3.6 DEVELOPMENT OPTION 3.1 AND 3.2

Major Issues facing Hockley Town Centre

- Poor variety of quality specialist shops and the amount of empty shops due to high rates / rents causing residents to shop elsewhere
- Shabby condition of shops, commercial premises, residential units, pavements, seating, bus shelters, and shop car parks
- Inadequate facilities for people with disabilities e.g. access to shops and service providers, appropriate pavements, kerbs and parking spaces
- Lack of leisure facilities and family restaurants
- Lack of youth facilities
- Traffic congestion at all main road junctions in the vicinity of the town centre, including Folly Lane, Buckingham Road, Hockley Rise, Station Approach / Eastern Road, Plumberow Avenue, and in particular the Spa roundabout
- Inadequate parking, especially close to retail and commercial premises, causing residents to shop elsewhere
- Poor bus service (infrequent and unreliable) and wrong bus stop locations

Potential Opportunities for Hockley Town Centre

- Relocate industry from Eldon Way Estate to proposed new Business Parks in Cherry Orchard Way or Rayleigh to create the space (directly and indirectly) to develop roads, shops, commercial units, youth facilities, leisure facilities, restaurants, and residential units (2 storey maximum), with appropriate parking facilities (possibly underground) and open green spaces, in both Spa Road and Eldon Way Estate, whilst providing new jobs. Eldon Way Estate must not become solely a housing estate
- Evaluate opportunities for redevelopment of the Foundry Industrial Estate
- After industry has been relocated, construct a new healthcare centre (not polyclinic), with free parking facilities, on Eldon Way Estate (or alternatively on Southend Road) for Hockley and Hawkwell West residents only
- Demolish the clinic and replace by residential units (maximum 2 storey) or retail / commercial units with apartments above. Transfer clinic functions to GP's and/or new healthcare centre. Alternatively, replace the clinic with a new healthcare centre (with adequate free parking)
- Relocate Royal Mail sorting office to Eldon Way Estate or the proposed new Business Park in Cherry Orchard Way to provide space for a market square (weekly farmers market) with retail and commercial units around the square, and for parking purposes (as per Rochford market square)
- Retain current supermarket with improved parking or relocate similar size supermarket (no more than 25% larger in order to protect smaller shops) to Eldon Way Estate with parking (free or refundable) and deliveries facilities (possibly underground)
- Reduce rates / rents to encourage quality, speciality, and varied village type shops, whilst providing new jobs
- Modernise shops, commercial and residential units whilst maintaining a village character, and considering people with disabilities. Modernise pavements and kerbs, including features for people with disabilities. Relocate bus stop from Alldays to a more suitable and safer location
- Construct a relief road to stop traffic using Hockley as a through route, especially with the additional traffic due to core strategy proposals, airport growth and development of new Business Parks. If a relief road is not feasible, then evaluate alternative proposals for the Spa roundabout and crossings to eliminate congestion, such as traffic lights with a filter lane into Spa Road
- Construct a new road through the back of the shops on north side of Spa Road and into a modernised Eldon Way Estate. Provide a new improved junction for Eldon Way due to increased traffic numbers
- Evaluate the benefits of a double roundabout at Station Approach / Eastern Road or filter lanes to improve traffic flow
- Improve parking at the back of shops and commercial units on the north side of Spa Road and possibly make use of space for parking if Royal Mail is relocated
- Provide a bus / train interchange and pull in area, plus a car drop off / pick up area at Hockley Station
- Provide a reliable and frequent bus service to encourage the use of public transport to reduce the number of cars on the roads and to support local shops

The best solution would be to have a more modern, compact retail centre, including a square and a slightly larger supermarket (no more than 25% larger), with free (or refundable) parking. Shops to complement (not compete with) supermarket.
The preferred option would be to expand Spa Road shopping area to the north, into the south side of Eldon Way estate, with shops, leisure and parking, by removing the buildings between Alldays and Somerfields.
If a town square was built, consider holding a farmer's market.

More off-street car parking in town centre if shops are to be revived.
Use gardens behind shops in Spa Road, use Alldays carpark and perhaps demolish Alldays to make more parking and better access.
Perhaps underground parking.
Remove industrial buildings on south side of Eldon Way estate to give more space for retail and leisure - perhaps a town square with underground parking.
Make carpark behind library more convenient by putting a walkway through the church grounds from Southend Road to Spa Road and moving the zebra crossing to line up with it.
Use old woodyard in Main Road as carpark for isolated shops.

Develop Eldon Way estate for housing, retail and leisure. This would have to pay for the whole redevelopment of Hockley town centre.
Make sure there are enough jobs from new business in town centre to replace industry.

The Royal Mail site would be useful for retail or parking but only if they are prepared to move elsewhere in Hockley. We don't want to lose jobs.

The clinic is run down. It should be rebuilt as a small Primary Care Centre to work with existing doctors and with own parking.
A large new polyclinic in Hockley would damage the GP's surgeries and cause too much traffic.

Hockley town centre is in direct competition with supermarkets and out of town trading estates where there is ample free parking and every kind of shopping and services available in one spot.

To compete, Hockley must have a bigger and better range of retail services, with a more appealing environment and more free parking.

There is a large enough population in Hockley to support a bigger shopping offer. Also there is a large enough population in Hockley to support a bigger shopping offer. Also there is plenty of passing traffic, some of which could be persuaded to stop and shop. It would not necessarily lead to more traffic.

A more frequent and reliable bus service is essential.

The best solution would be to have a more modern, compact retail centre, including a square and slightly larger supermarket (no more than 50% larger), with free (or refundable) parking. Shops to complement (not compete with) supermarket.

The preferred option would be to expand Spa Road shopping area to the north, into the south side of Eldon Way estate, with shops, leisure and parking, by removing the buildings between Alldays and Somerfields.

If a town square was built, consider holding a farmer's market.

