Weir Pond Road - Which options do you agree/disagree with?

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.

Agree all options.

I agree with the first 2 options, but I think the traffic island needs to be retained, it makes crossing the road there safer. perhaps the island could be resized to make bus movements easier.

Support first two options. Remodel island.

Unsurprisingly, we would support measures that would ease bus access to the town centre and remodelling or removal of this island would assist safe bus operation.

Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan

Theme and Summary of the Main Issues

Firstly we looked page 33 to see if there was general agreement with these issues.
It appears that there is a recurring theme of, have we got too much parking?

Generally it was agreed that the issues listed are correct with exceptions as follows:
* The matter of looking at the back of buildings in Back Lane is thought to be something that cannot be changed. That's how it is.
* There would appear to be an incorrect assumption that most people travel to Rochford by train. Everyone agreed this is not the case.
* It was also felt that the BR car park cannot be taken into the equation as this is owned by NCP.
* It was felt that it is not an issue for this consultation that people drive over the centre of roundabouts
* Members firmly disagreed with the statement that Back Lane and the BR car parks have "spare capacity".


Site A - Eastern Side of Market Square

It was agreed to support Option 2 with caveats.

The Spa building is an eyesore. The Chamber view is, rather than remove the building which could be too expensive and too disruptive for the existing businesses, the row could be landscaped. i.e. refurbished and remodelled to look older and more in keeping with the architecture in the Square. As this is an important site, we could perhaps secure some funding.

Flat roofs have a finite life and it is feasible to add a further storey which would help to recoup some expenditure. This should have good architectural input. Under sailing would be an additional feature and would blend well with Horner's Corner.

Windows could be put in facing West Street and North Street thereby improving the streetscape, linking these three roads. There would be no loss of retail space in the square.

At the request of the Chief Executive (RDC), the Chairman contacted the owner of this site who were reluctant to become involved with any improvements. Therefore a major effort on the Council's part will be needed to take this forward. We suggest that any project on this site would need additional outside funding ECC or East of England.



Site B - Pedestrianisation of Market Square

It was agreed by Chamber members - No pedestrianisation of the Square. The view is that pedestrianisation would kill the traders in the Square. Market days are very poor trading days for most traders. Some do well. To remove buses from West Street/Square would also be very detrimental. A great deal of people travel by bus especially on Market days.

Relaxing the 75% rule could be very detrimental and should be considered with caution and more consultation. This would need more investigation and more discussion. We would have to be very careful that shops did not revert to dwellings etc.
The widening of the footpaths, carried out a few years ago, does not seem to apply to market traders. They encroach on the pavements making it very difficult for pedestrians, especially disabled vehicles and parents with prams.

It was agreed that taxi drivers should have less space allocated to them in the Square. Most are hailed by telephone, few are engaged from the square. It is just free parking for them. There are other sites for them to park. Perhaps provide a telephone. It was felt their presence whilst waiting for fares, leaning on each others cars, eating etc does not create a good impression to visitors. There could be space by Somerfield and by Andrew's site in North Street. They already have space at the train station.

It was agreed - Leave the trough and pump where they are. A good feature for the "Market Square". The Martyrs Plaque could join them.

The new arrangement for cars entering the Square does not work and we should revert to the old system of entry and exit for vehicles.


Site C - Junction with West Street and Bradley Way

It was agreed that we would not, at this stage, recommend the removal of Haynes Florist and the Indian Restaurant. Haynes has been there for many years and is and old established business. This site could be improved without too much expense. To demolish either of these buildings would be a waste of money, we want to maintain the businesses, not lose them.

Should the 1st Stop site be developed it is imperative that retail units are featured on the ground floor.

The BP site should have been considered as part of this Area Action Plan. Any junction improvements could be included with this site rather than demolish the Florist and Indian Restaurant.


BP Site - there is a wide footpath around this site and this could be used for roundabout improvements if this is what is required. Sainsbury's (believed to be the current owner of the site) appear to be encountering many problems with contamination and underground utilities. If this is the case, a further suggestion was that perhaps they could be persuaded to cut their losses and donate some land to the town. It would allow us to make a very appealing entrance to the town. (Good publicity for Sainsbury's)

Further, if Sainsbury's could now acquire the adjacent site, formerly bought by Tesco, the plan for an express store could be remodelled. Everybody wins!


Site D - Rose & Crown Car Park and 60's Style Shops

As with proposal "A", the shops could be landscaped and given a facelift. Keep the commercial element. There was discussion about building on the car park site. On the one hand this gives a good view into the new development and keeps some open aspect. Alternatively, this could provide town centre development which is good for traders and again, retail units could be incorporated underneath. Provided this was not overdeveloped and some planting was including, it could provide a pleasant view.


