3.3 POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY SITES

The focus of any plan should not be centred upon a major "Tesco" size supermarket, as this would kill the smaller retail variety which is so important to the people of Hockley. Instead,expansion of the retail/commercial area around a square should produce sufficient "mass" to ensure viability.
The Eldon Way industry should be shifted to the airport where it will thrive as part of a large, viable industrial estate.

Hockley doesn't need a big supermarket, that would be highly detrimental to its character. If any retail to be encouraged it needs small independent shops.

The primary care centre at site H is an easily accessible, useful facility and should be left alone.

Small green spaces add to the character of Hockley and should be left alone, not used as extra parking space.

Dear Sir

I would like my very strong objection to the 'Planned redevelopment of village shopping centre and Eldon Way Trading Estate' noted on Council records.

The only proposal worth going ahead with, is the traffic lights at the Spa roundabout.

The rest of them, NO THANK YOU please leave our Village alone!

Re Hockley Area Action Plan

Dear Sir/Madam

We are against the proposed plans for the above. And we ask that you please extend the date by atleast three months for the local residents to get together, the first we new about this proposed venture was only about two weeks ago.

The shops in Hockley are not "of poor quality" they are independent traders that must all meet a demand, or they wouldn't survive.

Where one is considering the community, one of Hockley's problems is the gangs of youths that hang around, especially at night. Offering them high-quality youth facilities is essential. The bigger picture though, is that youth gangs are less of a problem where people know each other. These proposals are going to turn Hockley into a faceless town.

Dear Sir

We wish to object to not enough notification to the pubilc of the above plan and would request a longer consultation period. At a recent meeting it was apparent that only about half of the people wre even aware of the proposals. We would therefore like every resident of Hockley to be informed and more time for the consultation.

We have read the Hockley Area Action Consultation Plan and object to several points whilst agreeing with others. It would be nice to keep the 'Village Feel' in Hockley, preserving the period buildings that could be made more attractive and a centre not tucked away in Eldon Way.

We obect to a supermarket on the corner of Bramerton Road, which would cause lots of traffic problems and only benefit the supermarket.

We object to 200 plus new homes on an already overloaded infrastructure, Doctors, Dentist, Schools, Transport etc.

With regard to the empty shops at present, this is as much a result of the current economic crises and the nearby out of town shopping at Tesco's and Sainsbury at Rayleigh Weir. This could be helped with lower business rates and provision of some free parking at the library car park.

Traffic lights at the Spa/Woodlands Road junction, with no right turn into Woodlands Road would just move the problem up to Hockley Rise. We were told that when Nestuda Way was built that this would relieve the traffic through Hockley so why should we believe everything we are told.

Just putting new shops does not guarantee that you will:-

1 Find shopkeepers to take them on
2 Find sufficient customers to use them
3 Inviting Tesco to open in the VILLAGE and in time they would force the closure of the independent shops we have now.

The village is as much about the community, lets not turn it into a concrete jungle unmder the guise of improvements. Please let us have more consultation time.

We hope you will consider our views/objections, having lived in the village fo over 30 years and our now married children alslo live in Hockley because of the community/facilities. We appreciate the chance to make Hockley an attractive place but not just with more traffic and a larger supermarket.

3.3.11Traffic currently well controlled at Plumberow Avenue traffic lights. I think conjestion would be increased if station parking is moved to the South side.

My wife and I strongly object to the proposal to expand Hockley Village into Hockley Town by reason of the following points:

1. No notification of this scheme to us, as residents, which we believe is invalidated and therefore illegal. Apart from a possible mention in March in the 'Rochford District Matters' after 31 March 09 - which would be far too late in the scale of things.

2. Freedom of Information Act has been totally ignored and consultation on the project should be deferred until all residents and traders ahve the information and be able to respond.

3. We do not want or need a town square as Hockley already has a spirit and is much loved by its residents.

4. Larger shopping than that which already exists is not wanted or required by all Hockley residents.

5. Spa Road has a few period buildings, remaining from the 19th Century, which enhance the village 'feel' and should be preserved.