More off-street car parking in town centre if shops are to be revived.
Use gardens behind shops in Spa Road, use Alldays car park and perhaps demolish Alldays to make more parking and better access.
Perhaps underground parking.
Remove industrial buildings on south side of Eldon Way estate to give more space for retail and leisure - perhaps a town square with underground parking.
Make car park behind library more convenient by putting a walkway through the church grounds from Southend Road to Spa Road and moving the zebra crossing to line up with it.
Use old wood yard in Main Road as car park for isolated shops.

Remove some of the traffic from Spa Road by building a new road from Stantons to Eldon Way behind the shops in Spa Road.
Spa roundabout is too busy with traffic but the real cause is that the roads leading to it are overcrowded. Unless they can be improved or traffic can be diverted onto other routes which bypass Hockley, it is difficult to improve the Spa roundabout.

Develop Eldon Way estate for housing, retail and leisure. This would have to pay for the whole redevelopment of Hockley town centre.

Make sure there are enough jobs from new business in town to replace industry.

The Royal Mail site would be useful for retail or parking buy only if they are prepared to move elsewhere in Hockley. We don't want to lose jobs.

The clinic is run down. It should be rebuilt as a small Primary Care Centre to work with existing doctors and with own parking.

A large new polyclinic in Hockley would damage the GP's surgeries and cause too much traffic.

Create a bus/train interchange with associated junction improvements.

Who pays for these developments.
What are the costs.
Can landlords afford to pay for improving their property.
Can tenants afford the rents for new or improved properties.
It seems unlikely that national or local government will supply funding.
A private developer would only be interested if he could develop the whole of Eldon Way estate. He could be made to pay for improvements to the infrastructure and for developments in Spa Road in return for permission to develop Eldon Way estate.
If piecemeal development is allowed there will be no funding for infrastructure or other improvements.

It is essential that Hockley residents are kept informed as developments go ahead, perhaps with an annual report from RDC.

Underground car parking has been unsuccessful in the past, and may be so in the future.

Having rightly addressed the issue of exposed 'backs' of properties to the rear of the library, these two plans create exposed backs for the properties of d1,d2,d3, g1,g2,g3. Given that the last village green was built over, how long will it be before the new one in option 3.1 is built over as in 3.2?

Any redevelopment of Eldon Way mut be supported by appropriate road access improvements

I would survey the companies on the Eldon Way to find out if they would be happy to relocate. The new companies in the leisure sector may find their customers are not prepared to travel to the new location.

I am writing to express concern at the massive scale of the Hockley development plan. All the options would be disasterous for the character of Hockley. I think the Planning department should send a representative to a public meeting, to answer questions.

I think development Option 3.1 would be the most preferred option. As it contains a lot for all concerned - and be even a little better with a one way system around Eldon Way!

3.6.2.Having a village green could be a nice idea but major development of Eldon Way, to contain additional housing etc etc as undesirable - there is no explanation of how additional traffic can be successfully dealt with, for example, or where children would school or how infrastructre generally could support. The feasiblity of accommodating any such changes looks dubious and undesirable to me.

If the current run down Foundry Estate wanted to relocate into upgraded units in Eldon Way it could be replaced with housing and flats in keeping with those already in this area. There would also be the future possibility to expand this area into the adjacent south east corner of Eldon Way without the need for access from Eldon Way.

The best solution would be to have a more modern, compact retail centre, including a square and a slightly larger supermarket (no more than 25% larger), with free (or refundable) parking. Shops to complement (not compete with) supermarket.
The preferred option would be to expand Spa Road shopping area to the north, into the south side of Eldon Way estate, with shops, leisure and parking, by removing the buildings between Alldays and Somerfields.
If a town square was built, consider holding a farmer's market.

More off-street car parking in town centre if shops are to be revived.
Use gardens behind shops in Spa Road, use Alldays carpark and perhaps demolish Alldays to make more parking and better access.
Perhaps underground parking.
Remove industrial buildings on south side of Eldon Way estate to give more space for retail and leisure - perhaps a town square with underground parking.
Make carpark behind library more convenient by putting a walkway through the church grounds from Southend Road to Spa Road and moving the zebra crossing to line up with it.
Use old woodyard in Main Road as carpark for isolated shops.

Develop Eldon Way estate for housing, retail and leisure. This would have to pay for the whole redevelopment of Hockley town centre.
Make sure there are enough jobs from new business in town centre to replace industry.

The Royal Mail site would be useful for retail or parking but only if they are prepared to move elsewhere in Hockley. We don't want to lose jobs.

The clinic is run down. It should be rebuilt as a small Primary Care Centre to work with existing doctors and with own parking.
A large new polyclinic in Hockley would damage the GP's surgeries and cause too much traffic.

HOCKLEY AREA ACTION PLAN - CONSULTATION ISSUES AND OPTIONS 13.2.09 TO 30.4.09

Thank you for opportunity to comment on the above. I object to the Hockley Area Action as follows, except for "Preferred Alternatives" in final paragraph.

FOREWORD

In spite of above dates, there has been no formal notification to residents/traders of such a vast scheme during February, March.

- Arrival of Rochford District Matters Sunday 29.3.09, with small advert on 2nd page, two thirds through period, leaves little time for concerned locals to come together.
- Claims are it is: 1 on RDC website - none will seek unless they are aware; 2 newspapers - few buy.
- RDC Consultation Strategy has not been applied.
- Core Strategy Preferred Option, October 2008, hid indication of devastation now proposed, except to agree Hockley (a village, with local needs) cannot compete in scale with larger nearby retail centres.
- No 'residents' were told of "Placecheck" in February 2008 of such vast proposals on their behalf. "Citizens Panel" didn't include them.
- Central Area Committee, held rotationally: Hockley, Hawkwell, Hullbridge, is suddenly replaced: Rayleigh, Rawreth, Rochford, Hullbridge. So Hockley didn't know HAAP presentation was at Hullbridge. I learn it was attended by 2 RDC Councillors, HRA and Parish Plan Chairmen, 2 Hullbridge residents. By comparison, large Hawkwell green belt housing quota was in publicised Core Strategy - residents had time to organise meetings, attend Area Committee, make views public.