Site E - Whittingham's Garage

It was agreed no development here. This is one of the oldest, established businesses in the town. Whereas it is easy to see why an outside consultant might see this as a missed opportunity, it is now a part of the street scene and a landmark in the town. (It may be listed.)

The business provides a good service and brings visitors to the town, probably trade too.

However, the building next door - Parish Room is a small single storey building on a sizeable plot that could well be developed. With the interest and association that the Parish has with St. Marks Hall, is it possible they could relocate. This would be a great saving to the ratepayer. With some thought, we feel there are alternatives here.

It was observed that if this site and 1st Stop were to be lost we are taking away choices from residents for car repairs etc. Would it force people to have to go to main dealers who are generally more expensive and do not provide personal service? The chamber would be reluctant to see both sites lost.


Connaught House (West Side of Square)

This is an important building and a feature in the market square which needs mentioning. It is owned by county Council and therefore it should be easy to negotiate and make this an important, worthwhile building. We suggest either a restaurant with prestige offices above, perhaps a small hotel. It is a wasted asset in its current form.


New Development/Roche Close

It was noted that there are very poor facilities for traders in this area and will be a contributory factor to the slow take up of premises. Deliveries are very difficult for the small shop premises. Traders risk wheel clamping if they deliver goods to the premises. This perhaps needs re-thinking for the future viability of these outlets.

The chamber agree with the consultants that the inter-connection between the Market Square and the new development. It is not adequate as the Chamber warned at the outset of this development.


Site F - Land by Hotel Renouf

Your para 3.15 does not make sense. Why is the frontage described as weak and a barrier to the town centre? In our view it enhances the greensward and compliments the ambiance of the Reservoir Site on the other side of the road. To have any development here would, in our opinion be unwise. Access onto Bradley Way would cause further congestion. It could be developed as a pedestrian footway into the town. This would be visible from the train station and create a very pleasant entrance/gateway into the town centre. With vision, this could be very attractive. Seating, parking for bicycles and so forth. This should be designed as an urban garden.


Site G and H -- Back Lane & GP Surgery
Agreed. No development. We do not see a problem with the view of the backs of the buildings. It is "Back Lane"!

Most definitely, retain all car parking spaces.


Site J - Hospital Grounds

The Chamber feel that it is very unlikely that the hospital would agree to any development. They have strongly opposed suggestions in the past, even a footway. On this basis we would retain the doctors' surgery and car park in Back Lane.

It would be a good option to have a car park in the hospital grounds, however, at the planning stage of the hospital redevelopment, the NHS was adamant that they did not want the public anywhere near the hospital site despite the Chamber requesting pedestrian access from Union Lane to the new supermarket.


Site K - Freight House Car Park

The first priority would be to stop free, commuter parking in this car park!
There should be provision to allow businesses long term parking (for a fee).
What is the logic for the RDC employees to park for free?

Access to the BR car park could be improved. Access by pedestrians for the station coming from Bradley Way could also be improved, create links to the town and through the reservoir. (As per para 2.31 in the consultation document.) The Old Station building would make a good site for a restaurant. It could be themed, many possibilities.

Traffic Signals

These have been suggested at the existing crossing by the railway entrance and at entrance to Hall Road. We oppose both. The traffic flow works despite the amount of usage. We cannot see that traffic lights will improve the flow. Lights will cause delays and frustration when vehicles have to stop unnecessarily. Pedestrians are able to cross freely with minimal hold ups at the existing zebra crossing.


West Street
Nothing can be done about the narrow street. Ramps could be put in place to slow the traffic down.


North & South Streets and Bradley Way
We would not want to see two way traffic in North Street.

However, we would need more detailed information on these options to give a meaningful response. Perhaps this could be the subject of a further discussion/meeting rather than a paper based report.


Weir Pond Road

No mention of this area in the site plans. The space beyond Ernest Doe's could be better utilised. The existing buildings are not attractive and do not use the space well. Additionally, if BT could be relocated, there is a sizeable plot that could be tastefully developed and make an improvement to one of the gateways into the town.

We see no merit in restricting the car parking any further.

Plans have been drawn up with RDC in conjunction with Highways and a local group. A considerable amount of grant money has been spent already with excellent plans for improvements to the island at the junction of Weir Pond Road and Stambridge Road. This should be examined before any further plans and /or expense is incurred. This is an ideal project for further funding.


These plans would not only be safer for traffic and pedestrians, but would create a more pleasant gateway into the town.

Similar principles may apply to the island at the other end of Weir Pond Road.


Buses

Agree, no re-routing of buses. Buses must be allowed to come in to the centre of the town.