6. Plans to allow 3 to 4 story building along the Spa Road would destroy the village atmosphere.

7. The trading estate at Eldon Way is excellent in providing small businesses and work from local people. The addition of 'CJ's' and 'Monkey Business' is vital for our young and teenage residents.

8. Shops and homes in the village will be subject to compulsory purchase orders. This will bring HOckley to a standstill and causing 'development blight'! We are very happy with existing shops and have no need for a larger store/supermarket.

9. Hockley cannot possibly accommodate another 200 homes. All Hockley residents know that we are at saturation point already: Busy roads, queues at the surgeries, no NHS facility at the dentists, insufficient parking, packed trains during the rush hours, no buses (as these have been reduced).

10. Why are these proposals being pushed through if the time scale is supposed to be '20 years down the line?

Local shops should be given a chance in these economic times when things are difficult, by a reduction in the business rates.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am the Catholic Parish Priest of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I have been a resident of Hockley for most of my 38 years and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Rochford District Council, I am writing to you regarding the 'Hockley Area Action Plan'.

I would like to take this opportunity to have my views heard a a trader of Hockley.

Village.
I have worked in Hockley for 23 years now so I think I know the area quite well. I would like to see the village stay a village, it looks like you are trying to make it a mini town.

My own business.
I am aware on one of your plans, you are going to move our shops forward. I would not like to be right on the pathway as many of my elderly customers arrive on mobility scooters. Also my own car has its own parking space next to my shop. I also hope none of my loyal customers take their custom elsewhere. This does concern me while all this upheaval is going on. Would you be in a position to compensate.

Local Shops
While Hockley is being demolished, where are all the local shoppers going to shop? Especially the elderly. I hope all the shoppers return to Hockley and don't find it easier to shop elsewhere. Hockley may become a ghost town.

Supermarket
Yes I think Hockley should have a slightly bigger supermarket, with more choice. But please not Tescos. They have a very big store only five minutes away in a car or a no. 18 bus ride.

Traffic congestion
Traffic is going to be a nightmare. Have you been through Hockley between 8-9am and 4-6pm? Having traffic lights and a one way system will not help the congestion. It's already congested now.

Housing
This is another add to congestion to the roads in Hockley. Also the doctors, dentists and schools in Hockley; there is no places available.

Please take all our views into consideration, or have you already made your minds up? We are all trying to make a real honest living at the end of the day.

I look forward to hearing from yourselves soon.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I have been a resident of Hockley for most of my 38 years and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

With regard to the Hockley Area Action Plan, I would like to first strongly object to the fact that all the residents of Hockley were not informed of these propoals, only a few of them were aware of what was being planned and I myself only found out from a friend yesterday.

The residents of Hockley refer to it as a village not a town so any changes should reflect how the population feel about the area in which they live. If you want to create a focal point then I suggest you reinstate the village green that Hockley once had in the centre of the village.

I feel it is not necessary to knock down the whole of the north side of Spa Road, this area includes small businesses that have been in Hockley for many years and give Hockley its character they create the village feeling that the residents have, we need to retain our post office, newsagents chemist and small businesses these are what makes Hockley what it is and that is a Village.

What village has a very large store occupying one whole side of the shopping area? Thi s is not in keeping with the rest of Hockley where there is a variety of different stores.

The proposed store on the corner of Bramerton Road is far too close to the Spa junction, I feel this is dangerous and will create even more problems with the traffic trying to exit Bramerton Road. This was one of the main reasons that Bramerton Road was kept as a no through road in the first place and what you propose would be even worse with not only cars but large lorries trying to gain access to and exit from the road, it is bad enough with the few lorries that deliver to Potters at the moment. This proposal needs to be reconsidered very carefully with road safety in mind. How about building your large store in Eldon Way instead?

The traffic through the village is already at saturation point and we do not need even more cars and lorries on our roads that are still only the same width as when they were used by horse and cart.

Our schools and surgeries are already at breaking point and this needs to be taken into consideration before it is too late.

So basically my views are I Say No to your action plan it is a plan for disaster for the village of Hockley and all the residents should be consulted before this does any further.