Therefore I object to inadequate HAAP notification, clearly intended low key, so few will effectively object. Director said recently planning procedures should end 2012, in time for end of recession. Exactly - HAAP is done and dusted behind closed doors.

GENERAL OBJECTION

1. Introduction

PPS6 says "Town Centres often areas - significant change is planned". EEDA requires 4,600 homes for the District. I didn't think "Aspects of Hockley" needed regeneration, apart from developer driven eyesores. An unused "employment area" could be used for housing, but much Hockley trading site is locally viable; and wholesale demolition of shopping area is unjustified where most shops are successful. If the housing is needed, Planning Services should have thought of that before passing the trading estate, not remove latter now.


1.4.2 Overview of Area

Firstly Hockley is not a town. "Hockley....linear town centre" - naturally, it is a village. Paglesham, Stambridge, etc, are also linear. "Retail in 'town' (village) centre...limited...few multiples....". As a village, with local needs, apart from Somerfields supermarket, Hockley is served by small, local shops. "Multiples" would be surplus to needs.

1.4.6 "little in way of gateway features". "Need for public space within defined centre". A village does not need that; it would also be a collection centre for layabouts and rubbish. We had Spa Meadow in central Hockley, used for football matches, fairs and other local events. The owner offered it to RDC as a village green, for a modest sum. RDC refused to purchase, but allowed consent for a large bungalow estate on it - another of Planning Services' mistakes.

2. THE ISSUES - SUPPOSED CRITICISMS OF HOCKLEY "What you told us" "Placecheck....ensuring views, opinions of local residents...working together. As above we didn't. This doesn't reflect local views of working together.

Answers to "Placecheck initiate"
- "not wide range of shops; too many charity shops, closed down shops, not enough family restaurants, cafes, clothes stores". Only 3 charity ones, well used - Rayleigh has 7; closed down - credit crunch and no free parking; (also have some got wind of your plans and gone?); Cafes - one, well used; family restaurants - 2 well used - do not need more; "Boutique" proposal, clothes - go to Southend - also the young work/buy boutique items in London; there are too many estate agents, only 2 needed, not 7. Clearly the former planning rule of avoiding monopoly is no longer applied.
- "Youth meeting place" - bowling alley, Monkey Business, gym - in Eldon Way trading estate.
- "Development should take place through infilling existing sites/replacing houses with flats". This is the nub. Hockley village of homes/gardens regularly attacked by demolition, replaced by 'chavs' towers', 'town houses, blocks of dubious flats, fought unsuccessfully by residents. Plan is to turn village into over-dense town. Is this "development should be environmentally friendly!!"
- "Cheaper, more frequent public transport" you won't get that, as most people have cars; this is why Arriva cut buses to 2 per hour through Hockley, each way.
- "Toll road" B1013 was one in 18C, with toll house at Spa junction - proving Hockley was already a village, contrary to ideas it didn't start as now till railway arrived end 19C.





2.3.4 URBAN ASSESSMENT OF HOCKLEY TOWN CENTRE (eg what is supposed to be wrong with it)

- "Traffic dominated" Creation of Cherry Orchard bypass - another planning mistake, has directed all S E Essex traffic through B1013 and Lower Road Hockley. Start of 'satnav' has done likewise.
- "buildings a mix of scales" - ancient towns also a mix of scales over time, not uniform, - at least Hockley is a village, with maximum height 2 storey, c.26 feet high.
- "street furniture" no more than necessary and traffic lights will add to it
- "employment area - single route" there is no alternative
- "lacking gateway" Hockley a village
- "good examples of historic buildings...interspersed with recent purpose built development", but, apart from Spa pub, you propose to demolish the few period buildings we have left from Planning Services led demolition. Leave well alone.
- "Mix of uses lacking - supported by..employment area" a contradiction - we have variety of retail.

2.4.4 "..majority of units are...interwar.." wrong. Further down Spa Road there are period houses, as also some remaining in Southend Road. The Meadow Way bungalow estate is 1950s on former village green.

2.5 FORM/STRUCTURE

It is regrettable that formless 1960s buildings have been erected at eg corner of Main/Woodlands Roads, Somerfield block, but varying scale, 2 storey style, set well back from the road, including 19C buildings are suitable for the village.

2.5.3 Community/leisure uses are well integrated with Spa Road.

STREET NETWORK

ECC Highways have underestimated daily vehicle count - in 2005 estimated to be 2000/hour in B1013 at quiet times by their staff. Unless there can be a bypass round Rochford, Hockley/Hawkwell - probably causing more problems in green belt, nil can be done. There is nil you can do about the railway bridge and your now perceived problem with current roundabout in Mount Crescent was another example of bad planning done to accommodate the new flats by the station. The former Station Approach was a level and direct approach to the station. Pedestrians to Plumberow used the station footbridge, as they do now. Off street parking should be free. Reliance on on-street parking is dangerous.

3.1 VISION

Yet more development, or here - regeneration - is ruining the "town's (village's) identity and character". As a village we do not need and have no room for a "new square" - "homes" - this is the problem. Eldon Way industrial estate has settled, well used services. If you aren't happy, you should have thought of that before it was developed. The land might originally have been suitable for some housing - not nearly 200 - but it is too late to erect more than a few here.

Primary Care facility will conflict with 3 local GP surgeries, two of which have been; updated at much cost.

POTENTIAL OPPORTUNIT SITES Sites A1-3 I'm appalled at the proposed demise of successful shops, now blighted with prospect of Compulsory Purchase Order, including at least one family home. Destruction of 19C buildings would be part of systematic erasure of Hockley village. Sites B & C Successful local hardware business and a gym. This is obviously part of the plan to move all to new Rochford 'Saxon' Business Park under the JAAP, where they will fail. The hardware store was planning to expand and take on 14 more staff. The gym is a local community facility.