Speed Restriction
It has been suggested by many people in many consultations that a 20mph speed limit be imposed in the central streets in Rochford. We endorse this concept most strongly.


Car Parking - General Observation

A car park in the hospital grounds would be desirable, but as previously commented unlikely to happen. We therefore reiterate that we cannot afford to lose any further car parking spaces. It is believed that there is already not adequate car parking for residents in Roche Close.

It is proven with the success of out of town trading that the general public will go where there is free parking. We do understand that the council needs the revenue it derives from parking fees. We stress the need to keep the free parking in the Market Square.

In response to your document Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan, we have considered the options, and respond as follows, adding our own views and modifications.

We enclose copies of the options document marked for clarity (a, b, c, etc.)

Site A
Clear preference for option - a-to enhance the character of the square, and to dispose of the 'Disaster' 1960's buildings.

Site B
Option a-b-h are preferred to improve the character of the Square.

Site C
Option b is preferred. The character and style, and particularly the elevations of residential development here is important, as the visual gateway to the town from the East.

Site D
Option a/c is preferred.
Again, residential units of the appropriate character (based on the model of the 'New' Square), incorporating the removal of the existing shop/restaurant building!

Site E
No re-development.
This is an important Green Area.

Site G
Option a is preferred.

Site H
Option a is preferred.
Loss of this area of parking in this location is inconceivable.

Site J
Option b is preferred. It is impossible to envisage a multi-story car park of any design being suitable for this area.

Site K
Option a is preferred

North and South Streets 3.28

Option B - must be the most misguided and badly informed statement in the whole of the document - it has no relationship with realities of the safety considerations inherent in the traffic flow problems in Rochford. I would advise the employment of a competent Road Traffic Engineer. Solution to these problems are not for the amateur!

In answer to the question: - I would suggest that any short term low-cost solution will fail, the rate of traffic flows through these highways can only increase, and I believe the present condition to be desperate. Tampering will not answer a problem of this magnitude. You will be aware that we live in South Street! And believe that some traffic calming or speed control is essential.

No other comment on any of the options.

Weir Pond Road 3.29
Option b is preferred.

Bradley Way 3.30
Option b has merit - again some of the statements made in 'a' have no relevance to the real traffic situation in Bradley way every day. We do need Radical change. Passive surveillance, and retail, on this highway - I think not!

West Street 3.32
Both a/b are preferred.

In assembling our thoughts about this action plan it has become obvious that the principle factors are the maintenance of the historical character of the town centre, and the ever problematic road system. Possibly the only future solution for historic towns like Rochford is by-passing, which sadly may not be a positive contribution.

Thank you for a well produced and thought provoking document.

Site A Page 36/37

Agree best option would be replacement of site A by 2 storey copy of once existing Market Hall to fit in existing building incorporating shops with flat over.

The proposed removal of the Spar building without its replacement would destroy the whole concept of the Square. Horner's Corner is the centre of a unique street system which must be retained.

Pedestrians move between the Square and North Street easily via the alley.

Site B Page 38/39

Parking in Square is vital to the shops economy. The entrance and exit should be reversed. Reduce taxis in Square to 3 places. Do not agree Rochford needs more restaurants or bars, 2 pubs have closed down, there are 3 restaurants in West Street and 3 restaurants in East Street.

Pedestrianisation of the Square will encourage antisocial behaviour as experienced in Southend - rowdy youths on staketboards and skates. Café culture is not appropriate in such a small town, people living over the shops will experience noise.

Relocation of the pump and trough from the centre of the Square will remove 2 features that were returned to the Square only a few years ago. The bus must be retained through West Street as it is convenient for shoppers with heavy loads particularly with many elderly residents.

Area C Page 42

The restaurants and florist should be retained, these are old buildings part of fabric of the town.

The Garage and ex-garage site on both corners of Union Lane would benefit with a symmetric development no more than 2.5 stories high, preferably residential.

Site D

Car park must be retained for the pub but the vacant plot and 'sixties' style shops should be redeveloped with more sympathetic residential development.

Site E

Whittingham's Garage is an iconic building and should be listed. It is one of the oldest businesses in the town and must be retained as part of the older fabric of the town, it neighbours a listed building.

Site F

Cannot believe that a lovely landscaped area along Bradley Way could be called a weak frontage. The Hotel has permission for an extension on part of this site, also attractive area for Wedding photos and contributes and softens the commercial building in Bradley Way. The suggestion for retail or residential units facing onto Bradley Way will detract from the appearance and proposed lay-bys will cause congestion with cars entering and leaving the lay-bys.

Site G

Back Lane car park should be retained, several businesses and houses have access across car park. Rear of the properties in South Street is not unattractive - shows the historic core, the same goes for South Street.