We are concerned about the proposals put forward and the lack of information sent out by the Council. We would also like to point out this is a village and not a town as stated in your proposal.

We object most strongly to demolishing all our shops, and compulsory purchasing small businesses. We also object to selling a large section to one of the high street supermarkets with a car park next to a school. This will leave us without a selection of shops including a bank, solicitors and post office.

The new health centre, which in principal is a good idea, could not possibly cover the whole of Hockley. In view of this we would hope you would not close the Greensward Surgery.

Regarding the Eldon Way Industrial Estate, it should be left alone since it gives local employment and leisure facilities. It could be detrimental to light industries if compulsory purchased.

Hockley cannot support a large housing development because there is no infrastructure to cope with this. Our schools are full to capacity and there are not enough doctors and NHS dentists to look after young families coming into the area. The traffic is at a maximum and more housing will only put extra stress on the roads and we would end in grid lock! If a supermarket is allowed to be built on the corner of Bramerton Road with a car park at the rear, all traffic in and out turning right could be potentially dangerous in view of the junction nearby.

The creation of a town square or village green needs careful consideration since either could be subjected to vandalism.

Lastly, we do not like compulsory purchase orders being held over peoples homes.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Document

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

1. General comments

I have only just been made aware of this consultation by the action of local residents. I have not seen any information from the council concerning the plan. There appears to have been an almost complete reliance on the Internet to provide information which precludes many people from participating (This risk is recognised in the Statement of Community Involvement) and which is in stark contrast to the publicity surrounding the development of Southend Airport where we received a variety of circulars to households. This apparent secrecy is bound to raise concerns amongst those living in the area.

The options on which this paper is based must be questionable as they have only come from the Placecheck which was conducted via the website and from the Citizens panel. Whilst I am sure any comments made by those involved have been honestly provided they cannot be said to represent the wide cross section of residents in the area. There should have been much wider public engagement before this paper was published including open public meetings, and involvement of the parish council and other community groups. This early engagement as I understand is one of the key elements of the Government guidance for producing local plans.

The paper contains a number of 'jargon' terms - for example, 'retail offer' (page 11) 'fine grained scale' (page 14) 'collector road' (page 16), 'limited permeability' (Page 22). This causes some confusion trying to work out what is being proposed (and again is contrary to the SCI) and gives the impression that the document has been produced as an academic exercise by people who have just come from the latest planning course.

The paper contains a number of factual inaccuracies. For example it repeatedly refers to Mount Crescent when I believe it means Plumberow Avenue. It suggests that the pavements in Hockley are in poor repair when they were refurbished only last year.

It also makes a number of assertions for which no evidence is given and in my view are inaccurate. For example it asserts that the junction of Main Road and Spa Road is the main focus for the village. This depends on what you mean by the focus. In my view the place where most people meet and stop to talk is along Spa Road. It suggests that pedestrian crossings are poor at the main road/Spa Road junction. There are in fact 2 crossings within a few yards of the roundabout and I have never encountered any problems with using them in all the years I have been here. It suggests that the 'signalised' junction between Plumberow Avenue and Greensward Lane has safety issues, but doesn't define what these are or give any evidence in terms of accident statistics.

You mention spatial planning in the opening remarks. My understanding of this is the need to take a wide of all aspects that are effected by the development. You have recognised some aspects in terms of economic prosperity and touched on issues like local health centres. You do not however appear to considered the impact of your proposals on local schools, the impact on other services such as the Police and Fire services or the impact of this greater population on the wider road systems feeding into Hockley.

However, my main concern is the continual reference to Hockley as a town. It is not. It is a village, albeit an expanding one and as your 'Placecheck' told you the village feel is something that is greatly valued by local residents. Creating a town is not something that is needed for Hockley; there are already towns close by in Rayleigh and Southend. The requirements for a village for the future are something quite different and for example don't include an influx of High Street multiples. Also although we have some 3 storey developments in the village at present we do not want this to be the model for the future and certainly not buildings 4 storeys or more.