Sites J & K Successful shops

Sites L & M Successful restaurant and bank buildings. Incidentally the latter replaced in 1970s 2 fine 17C thatched, close board cottages better than anything in Rochford conservation centre, as also nearly a dozen period houses between Hawkwell side Hockley Hill and Spa pub, in 1970s. So much for planning.

The PCT would conflict with recently refurbished GP surgery. If you want regeneration, suggest demolition of 1960s buildings at corner of Main/Woodlands Roads - mainly estate agents - readily disposed of. Dentist could go in eg 19C period building 2nd from left at 'K', currently occupied by estate agent on ground floor, no longer using 1st floor accommodation.

DEVELOPMENT OPTION 1.1, 1.2

New Town Square - Hockley is a village - as argued before, we don't need a square.

Sites B, C It is ok, perhaps to erect apartments (housing) above the hardware store and gym, but not at the expanse of demolishing North side of Spa Road. There is no requirement for a massive supermarket at busy Bramerton/Spa Road junction.

A new PCT could replace estate agents at corner of Main/Woodlands Roads, as suggested above, but would still conflict with GP surgeries. Otherwise A1-3 should be left as it is.

Successful restaurant and library at L1-2 should be left.

A Hall - we have public hall at Bullwood Road, hall facility at Parish Hall opposite Greensward Academy assembly hall is hired for meetings and indoor sports events in evenings, as at all local secondary schools, Hockley Community Centre at Westminster Drive.

There are Youth Facilities at Eldon Way - Gym, Bowling Alley, Monkey Business; Why rebuild library?

Car parking exists, but is chargeable; 'Landscaped footway' is RC Church garden - apart from obvious considerations, this would cause security problems both to the church and adjacent dwelling.

Site J is a successful retail area - residential above would overlook Meadow Way bungalow estate.

Railway station/car park I thought you proposed the car park be moved south of the tracks and to use the current one for housing? - this would be a good idea.

I thought the pavements, etc, in central Hockley had already been updated, etc by Hockley Parish Council 3 years ago?

OPTIONS 2.1/2.2 AND 3.1 AND 3.2

If you plan to sacrifice Eldon Way trading estate for housing, you should have done that in the first place instead of giving consent for industry, then removing it. As it is, there are settled, successful enterprises there:- hardware store, Monkey Business, bowling alley and several more, which thrive on proximity to shopping and residential and serve the community. You proposed to move them, with CPOs, to the new Rochford 'Saxon' Business Park where they will lose business - and so much for the boast of 4700 new jobs provided by the JAAP proposal - just moving jobs from elsewhere!

May be the few empty units could be demolished or converted for apartments (housing).

In Core Strategy H Alternative Option you were against housing for North east Hockley - '..in spite of proximity to centre, station, impact on highway..traffic..through, out of Hockley..along Ashingdon Road...render location unviable'. Here, at 3.2 you propose up to 186 dwellings - surely a contradiction in ideas.

Core Strategy also notes CPOs not acceptable to public - here it is planned to ruin businesses and at least one private home.

3.8 SCALE

Hockley is a village, not a town, which is why 'predominantly..of 2 storey developments', but '..recent developments..increased scale of new building..' - yes, the ones we fought to reduce in height scale on account of harmful impact on existing, and failed. THIS MUST NOT be used as precedent for 'developments of 3, 4 storeys can easily be accommodated...'.

3.9 TRANSPORT

Buildings have always been 'set back from the street' - adds to Hockley character.

Congestion has arisen from development and particularly the Cherry Orchard bypass. Satnav also directs vehicles to B1013. Don't forget also that the Lower Road is also now congested with heavy commercial traffic.

By all means have a 'signalised' junction, though drivers doubt its efficiency, but Woodlands Road closure, traffic redirected to Hockley Rise/Kilnwood Avenue, could be disastrous. Commuters from latter roads cannot exit in the morning and contend with Westerings School run weekdays and Emmanuel Church on Sunday. Recently, a celebrity funeral at the church blocked both sides of Hockley Rise.

It would be a good idea to move the pedestrian crossing to west of Station Road - commuters have hell getting to station from central Hockley - there is opportunity from beside the public footpath to the pavement outside the new flats.

DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

I trust Mrs Becket's (Housing Minister) recent announcement that housing targets must be shelved for foreseeable future for cost reasons may give EEDA and HACA pause before acceding to money requests for this regeneration. You will certainly get resistance to CPOs.

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES

There is no need for wholesale demolition.

There is a need for free parking - the charges at the library car park should be rescinded. More free parking could be provided behind the former Alldays - in fact that could be demolished for access. That way, the local shops would catch the passing trade. It would also counter the fact that outlying supermarkets have free parking - thus starving local shops of business. Much traffic drives through Hockley without stopping.

Hockley is a village with local basic needs - chemist, newsagent, post office, food, hardware, shoemending, haberdashery - larger items and clothes belong in adjacent towns.

In this context the former planning policy of restricting the number of outlets for one facility in a neighbourhood - a monopoly, should be reintroduced - eg Hockley does not need 7 estate agents.

Business rate and rents need to be reduced.

Traffic - increased by too much development and error of opening Cherry Orchard bypass. Unfortunately the only solution now is a further bypass round Rochford/Hockley - but that would also deny further business to Hockley shopping centre - a double trap. One answer would be increase in public transport - but that cannot be achieved in the face of car traffic - another conundrum.

As you are so keen on demolition - 1960s block at corner of Woodlands/Main Roads, possibly Alldays, as suggested before. Alldays and land to its rear could be used for free parking for shops. The Somerfield block is unaesthetic, but must be retained as the shops there are successful. We don't need a Tesco's in addition.

I was going to enter my views on the website but decided this would be easier!