Dr's Surgery should be retained on site, most convenient location for elderly people, several sheltered housing schemes, Day Centre, Citizens Advice Bureau, Housing Office and Council Office are in close proximity.

New Health Centre would take too much car parking space as would residential or retail on the site.

Site H

Shows picture of CAB and Day Centre, not Surgery. The proposal to relocate Dr's Surgery to near hospital site, bear in mind it is a mental health hospital - there is no benefit.

Site J

Provision of a multi-storey car park in conjunction with the hospital car park is not practical. The hospital, because of security, closed all footpaths through the site to the detriment of residents on the east of Rochford and town centre trade.

Site K

The Railway Station car park and Freight House car park shouldb e left alone, both are needed to service these facilities.

There is a well-used footpath link from West Street/Back Lane via alley the side of the Hotel, steps set in bank would aid access to Freight House and Station.

North and South Street

The proposal 2-way traffic in North Street is not practical, traffic speed can be controlled by road humps.

Weir Pond Road

Most of the parking on Weir Pond Road is by residents as many houses have no off street parking.

The traffic island at the junction with East Street could be removed.

Bradley Way

Do not agree to signalise junction with West Street.

West Street

Do not agree signalise junction with Hall Road.

The system of mini roundabouts work perfectly well most of the time. Traffic signals are out of place a conservation area.

I attach my Council's response to the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan.

Site A Page 36/37

Agree best option would be replacement of site A by 2 storey copy of once existing Market Hall to fit in existing building incorporating shops with flat over.

The proposed removal of the Spar building without its replacement would destroy the whole concept of the Square Horner's Corner is the centre of a unique street system which must be retained.

Pedestrians move between the Square and North Street easily via the alley.

Site B Page 38/39

Parking in Square is vital to the shops economy. The entrance and exit should be reversed. Reduce taxis in Square to 3 places. Do not agree Rochford needs more restaurants or bars, 2 Pubs have closed down, there are 3 restaurants in West Street and 3 restaurants in East Street.

Pedestrianisation of the Square will encourage antisocial behaviour as experienced in Southend - rowdy youths on skateboards and skates. Café culture is not appropriate in such a small town, people living over the shops will experience noise.

Relocation of the pump and trough from the centre of the Square will remove 2 features that were returned to the Square only a few years ago. The bus must be retained through West Street as it is convenient for shoppers with heavy loads particularly with many elderly residents.

Area C Page 42

The restaurants and florist should be retained, these are old buildings part of fabric of the town.

The Garage and ex-garage site on both corners of Union Lane would benefit with a symmetric development no more than 2.5 stories high, preferably residential.

Site D

Car park must be retained for the pub but the vacant plot and 'sixties' style shops should be redeveloped with more sympathetic residential development.

Site E

Whittingham's Garage is an iconic building and should be listed. It is one of the oldest businesses in the town and must be retained as part of the older fabric of the town, it neighbours a listed building.

Site F

Cannot believe that a lovely landscaped area along Bradley Way could be called a weak frontage. The Hotel has permission for an extension on part of this site, also attractive area for Wedding photos and contributes and softens the commercial building in Bradley Way. The suggestion for retail or residential units facing onto Bradley Way will detract from the appearance and proposed lay-bys will cause congestion with cars entering and leaving the lay-bys.

Site G

Back Lane car park should be retained, several businesses and houses have access across car park. Rear of the properties in South Street is not unattractive - shows the historic core, the same goes for South Street.

Dr's surgery should be retained on site, most convenient location for elderly people, several sheltered housing schemes, Day Centre, Citizens Advice Bureau, Housing Office and Council Office are in close proximity.

New Health Centre would take too much car parking space as would residential or retail no the site.

Site H

Shows picture of CAB and Day Centre, not Surgery. The proposal to relocate Dr's Surgery to near hospital site, bear in mind it is a mental health hospital - there is no benefit.

Site J

Provision of a multi-storey car park in conjunction with the hospital car park is not practical. The hospital, because of security, closed all footpaths through the site to the detriment of residents on the east of Rochford and town centre trade.

Site K

The Railway Station car park and Freight House car park should be left alone, both are needed to service these facilities.

There is a well-used footpath link from West Street/Back Lane via alley the side of the Hotel, steps set in bank would aid access to Freight House and Station.

North and South Street

The proposal 2-way traffic in North Street is not practical, traffic speed can be controlled by road humps.

Weir Pond Road

Most of the parking on Weir Pond Road is by residents as many houses have no off street parking.

The traffic island at the junction with East Street could be removed.

Bradley Way

Do not agree to signalise junction with West Street.

West Street

Do not agree signalise junction with Hall Road.

The system of mini roundabouts work perfectly well most of the time. Traffic signals are out of place in a conservation area.