As a final point many of the apparent problems identified in the report are a direct result of council decisions over previous years. For example the poor road junction between Station Road and the railway station is a result of planning decisions taken. I also believe the reason so many shops are closed or have been taken over by Charity shops is because of the burden of high business rates. Now I am sure these decisions were taken on the basis of best available information at the time, however, it highlights the need for flexibility to take decisions on a case by case basis. Whilst I accept that an overall long term strategy is a useful framework, it cannot be produced without consideration of the detailed realities of local decision making.

2. Specific comments

The following table makes specific comments relating to individual options in the paper.

Page 10 Table 2 - There seems to be an obsession here and elsewhere with layout and structure. It must be remembered that the character of many of our historic towns and villages relies on such 'quirkiness', rather than the neat ordered design of straight lines and geometric shapes so often seen in an artists impression.

Page 16 para 2.6.4 - I am not sure the off street parking mentioned here is actually official (I assume it is the space between the Factory Shop and the Shoeshop). If you are mentioning this free parking then you should also consider the parking available behind Somerfields and the (former) Alldays shops. I certainly agree that on street and other free parking are vital to the future prosperity of the village.

Page 22 Para 2.9 - I disagree with many of the statements here and as mentioned above they are based on unfounded assertions and lack of real knowledge. Specifically:
• There is not a poor range of retail outlets. We have a supermarket, post office and Pharmacy, bakers, butchers, greengrocers, dry cleaners, hardware store and various others
• The fact that the 'employment land' (I assume Eldon Way) doesn't relate to the village is not important. It has the potential to provide local employment which again is vital to the prosperity of the village.
• As above, the fact that the form and structure is unco-ordinated and has a 'weak' building line is not an issue for residents. It adds to the character of the village. I also disagree that the space is cluttered.
• As mentioned I don't agree that the junction of Plumberow Avenue and Greensward Lane is hazardous.
• I don't agree that the number of pedestrian crossings is poor. There are 3 in the main area of the plan and it is not difficult to cross at other points if you are reasonably fit and aware; traffic volumes are not so great outside the rush hour.
The real issue that needs to be addressed is how to encourage small local businesses to set up shop in the village and enhance its attractiveness. My personal view is that we should avoid attracting the large national chains and focus on the small specialist shops that cannot be found in Rayleigh or Southend.

Page 24 Para 3.1 - As noted above I do not agree with the persistent use of the term 'Town'. The vision should emphasise the village nature that we want to preserve. The final phrase in your current statement is important - it should be a pleasure to live and work in. I am concerned that the main focus of the plans seems to be to remove the already limited local working opportunities in the village. Not everyone wants to work in an office; we need to ensure there a diverse range of work opportunities for local people.

Page 24 Para 3.2 - I disagree with the proposal for a new square at the heart of the village. The benefit of the current 'ribbon' nature of the village means that people can meet along the length of the shopping parade. Creating a focus will risk concentrating this in a very small space and shops further away will be at a distinct disadvantage. We have already seen the decline of shops further up Main Road as people focus their attention on the Spa Road shops.
There is a presumption that the land in Eldon Way is not being used appropriately and would have more value under alternative use. As far as I can see the only people who would realise any increase in value would be the current land owners who would see their assets rise as they are sold for housing. Local residents would simply see greater strain on the existing infrastructure and services. I reiterate my view that a key objective must be to create an environment that will attract new businesses to the area that will offer a wide range of employment opportunities and attract visitors to the village. Have you considered encouraging the establishment of a series of small 'craft shops' on the estate?

Page 28 Para 3.3 Potential Sites - I am not sure why there is a need for a new foodstore on Sites A1 to A3 given the existing Somerfield Store. If you are suggesting that a larger store is needed that would attract people to do their weekly shopping then you would have to provide adjacent car parking which doesn't seem to feature in your options.

As mentioned before, in relation to sites B to G I disagree that the Eldon Way industrial use is not appropriate. What evidence do you have to support this assertion other than it seems to be prime residential land for a developer?

In relation to sites J and K there doesn't seem to be any proposal for the shops on the south side of Spa Road other than those from the Factory shop to the Hairdressers. What is proposed for shops the other way (towards the Spa)?