I agree something does need to be done with the centre of Hockley but I feel it could be achieved on a lesser scale and would like to make the following comments:

The idea of a village green sounds great and possibly the simplest solution would be to relocate the Royal Mail sorting office onto the Eldon Way Industrial Estate.

Keep Eldon Way as an Industrial Estate and try to encourage more leisure facilities to come into the empty units. I do not feel new housing there is a good idea.

More litter bins from the station up to the village and the area in general would help with the litter problem as well as more dog waste bins (but they do need to be emptied regularly).

Something does need to be done with the Spa junction. When I moved here 20+ yrs ago the mini roundabout was fine but there is too much traffic now. Traffic Lights are certainly one idea, are there others?

Somehow persuade the freeholders of the existing buildings to keep the properties in a good state of repair!!! Some of the buildings are not the most pleasant to look at but if they were in good order it would make a big difference.

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 public 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 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.

Area Action Plan for Hockley.


In recent weeks I have been talking to many businesses of all types in the Hockley area about the regeneration proposals.

I printed off two copies of the Report and have loaned these out to interested parties.

Most people I spoke to had not read the plan in depth but had picked up information from recent newspaper reports or by word of mouth.

There are many misconceptions mainly involving large supermarkets - Tescos in particular. There is concern over the future of the Alldays store which has been closed down recently.

Many businesses are understandably concerned that any changes may have an adverse affect on their trade.

However there is also an underlying view that there have been very few infrastructure improvements in the Hockley area for many years and that if we are to encourage more shoppers and visitors then we have to improve our offer to customers. We have an excellent community spirit in Hockley which must be fostered by offering a better range of shops and businesses.

We still have a good range of the basic trades here like butchers, bakers, greengrocers, shoe repairs, drycleaners, florists and hair salons. They can only survive and flourish if we have a good stream of shoppers ready to buy locally.

So worn out buildings may need to be improved or replaced so that modern facilities can be provided.

Upgrading the Eldon Way Estate to encourage more leisure and recreational pursuits is a popular proposal.

Adding more housing to Eldon Way is not so well received.

Better access from the village into Eldon Way Estate is a positive need as the two are remote from one another at the moment although in reality back-to-back. Customers need to get from one area to the other more easily.

There is a view that the Library car park in Southend Road is underused due to it's relative remoteness from the main shopping area. Parking for shoppers in Hockley is always a problem.

Although the village does not have a "centre" as such at the moment, no members that I spoke to want to see the Sunrise to Post Office block of shops and flats replaced by a village square.

However if the sorting office was relocated then that space could be used for new businesses.

Many businesses feel that at this time of economic recession they need every possible assistance to survive and prosper during the next few years and the regeneration plan should be part of this.

I object strongly mainly due to possibility of a larger supermarket and car park associated with this option. This is because I believe that the village feel would be under threat and there are enough supermarkets nearby. It will attract extra traffic in to the area causing disruption to locals. This will also badly affect small local business.

Green space adds amenity value and character. Please choose this option if some redevelopment goes ahead.

Using compulsory purchase powers is disruptive to the commercial activities of independent traders and should be discouraged.

Hockley Area Action Plan

Hockley is neither a town or a village...just an unpleasant urban sprawl.

The above mentioned plan is yet another outdated 20th century concept of 'predict and provide' lacking any economic justification...unless you are the developer.

The plan is anti-social. It fails to cater for the housing needs of a growing elderly population as there is no provision for new single storey housing. Of those bungalows built in the 50s and 60s most have now been bastardized with 'rooms in the roof' thus reducing the available housing stock to buy for the mature citizen wishing to downsize because of age-related incapacities.

The proposals will not make life healthier, the overcrowding will make it worse. It will intensify the inequalaties for the elderly who will be subject to covert rationing of the limited health service resources available.

Nor will it help to reduce the level of crime or the fear of crime. On completion of the project crime figures will increase. No mention is made for developing schemes to combat substance misuse including illegal drugs and alcohol.

What about fire safety cover for the additional housing plus retail and industrial units. Of utmost importance is to ensure that retained fire engines can respond to emergencies including the increased risk of a disastrous air accident. I believe the Hockley fire tender is crewed by retained fire fighters on a part time basis who often have other jobs. In order to be available to respond to emergencies retained fire fighters must be within five minutes travel distance of the fire station. Due to work and other commitments they are not always available on this basis. As a result the fire engine will not be available for periods of time. A stand by unit from either Rayleigh or Rochford will not be able to respond quickly due to additional road traffic generated by increased population. It is also difficult to recruit and retain enough part-time firefighters which will impact on the fire and rescue services ability to respond to all emergencies.

Safety is word that has no value to Rochford District Council.

The obese developments proposed will require a high level of additional costly infrastructure to meet the demands of the increased population. The area is already overpopulated and any increase will have serious consequences. The additional costs for roads, sewers, schools etc etc, will place a heavy burden on Council Tax Payers some of whom will only have a limited income source and face severe hardship.

I would point out that Essex and Suffolk Water have already announced price increases above inflation to cover the cost of providing extra capacity in its resevoirs to meet the demands of additional population usage.

As for the proposed 'flats' developments...the City of Leeds went down that road and many remain empty and unsold. The same circumstances apply in Birmingham and other UK cities therefore the proposals outlined for so many 'flats' in Hockley is NOT viable.

Frankly, nobody in their right mind would support this proposal. The whole concept is criminal as we shall all be battery caged humans. Chickens have better welfare standards.

Consultation doesn't work. There is an incesturous relationship between Council officials and Developers that works against concerned public opinion. Examples of maladministration by Rochford District Council are shown below:-

. Failure to observe the regulations contained in the TOWN and COUNTRY PLANNING (General Development Procedure) ORDER 1995.

. Failure to observe the regulations of the TOWN and COUNTRY PLANNING (General Permitted Development) ORDER 1995...Part 2...MINOR OPERATIONS...CLASS A.

