Ltd (RSL) recognises Rochford's tourism opportunities in relation to 'heritage, countryside and coastline', and would seek to ensure that good quality sustainable links (i.e. not all requiring car journeys) are created between Southend and Rochford to enable good access to this tourism potential. Scoping work for the 'new country park' concept currently being undertaken by RSL will highlight the opportunities in respect of this point. RSL supports the RSPB led proposals for Wallasea Island, and would also seek to improve sustainable links between the Borough of Southend and Wallasea Island where this is possible.

Comments from the FSB SE Essex Branch Vice Chairman.

Due to the lack of a sustainable road transport infrastructure in the district, the need to ensure that each centre of population has a concentration of suitable commercial premises to enable local employment to succeed. This could be attained by the careful introduction of commercial centres within the community. Better utilization of existing building and out buildings, farm and redundant properties which would lead to local employment possibilities. Local mini business centres could mushroom with the right type and size of accommodation for starter companies. There would be a need for various types of business accommodation as not all businesses will be in the high tech category. This could lead to growth areas being formed which could lead onto larger estates sited in the west of the district.

There is a common belief that we need to embrace high tech industries. The presented base information indicates not only are we an area of small and ultra small businesses there is a vast diversity of trades of which many are service based.

With the recently announced purchaser of the Airport the potential development based on other locations, leans to the possibility of large warehousing and transport based industry. This, though it will bring employment to the area, will only bring a certain type of employment and the need to have a better scatter of types of businesses in the location possibly has been missed. There will now be an urgent need to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to cope with the increase in goods movement. The demise of yet another air support company may in turn mean a problem for growth in the form of commercial air travel, thus aircraft based industries must not be relied upon as the answer to future employment. The need to open the immediate area to low tech industries and small and micro small businesses is paramount.

The presented vision of creating a business park for larger concerns in the west of the district, to release much needed housing allocation, is in the bases a reasonable solution. Large transporters would not have to negotiate the restricted road infrastructure of the district. Though we have existing large companies who are well established within the district, some who would have trouble relocating due to the type and size of their operation eg Baltic Wharf .

There also could be a counter argument in that due to the lack of road infrastructure, there may be a problem of access at peak times for staff. This is a common problem on our existing trading estates such as Purdies Estate Rochford. Also the need to move staff from one side of the district to the other will not help the already inadequate transport system. The positive is there is direct access to major road system. But there may be also a need to investigate if there is a need of an upgrade of the rail infrastructure, this is due to the inadequacy of the national road infrastructure of the future.

The three main retail centres are at this time having a real challenging time. Due to the restraints of public spending and the need to use car parking fees as a source of revenue does not make it easy for the high street retailers. As the district originated from market towns and we can't compete with the out of town shopping centres and large super markets, should we be. looking at returning to the small centres with convenience/service stores. With more "on street" drop by parking, maybe pedestrian walk ways areas. Smaller towns and villages to adopt a similar style of small retail outlets. New residential developments should be required as part of the development include "Corner Shop" type units. This not only forms a micro community but helps in retaining the "spend" within the district and the need not to have to travel to the major shopping areas for the basic essentials.

If the ideals of the tourism initiative are implanted into the district, the need for more cheap but adequate accommodation within the newly developed countryside, eg Wild Coast at Wallasea, Jubilee Park at Hawkwell. There will be a need to change planning policy to accept this type of development. Yet there must also be suitable hotel accommodation in the west of the district to cover the proposed new industrial area.

There are concerns that the Core Strategy does not cover the future of the Roach and its tributies from the aspect of the existing users of the river. There seems to be scant regard to the illegal waterside development in the area, House boats, live a board's, waterside constructions. Following the latest Appeal Decision at Pagelsham Boatyard is the now a need to look again at a coherent policy on House boats/ Live Aboard Craft on the rivers.

The lack of access by the public to the riverside both on the Roach and the Crouch. There is a great need to open up such public access to the rivers as we only have one point at Hullbridge which is not designated as a slipway but a road end.

The proposed increase in commercial boat yards/ Marina's is not matched by the decrease in river traffic and boats in the rivers. The CHA report a marked drop in mooring take up, to gain better access to the water will mean negotiations with bordering land owners. The problem as always will be controlled access and costs.

In reflection and in reading the document again after composing the contents of this reply I note many of the points raised have been covered or partially discussed in the LGF (October revision) document.