I cannot understand why you consider sites L and M to be 'cluttered and unco-ordinated'. There is a mix of shops, offices, the library and surgery as well as the car park and day centre.

Your assertion in para 3.3.10 that 'improvements to the quality of the public realm are required' needs firstly to be expressed in plain English and secondly to be justified.

Page 29 Para 3.4 Options 1.1 and 1.2 - Again I disagree with the need for a new village square. Not only is there no justified need, there is a risk that it will further alter the balance of the village to the detriment of shops further away.

I accept that some of the buildings along Spa Road are in need of refurbishment or replacement, but this should be done with due consideration to the 'village' atmosphere required. New units should be small and available on terms that will attract new small businesses. National chains should be discouraged from moving in.

The proposal for a new footway between the proposed community hub and Spa Road risks splitting shops beyond there from the rest of the village. It is no great distance to walk round the existing road into the village.

It seems bizarre to propose new public toilets at the station (para 3.4.7); surely they should be close to the main shops?

Real time bus information would be useful if the transport authorities can be persuaded to invest in it - the technology is already well proven. However, given the recent reduction in bus services it seems unlikely they will want to make the investment. The station already provides upto date train times. What might be useful would be to integrate bus and train services and provide common ticketing but I suspect that is beyond the capability of the council - it certainly seems difficult for national government to achieve!

As mentioned before I am not convinced that the quality of pavements and street furniture is as major issue as suggested here.

Page 33 Para 3.5 options 2.1 and 2.2 - This section contains no detail about proposals for sites D, E or F and yet this a distinct variation from the options 1.1 and 1.2. From the colour coding I assume this is to be residential accommodation. The concern here must be the limited access to and from this new estate onto the Spa Road and the increase in traffic arising from the new houses and flats. (I assume the area marked 1 on the map is pedestrian access only)

Para 3.5.4 suggest that sites A1, A2 and A3 would provide scope to accommodate any displaced employment use. If I understand correctly the proposals for these sites are shops and offices, not the sort of employment use currently in Eldon Way. Also if it were possible to accommodate some relocating businesses this would surely be at the expense of business already operating in Spa Road?

Page 36 Para 3.6 Options 3.1 and 3.2 - The proposal in Option 3.1 for a village green is attractive but I wonder whether it would simply become an extension of garden space for those living in the proposed new flats. It is effectively in a cul de sac and probably would not be used by other local residents. It also begs the question of how the 'value' of the land can be met by such a proposal.

The proposal to increase the number of flats is a concern. The village needs to provide a good mix of accommodation to ensure a diverse population. There have been a number of developments of flats in recent years and the balance needs to switch to providing more family accommodation. Otherwise the village will sink even further into a dormitory town with young professionals commuting to town every day and no one using the village facilities.

The proposal to have no surface parking also takes no account of the realities of visitors to people in the new houses and flats. They will expect to be able to park outside or nearby. Will underground car parks enable them to do this?

Page 39 para 3.7 - Without reiterating the points above I do not think any of the options particularly well founded. What is a slight concern is that the paper is written as though a number of decisions have already been made. Those responsible for taking the plan forward must take an open and honest view of comments made in the consultation and accept that previous ideas may not be the best way forward.

However I accept that there is a need for some planning framework to inform future developments in the village. I do not agree with the wholesale redevelopment of the Eldon Way estate but I can see a need for some redevelopment along Spa Road. Whatever development is proposed must reflect the village nature of Hockley as its residents want. Therefore shops, restaurants etc must be focused on small local businesses providing facilities that are unique to the village.

However, the planning framework of itself is of little value. The Council cannot deliver the plan without the support of businesses who can see benefits in coming to Hockley. Therefore the plan must show how the council can encourage the sort of businesses that are needed either directly through business rates or indirectly by providing access to other funding and support for new business.

Page 46 Transport options Main Road/Spa Road Junction - I disagree with the assertions made about the existing Main road/Spa Road junction. In particular the view that the Main Road/Southend Road is the dominant route. I believe that the traffic merges and exits from a variety of routes and is therefore ideally suited to a roundabout solution rather than traffic lights. I believe that traffic lights would increase congestion by forcing traffic to wait when it would other wise be able to move and also even if the right turn to Woodlands Road were prohibited there would still be increased congestion from traffic turning right from Southend Road to Spa Road. So in answer to your first question on page 47 I would suggest you leave the existing roundabout solution in place.