. Failure to observe the regulations applicable to the FIRE PRECAUTIONS ACT 1971.

A Fire Service document states the following - the range of consultations varies from small building work (such as the installation of a new toilet) to high-profile building projects. Please note, nothing is too small to be outside Building Regulations.

To support their planning policy Rochford District Council advised as follows:-

With regard to whether or not an extension to an existing house is acceptable or not, that is a decision the planning authority must reach taking into account the material planning issues. In this case, planning consent was granted, but in other instances consent can be refused for a range of reasons, including the scale of the extensions, impact on neighbours etc.

As this was written on Rochford District Council headed notepaper I assumed this had been 'signed off' by the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive of Rochford District Council as official Council Policy.

To me the words underlined represents PLANNING ANARCHY...a form of planning apartheid dictated by postcode. If someone can advise me where this interpretation of planning legislation can be found in BLACKSTONES STATUTES ON PLANNING LAW (3rd Edition) by Victor Moore LLM, Barrister (Professor of Law Emeritis, University of Reading) and David Hughes LLB (L'pod) LLM (Cantab) FRSA (Professor of Housing and Planning Law) The Environmenal Law Institute, De Montford University Leicester, I would be obliged for the information.

In conclusion I have no confidence that Rochford District Council are capable in conducting any planning application with due dilligence. To me their policy represents the acquistion of power with a corresponding decline of responsibility.

Re Proposed Hockley Area Action Plan

I am writing this letter to say that I have lived in Hockley for 40 years and the village has really gone down hill. When we first moved here it was a lovely place we had 3 supermarkets, a lovely little Co-op store a big Spar supermarket and Gateway what have we got now, nothing. The Somerfield supermarket in the village seem to charge what they like as they know there is no where else to go and no competition. I am a pensioner living on a low incom, I do not drive so seem to spend most of my time going to Sainsbury's in Southend and fetching and carrying. I think things urgently need to be looked at. We had the Alldays shop which is now shut with prices that most people could not afford but just handy for a newspaper and lottery. How nice it would be for everybody to have a nice Tesco's or some other decent supermarket. I am sure there are hundreds of people in Hockley who totally agree with what I am saying in this letter.

To whom it may concern

Sirs

Having pulled off the website your options for the redevelopment of Hockley Village, my wife I are greatly concerned and alarmed about your proposals.

Having lived in Hockley for 33 years and before that Rayleigh for 17 years we feel your plans could be a repetition of what happened in Rayleigh in the 60's.

That tore the heart out of a lovely old town centre, destroying its character. Why can't councils learn from experience, that bringing more housing into an area, and building more supermarkets onto a village, only increases the existing problems of traffic flow, parking, overloaded services, and pollution!

Have not Rayleigh had to revamp its road system three times over the years? But now Hockley and in particular, the Spa junction. This has already become nightmare because of extra traffic going through the junction via Southend Road to get to Cherry Orchard Way. With the Spa Road (the High Street) being the main route to the Baltic Wharfs and three other industrial/commercial estates. To propose (as all the options do) to place a supermarket right near the Spa junction is sheer lunacy!

In other options you propose to remove the small businesses of the old foundry estate to the 'Saxon' Site. These small units provide local employment, and are well used by the local community. Remove them, and again you increase traffic with local people having to motor in and out of the area for their services. To build more houses and flats on the Eldon Way estate is again, unwanted. With local doctors, schools, etc already overloaded, and recently bus service cuts, enough is enough for any village.

Yet, we also learn that even more are planned to influx the Hawkwell are too!

We will concede that Hockley does need some improvements. The Eldon Way Estate could therefore provide this with more parking, a village green, and a moderate size supermarket. Closing the existing Somerfields in the Main Road, and thus alleviating the problems of supply lorries accessing the stores. Too many 'take-a-ways' are also a problem, with parking and rubbish.

Planners should learn from history, that if they don't listen to the local people, and get it right, then they only exacerbate the problems they sort to improve in the first place. So please, if you can't come up with better proposals than these, leave our village alone until someone can!

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.

We are very concerned to hear about the proposed re-development of Hockley which has been discussed at a town meeting held today. We are not sure how these plans have been circulated to residents, but do know that the vast majority of those attending were also unaware. You may like to know that a councillor was present for a very short period of time reassuring us that he was listening to our concerns and would be passing them onto the relevant personnel at the Council. However, moments later when called back for further discussion, he had apparently left. This did not leave a very good impression with the group.

We understand that there are various options being proposed, so we would like to give you our views: Firstly, we know that there is a suggestion of clearance of the North side of Spa Road and to have a new 'town' square in the middle, with a supermarket three times the size of Somerfields at the Bramerton/Spa Road junction with parking to the rear and a large amount of additional housing. Hockley is a village and therefore its infrastructure, schools, doctors, roads, hospital and transport etc (already at bursting point), is not able to sustain such development.

We also understand that Tesco is interested in having a supermarket in the High Street and has already purchased property nearby. Obviously they will now have a vested interest in driving any development forward, without any consideration for the local community. We are very concerned at the amount of supply lorries that will be using the only road into Hockley, together with the increase in traffic that this supermarket and further residential homes would bring. The roads in this area are already at breaking point. A recent survey found that as many as 15,000 cars pass through each day and therefore any further traffic from new housing or supermarket with deliveries etc would not be a suitable addition to this already overcrowded area. There is only one road coming from Rayleigh into Hockley and there is also speculation of additional traffic from Southend Airport.

We hear that traffic lights have been proposed at the Spa Road junction. This would create a huge tail-back, as the only reason that the current traffic flow is working, is that people are taking their own initiative to ensure that this badly directed route can still safely operate. If traffic lights were put into place, the cars would back up along the already congested Hockley Road as well as in the other directions ie Greensward Lane. This could cause gridlock as far back as the Rochford and Ashingdon areas.

