Parking and travel demand management - Which options do you agree/disagree with?

Agree with both

Site A - Support option for two storey retail designed as market hall - this option best compliments existing retail area and will improve appearance of area.

Site B - Oppose pedestrianisation of market square as this will have negative impact on business.

Support removal of taxi rank as these vehicle cause congestion.

Support removal of bus route as again causes congestion.

Move car park entrance further west to allow additional queuing space.

Site C - Support creation of heritage entrance. We need to 'advertise' our towns historic past.

Site D - Support redevelopment of shop/restaurant. Would like to see work/live units to provide start up units to small businesses.

Site E - No redevelopment. This is a very old established business and is part of our history.

Site F - Support redevelopment for retail/residential especially art/craft help Rochford become a destination.

Site G - Support retain car park - but improve signage provide map of retail/business.

Site H - Support extension of healthcare.

Site J - Support redevelopment of car park to multi-storey.

Site K - Support refurbishment of station with café, toilets, shop etc. This would bring our station up to date with needs of travellers.

TRANSPORT

Oppose more strict parking management. This will have a negative impact on business, people would travel to free parking shopping areas outside our district.

North and South Street - Support option to slow vehicles additional pedestrian crossing. One way system should be retained as part of charm of area.

Weir Pond Road - Support enhancement to footpath/crossings.

Support resident only parking scheme.

Bradley Way - Support redesign with on street parking bays. Encourage stopping off to explore our town.

West Street - Support widening of footways but would not support continued use by buses.

Bus routing - Support option to reroute to avoid market square. Would like to see small 'hoppa' buses linking Rochford with Great Stambridge, Canewdon, etc.

Members prefer Option 2, but would like to see public transport far more affordable particularly for families

I support both of these options

I support both these in principle but it does depend on how exactly they would be implemented

Rochford Area Action Plan

At last we are beginning to appreciate the need to give Rochford some sort of status.

One before I wrote to you about the problems on the district. Litter, language abuse, parking, illegal mobile phone use and noise of seat belts. People causing these problems will be the cause of any forward thinking to fail.

Unfortunately the Council plays a part in this; litter, it would appear streets are only swept when a complaint is made whereas before notorious littered areas, noticeably near schools were cleaned regularly. The Council should monitor school areas and identify the problem, perhaps then it can be eradicated.

We often read that crime is on the decrease in the district, however, wherever you go foul language abounds. People park irregularly especially when the wardens are known not to be active, try Saturdays and all day Sundays.

Driving using mobile phones and not wearing a seatbelt, surely one day a week could be spent on clamping down on such illegality.

Perhaps a "zero tolerance" approach may be the answer as used in other areas of the country.

An article in the Standard recently suggested the market square and West Street become pedestrianised, what a good idea.

Roads should be improved, not more cycle paths, we have enough and in any case cyclists don't use them they ride where they like!

The infrastructure of Rochford is such any increase in building is going to put more stress on our roads, schools, doctors, fire brigade and police.

It is all very well talking about better help for the elderly and unemployed but who would put a business here, Southend are suffering with businesses shutting down and moving, this even before the so called recession.

Rochford could be lovely, like it used to be, but lack of policing, poor building regulations and cut backs has made it to decline.

I think these plans are asking for "St Andrews Church to be come a Cathedral and Rochford a city".

Sorry but we must clean up and get back to a lawful district. Acorns grow to oak trees, minor offences grow to robbery and worse.