I cannot understand you comment about hostility at the junction and cannot see how this may have caused buildings to be set back from the street. Do you think they live in fear of being confronted by an angry lorry and creep away from the road overnight?

The concern over pedestrian crossings at this junction is unfounded. Indeed the courtesies shown by drivers to pedestrians is one of the pleasant things about living in the village. I rarely have to wait more than a few seconds before someone will stop and let me cross. As soon as you put a set of lights in place you will lose this and you will also run the risk of people dashing across the road when they think they can make it.

I disagree with your proposal to prohibit right turns into Woodlands Road even if only at certain times. Such a move would increase traffic along Hockley Rise and Kilnwood Avenue which is already heavily congested particularly at school times. Furthermore I don't think the existing roundabout creates a great problem. There may be some confusion when traffic from main Road signals a right turn and then goes down Southend Road but traffic is moving slowly and there is little danger of accidents.

Page 47 Transport options - Southend Road - Although this is subtitled Southend Road it seems to only discuss Spa Road.

I am not sure the width of the pavement opposite Bramerton Road is a major concern, but I can't see how straightening the road would improve matters. Rather it would seem you would have to create a kink in the road to take space from the opposite pavement. Also if you straightened the road to any extent you create more problems at the Main Road/Spa Road Junction.

Similarly I cannot see the lack of pavement near Meadow Way a problem - I don't recall seeing anyone trying to walk along that side of the road.

As I disagree with the need for a new square I don't see the need to relocate bus stops. The only issue for siting bus stops is that to ensure the buses can park without blocking through traffic as has been done recently with the stop outside the (former) Alldays.

If I understand your maps correctly there is already a suitable pedestrian crossing on Spa Road. Are you proposing a second crossing?

I cannot comment on the proposal for new 'side road entry treatments' as I have no idea what you are talking about.

By indented parking bays do you mean parallel to the road as they currently are or 'herringbone' style where you park at an angle. If the latter this will further restrict the width of the road which you have expressed concerns about. If the former then yes I believe there should be on street parking as at present and it should remain free.

Although I disagree with the need for a square, I have no objection to cycle racks being installed to provide additional security, providing they don't obstruct the pavements and 'clutter the public realm'.

Page 48 Station Approach/Spa Road - I agree there are issues at this junction and it is a pity the Council did not act when the development of the flats on the former stationmasters house was being considered.

In para 3.9.9 I am not sure there is a need for sight of the traffic lights and cannot see the relevance of the comment about the roundabout. Indeed it is a useful way of ensuring vehicles can enter and leave the station.

Again I am not sure what is meant in para 3.9.10 by 'side road entry treatments'. You still have traffic coming from a number of different directions competing to turn each and every way. Installation of a double mini roundabout may have some affect in easing the problems of cars and lorries but improving matters for pedestrians is more difficult. The existing pedestrian crossing is too far from the normal routes out of the station. However, moving it any closer to the junction may increase problems with traffic flow and block the side roads.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

Keep your hands of Hockley Village, we love it as it is.

The Planning Department Team where were you on Sunday 19th April, we had one person from the Council and he left half way through the meeting he missed the best part of the meeting.

There were 400 villagers at the meeting at C J Tenpin Bowling Club standing along all sides.

Point 1 It is not easy getting out of our village at certain times the traffic is heavy now.

Point 2 We have lived in Hockley for 40 years. We came hear because it was a quiet place of peace, over the years you have allowed every space to be built on, making Hockley not so quiet and at peace 400 people agreed with me, we are full to capacity. We do not want 250 houses, we have had our quota if you look over the past 10 years. We want to tell the government to pick somewhere else to put 250 houses and 4 people per house 250 cars, we all have cars these days. People are losing their houses every day, lives being destroyed and you are proposing to build 250 houses, these people will not be able to afford.