The suggestion of re-directing Woodlands Avenue traffic at peak time to go through Hockley Rise is not a feasible proposition, as traffic is already colossal due to the Westerings School. It is generally extremely difficult to get in and out of Hockley Rise on a daily basis due to the volume of on-coming traffic. The road is quite narrow and there are always cars parked both sides. Also, children use these roads to get to Westerings School, and surely their safety should be paramount before re-directing more cars to a road that is increasingly struggling with traffic flow.

We were appalled to hear that the 30th of April is the closing date for consultation and therefore would hope that more time be provided for the community to air their concerns and any suggestions to be taken into consideration before further plans are submitted.

We do understand that improvements could be made to this area and are open to ideas to improve not destroy Hockley. We welcome your comments and would be a grateful for a copy of the current plans by return of post

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 to give my comments about the proposed Hockley Plan.

Although I would like to see various improvements to the centre of Hockley, I do think that some of the proposals are too drastic.

The siting of a huge supermarket at the end of Bramerton Road seems disastrous with huge vans coming and going at all times and a busy carpark will cause huge traffic problems in Spa Road, not to mention the hassle given to local residents. How about a new supermarket on the industrial estate at Eldon Way?

I like the idea of a linking path between Southend Road and Spa Road but not at the expense of the local Catholic community losing their garden which was given to them by a benefactor.

The suggestion of one way traffic for Woodlands Road will ease some of the hold-ups at the Spa corner, but what about the heavy load of vehicles cutting through the smaller roads leading to Woodlands Road.

I wonder about the publicity given to this project. Why were the plans displayed at Rochford and Hullbridge but not Hockley?

I like the idea of Eldon Way being used for youth-related projects, and empty buildings being reused, but with a large housing plan sited there, what about the traffic?

I do hope the Council will give careful regard to what the local residents think, and perhaps arrange a meeting with them.

I am writing to you because I understand that there is a plan in the pipeline to demolish half of Hockley High Street. If there is I would like to register I and my husband's stong concern about such a badly though out proposal.

We have heard no mention of this plan till the beginning of April this year and we understand that it has been discussed for two or three years. As residents of Hockley and users of the relevant shops we should have been given the opportunity to register any complaints against the scheme we are likely to have and take part in meetings and disucssions. That is surely our right as residents of this area. Could it please be explained to us why a meeting about Hockley High Street was arranged to take place as far away as Hullbridge?

Hockley has a character very much its own and it does not want to become just another town with the usual chain of shops. The High Street could not possibly take any more traffic generated by more houses, businesses or shops and they would spoil the village atmosphere. There is no room for them anyway in this little corner of Essex. Where would all the extra facilities be built, the doctor's and dentist's surgeries, the schools which are bursting at the seams now, not to mention sewerage, water, gas and electricity. The roads into and out of Hockley are also at bursting point..have any of these questions been considered before these plans were mooted?

This is a blatant waste of money in this 'credit crunch' climate. The money could be better spent helping businesses in Hockley High Street who are struggling. I again say I strongly register our disapproval of such an outlandish scheme. We do not want to see three or four storey buildings in what is an old typical Essex Village.

We have a choice of development or development. I propose another choice of no development whatsoever because:- Hockley is a village and is already over developed and crowded, caused by allowing too much development. Nowhere have you mentioned new schools, nurseries, doctors, dentists, facilities for elderly. More buses, security issues, crowded trains. Instead we need:- Free parking behind existing shops on the side of Somerfields with an in/out facility and a general tidying up.

We are extremely happy in our village now that we have a thriving area for our children ie monkey business. Our teenagers ie C.J's and the gymnasium. Retail centre for work for local people. The Post Office supermarket and all other small shops give us good and friendly service, although it is a struggle for them in these difficult times. We do not want a town centre with blocks of flats or Tescos to take away the livlihood of our village retailers.

We do not have an entrance to the town centre becuase Hockley is not a town. Hockley is a village and people like to park or walk to small shops in the village.

I understand that Hockley village looks a lucrative prospect for developers. Surely residents views come before their huge profits.

Can I start by saying that I welcome the discussion on Hockley high street and to a large extent agree with the points raised against the current situation, however I have concerns about the proposals being put forward. I would also express my displeasure at the lack of information being circulated about these plans, more effort should be made by the council to improve awareness if a fair and useful feedback is to be received.

Firstly reviewing the visions/objectives set out I strongly question the conclusions regarding Eldon Way, whilst I accept it is an unusual location for this type of light industry this site provides valuable employment and leisure services within the community and any attempt to relocate those businesses risks damage to successful operations and also presents the issue of the cost being born by the residents as being unjustifiable. The talk of a town square whilst a pretty idea seems to be about aesthetics and little else, I see no specific problems with the existing linear structure and believe that this alteration is an unnecessary expense. With regard to areas J and K I am concerned that if these were refurbished for retail what would be done with existing lease holders and would the cost mean that they were prohibitively expensive to new businesses. From speaking with current lease holders they all express concern that the number of vacant units presently is due to unrealistic rents and rates.

The suggestion of a new health centre on site L1 is in principle a reasonable idea, however, how would this fit in with an overall health strategy for Hockley, we have very limited GP facilities given the number of people and no NHS dentists, I think this issue needs to be addressed, particularly given the context of further housing development mentioned elsewhere in this document.

Looking specifically at option 1.1 and 1.2 it is mentioned that a supermarket be developed on site A1 and that A3 be redeveloped, during this re-development phase how would residents be provided for as if this whole site was cleared this would lead to no local shopping facilities for elderly or those without transport. I also fail to see how moving the supermarket will improve the offering to any great extent as there simply is not the space. Further the proposal to put the car parks and 2,3 seems foolish. This would mean all the traffic flow would be at the bottom end of Bramerton road turning a difficult junction into a very dangerous junction, it would also cause much inconvenience to the residents of this road as access to and from their homes would be affected and in all likelihood parking would overflow into the road. Plus you are building next to a church, has the noise implications been considered? Further what do you plan to do with the rest of the businesses you are destroying what shops we do have, our only bank would be gone to name but one.