Point 3 I hear many of these houses are for social housing. We do not want these people in our village. We have worked very hard for years going to work buying our houses looking after our houses, bringing up our children in a great place a village or you would say it has become a small town.

Point 4 Tesco or any other store we think 400 people would hate. We love our small shops.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

I am horrified that vast sums of our money will be used for the proposed re-developments of Hockley. These are not necessary, apart from better parking.

What residents appreciate about Hockley is a compact shopping area where small, retail shops are still able to trade.

We do need traffic lights at the Spa junction - the roundabout is a hazard.

We do need more parking facilities especially at the clinic and sorting office.

The tax we pay would be better spent providing more police protection and road maintenance than unnecessary work proposed. Eldon Way Trading Estate provides work as it stands, so while it could be more attractive, it should remain. Sign posts are needed.

Residents are destroying the country ambiance by paving frontages.

In principle, the new plan for Hockley is good, but when analysed it seems ridiculous for the following reasons-

The idea of knocking down nearly all the old buildings to create a square would completely alter the character of our village. They are the village, and to make a new square is something akin to Basildon. Many small, old-established shops which we know and love would have to relocate and may lose their trade, or be forced to close becuase of the inability to pay what would no doubt be highter rents and rates. If the large supermarket proposed was to be Tesco, any small traders that were left would be killed stone-dead. It woudl not be competition, it would be monopoly, leaving Hockley like a ghost town and altering the feel of the village altogether. We already have some empty shops, so what would be the point of providing more retail units that nobody could afford.

As for more housing in Eldon Way, yes - if you can provide more doctors, dentists, school places ets and magic the increased traffic through the worsening congestion that already exists in Hockley. I have lived in Hockley for many years and have never seen so many new houses being built wherever they can be, so isn't that enough?

It isn't as simple as bulldozing a load of old buildings and making it all shiny and new. It is knocking down tradition and charm and a way of life. It would affect so many people in an adverse way. People need stability and something familiar in their lives and do not always need sweeping changes. These can be unsettling.

It would be a shame to clear it all away as if it had never existed - can you imagine that happening say, in Leigh Broadway? They thrive on tradition, mixing old ways with modern trading. Because of the individuality, people flock there. Hockley has been enhanced with trees and seating, and it is pleasant and interesting. Let's keep it that way, because it is not about resisting change for the sake of it, but about heritage that we do not want to lose.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.

I write in response to the Hockley Area Action Plan Consultation Draft dated January 2009 ("the Consultation Document").

I am a resident of Hockley and will be affected by any proposals agreed upon in the Hockley Area Action Plan. Please see my comments below, firstly regarding the lack of adequate consultation and participation of stakeholders in this consultation procedure, and secondly regarding my initial objections to the proposals in the Consultation Document. Please note that due to the lack of appropriate notice and consultation, I have not been able to address the questions posed in the Consultation Document. I require an extension to the consultation period of, say, 3 months in order to do this.

Failure to ensure adequate participation of stakeholders:

Inappropriate
The method of consultation is inappropriate. There has been no advertisement of the existence of the Consultation Document in the local press except for a passing reference in an article. I have seen no advertisement on non-council owned public notice boards (churches, shopping areas etc). No council organized public meetings have been held in Hockley - although I am led to understand there have been two meetings (one held at an inappropriate hour in the morning) in other towns in the Rochford area. The vast majority of stakeholders only found out about the Consultation Document due to a private resident's leafleting campaign in the last week or so.

Not from the outset
As I have only very recently discovered the existence of the Consultation Document I do not feel that I have been consulted from the outset of this transaction. The first well-attended meeting on this matter was organized by a private resident and held on Sunday 19 April. The deadline for comments and submissions is 30 April. There is therefore insufficient time to give any meaningful feedback.

Not transparent
Due to the lack of public awareness of the Consultation Document I do not feel that the process has been transparent. Were it not for the private resident's leafleting campaign I would not have been aware of the existence of the Consultation Document in time.

There has also been a failure to give any details of the 'research' quoted in the Consultation Document (i.e "Interactive web-based consultation" and "Placecheck Initiative") or information on where these pieces of research can be inspected.