I agree that the leisure use units in Eldon Way should be retained, but believe building more residential on the rest of the land is folly. By your own objectives you state the aim is to keep Hockley as a village and yet these plans contradict that very aim. The resources of Hockley are stretched as it is, yet more homes are proposed. Just for starters where will any children go to school, all the schools in this area are full (both secondary and primary), plus the extra cars and other facilities cannot cope. The village has grown large enough and the focus should not be on more homes.

I support the plans for L1 and L2 and believe strongly that better provision of facilities for the community and specifically youth is important, however a building is not the answer in itself and careful consideration should be given to how these facilities will be run eg who will fund a youth club? Also will young people actually go, it can be seen in the past that even with somewhere to meet they still are found on street corners.

Looking at option 2.1 and 2.2 I note that the leisure companies currently based in Eldon way would be relocated to the new B and C sites, however I would question looking at the scale are these sites big enough. Is this really practical and once again question why this plan is so keen to destroy so many jobs and build so many more homes in an already over crowded area this seems like a double loss to me. Given the intent to build houses what provision is being made for education as they will undoubtedly bring more children into the area. It mentions the possibility of the use of compulsory purchase orders, which I find objectionable, if this plan is so critical then it is up to the council to work out how to relocate business in a constructive non forceful way, otherwise you are effectively discouraging people from going into business in case this happened again. 2.2 seems to be even worse than 2.1 as it increases the over crowding problem further by pushing more houses in, which will be right up against the railway line and therefore I question their sell ability.

Options 3.1 and 3.2 raise the same concerns about housing, which I won't revisit. My concern with the provision of commercial and leisure units would be whether they were realistically sized and priced to attract tenants and whether Hockley could support them, as otherwise this could create a white elephant of empty units. Further with the creation of the town square and village green careful consideration needs to be given to lighting and security otherwise this could be subject to vandalism or become a meeting place for large groups of young people as has been an issue at Broad Parade previously.

Looking at the overall options I can honestly say there is no plan I would support as a standalone. I am broadly in favour of the redevelopment of L1, L2 and the surface parking 5, I think the walk through 4 is a nice idea but again safety and security are un underlying issue. I actively object to the up rooting of all the businesses on the north side of Spa Road which would lose us solicitors, bank, fish shop, bathroom/kitchen shop, health food shop and our supermarket. I think a more effective strategy to ensure they can remain in Hockley is required. I believe an enlarged supermarket is the wrong idea, it will destroy local shops like green grocer's and butchers and create massive parking problems, rather than focussing on redevelopment the plan should focus on maintaining the existing infrastructure, providing better pavements keeping the areas cleaner and having rents and rates that encourage business to grow. At the end of the day if you build a load of new buildings and they end up empty because they are too expensive this is all pointless. Hockley can never compete with the larger high streets and out of town shopping centres. I think it is unrealistic to think that we will draw more people to stop, the other villages/towns all have their own offerings, Hockley should focus on providing for its residents and these plans seem to do little to promote that. If the focus was on local people why destroy local businesses.

I would also strongly urge the council to review their information dissemination system, the way these plans have been circulated is outrageous, given this is a consultation how can people consult if they haven't been informed!

1 , Spa road is a very pleasant shopping facility,the fact that a lot of the shops are low rise gives it a nice airy open feeling.To replace it with three/four story buildings would be criminal.You would jus turn it into typical urban jungle.The only modern high rise shops in Spa road look a disgrace,they do not appear to have had any decoration ar maintainance done to them since they were built,there are rotton wooden facings aon the balconies,the paintwork etc. is appalling.So much for modern buildings.

2, If you go under the railway bridge towards Ashindon you will see a parade of shops just past the petrol station,they have flats above,and if you look they are little better than slums,gaffitii all over the place,the communial areas are dirty and full of garbage.Why? because people do not look after communial areas,the children are forced to play in them ,get bored and vandelise everything.And that is exactly what will occour if you tear the heart out of Hockley with your stupid ideas.Do any of you actually live in Hockley?

3, The proposal to let "Tesco"or some other large supermarket chain to open a large store is crazy,those sort of developments should be confined to out of town locations.As I said if you allow this sort of developement to happen you can kiss goodbye to the local shops in Rochford,Hullbridge,Hawkwell, Ashingdon,they will all end up closed,you make comments about the empty shops in Spa road,but two of them have just been let,one is opening as a bakers the other one is beeing worked on at the moment.So really you just do not appear to know what you are talking about.

4, Traffic ?? The proposal allow a large supermarket will do a lot to deal with traffic problems won't it ???? That was a joke by the way !! It will without a doubt make the traffic a loy worse,when people from all, the villages previously mentioned,come here to shop.You planners really are crazy arn't you.

5, Destroying jobs on the Eldon Way trading estate,what a lot of sense that makes,where do you get the people from who make these suggestios for gods sake??Buliding lots of flats there hmmm. great idea,where are the children who will live there going to spend their time,oooooh guess,on the streets wrecking the place.Have you not learnt anything from what happened in London and othere large cities back in the sixties/seventies families and flats with no private outside space do not work.

SO as I said before LEAVE HOCKLEY ALONE

In addition why have you not consulted with the people of Hockley honistly and above board,to put it on your website and hold ameeting in Hullbrige is an awfull way to behave,I for one will certainly try to get you unelected at the next council elections.

Our records show that there are public foul/surface water sewers within the boundary of some of the sites listed. No development will be permitted either over or within the easement without the prior consent of Anglian Water. Please be aware that the existing public sewers should be located in highway or open space (not in private gardens) to ensure access for maintenance and repair and this must be taken into consideration when considering the site layouts.

Generally there is available capacity at the Sewage Treatment Works (STW) to treat the potential foul flows from these sites however there is limited capacity within the foul network that will require further consideration. Surface water can be accommodated.