Not accessible
Even after finding out about the Consultation Document from the private resident's leafleting campaign and learning more at a public meeting on 19 April, I have found it difficult to access the Consultation Document and associated information, as although these are on the Rochford DC website a login is required. I have therefore only been able to access the document by a) divulging personal information to a website, b) making a special trip to the library, or c) contacting the council directly and waiting for the document to arrive in the post. Considering the short timescale already mentioned, the loss of a day or two waiting for the post is critical.

No clear plan
I do not feel that my involvement has been clearly planned for by the council. Due to the failures in the consultation process I do not feel that I have been integral in the process of stakeholder participation in respect of the Consultation Document.

No proportionality of consultation
The contents of the Consultation Document have enormous effects on residents of Hockley and other stakeholders. Demolishing business and residential premises through compulsory purchase orders, large-scale high-density housing, significantly altering the geography of the village by creating a square and creating large car parks on green spaces will affect everyone in the village. I would therefore expect the scale of the awareness raising of the Consultation Document to be much greater, including at the very least a mail-shot to residents and presentations and public meetings at accessible times within Hockley in order to take stakeholders' feedback.

Initial objections to the Hockley Area Action Plan:

Despite the lack of adequate consultation described above, please find my initial comments on the contents of the Consultation Document. Because of the short timescale, I have been unable to address the questions posed in yellow boxes. I request that the council provides a further 3 months in order to have a meaningful consultation on the Consultation Document.

Unsustainable
There is no evidence in the Consultation Document that a Sustainability Appraisal has been taken into account. All plans put forward in the Consultation Document would appear to be manifestly unsustainable for the following reasons:

1. Increased housing - by creating so many new homes impossible stress would be placed on the current infrastructure. Without destroying local green spaces in the village it would create massive stresses on parking, schools, medical facilities and other local amenities.

2. Changing the feel of the village high-street - the focus of the new development will draw the centre of the village away from the junction of Spa Road and Woodlands Road. This will detriment the current feel of the village and have a negative impact on local businesses.

3. Destruction of part of the high-street - in order to create the square in the village, a number of residential and commercial properties could be compulsorily purchased and destroyed. There are thriving businesses currently in situ whose destruction would be a loss to the village.

4. Increased traffic - the road system is already running at full capacity. The creation of extra traffic due to the proposed extra residents and the supermarket site would have catastrophic effects.

5. Increased congestion - the creation of a supermarket would create problems as there does not appear to be a plan to enable deliveries by HGVs. The current volume of deliveries to Somerfield and Alldays already creates havoc. If there were a larger supermarket site, these problems would be compounded and there would be unmanageable levels of congestion.

Justification and effectiveness

Seeking Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) over peoples' homes and businesses is extremely serious. As a stakeholder in Hockley I do not believe that the village should have the sort of square suggested in the Consultation Document. I do not believe that the Eldon Way estate should be replaced by high-density housing as there are many businesses and amenities serving villagers' needs in the estate. I therefore do not believe that there is any justification for the council retaining the plans for CPOs in the Area Action Plan.

I do not believe that the need for CPOs has been founded on a robust or credible evidence base - the online surveys quoted in the Consultation Document do not warrant the destruction of peoples' homes and businesses. There are certainly alternatives that extra time in consultation will bring to the fore.

Timely progress

The Area Action Plan will run until 2021. If intention to apply for CPOs remains in the final Area Action Plan, residents' and businesses' properties will be effectively blighted until such time as the CPOs are actually granted and enforced by the council. If the Area Action Plan does include CPOs I believe that these should be sought as soon as possible by the council with a long-stop date of, say, 2011 in order to protect the personal interests of those affected.

Sustainable community strategy

As mentioned above, it would not seem that the Consultation Document has had proper (or any) regard to a sustainable community strategy.

In summary, I do not believe that the council has fulfilled its duty to ensure stakeholder participation in the Consultation Document. I would like the council to go through further, meaningful consultation. This aside, I do not believe that the proposals are sustainable, proportionate or justified.

I strongly object to all proposals in the Consultation Document and wish to participate fully in the ongoing process of stakeholder involvement in the planning of an Area Action Plan.