West Street - Which options do you agree/disagree with?

1st option

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.

Not in favour of either option.

Agree that the pathways could be slightly widened as long as traffic speeds were severely restricted (max 10mph)

Do not agree with traffic signals at junction of Hall Road. Traffic does sort itself out quite well and is only problematical at peak times. Traffic signals would not improve this.

I agree that pavements could be widened, and west street could be made more sympathetic to pedestrians. I don't think lights are required at the junction to Hall Road.

Widening the pavements in West Street is an excellent idea. It would not only make it safer but also make it more attractive for pedestrians and this would help the shops. I would rate this as a high priority because relatively effort could achieve such a useful result..

Agree with option 1 with 20mph speed limit with camera. Hall Rd junction works - traffic lights not needed.

We would strongly agree with retaining bus access to West Street. This allows good access to both Rochford Town Centre and to the Station in this direction. Many journeys made on routes 7 & 8 are through riders across Rochford. A more circuitous route returning via South Street again would be very likely to deter through users and affect the viability of the services.

I refer to your Rochford Town Centre AAP, dated September 2009.

I am writing on behalf of the Council and Councillors of Ashingdon Parish Council. We discussed many details of your AAP and here I write a summary of the comments which they have asked me to submit as I feel necessary.

I will follow the chapter and section numbers as in the AAP.

2.2 Market Square is useful as a quick short duration car park. If it is pedestrianised, then some parking must be left available nearby free of charge for short periods.

If it is pedestrianised, we believe that the Market Square will be enhanced by replacing the ugly asphalt surface with cobblestones like thousands of streets and squares in hundreds of towns and villages in the UK.
We have no objection to a war memorial in the square.
We have no objection to a café / bar in the square.
There is no need for crossings in a small, narrow street like West Street.
We agree with the return of shopping in the town.
We agree with removing all car parking charges to get people into town.
We agree with removing the ugly east side Spar building.
We believe that the weekly market must remain in the square.
We believe the "whispering court" proceedings could be revived.

2.13 We agree with removing the ugly east side Spar building and replacing
it with a traditional building more like the one demolished in the 60s.

2.17 We agree with most of these points. But, we disagree with restricting on-street car parking. We believe parking should be de-restricted.

2.21 We agree that any improvements to the Railway Station, car park and approach to the station are a good idea.

2.24 You note that vehicles "tend to speed through the centre along East and North Streets". Our suggestion is to de-restrict parking in many parts of Rochford and this would result in slowing down traffic.

2.29 North Street has many fewer parking spaces since resent changes and additional yellow lines.
We do not see the point of "Disabled" parking bays. Disabled drivers are supposed to be able to park anywhere on single yellow lines - i.e. right in front of where they have to visit. Painted disabled bays will always be at random and fixed locations and some distance away from where a disabled driver or passenger needs to get out.

2.31 and Figure 5 We are disappointed that a century of pedestrian access was lost when the hospital was redeveloped. There were at least two north-south routes and two east-west routes closed off and lost. Some of the routes would still be available if re-opened. Pedestrian traffic is beneficial to a community and more eyes and ears make security better.

Re-opened routes in the Rochford Hospital site could include :
Pollards Close to Rochford Primary School.
Pollards Close to Union Lane
Saint Luke's Place to Union Lane
South of Somerfield (Coop) to Union Lane
North of Somerfield (Coop) to Rochford Primary School

2.33 Cycling is not improved by the yellow line parking restrictions. Faster cars in roads with yellow lines speeds traffic and endangers cyclists. Road centre islands, bollards and corner pinch-point build-outs endanger cyclists. They use cyclists passing through the narrows as part of the "traffic calming". Cycling safety is further spoilt by the loss of routes through the hospital site.

2.36 Rochford Station looks untidy and could be improved. One way to make it less scruffy, would be by converting unused accommodation in the station building at ground level and upstairs into retail, residential and commercial office use. Continuous use of the empty rooms, offices and sheds would improve the site and give it some life.

2.39 We have no objection to more bus shelters. We believe them to be a good asset. We have installed several bus shelters in our Parish.

3.7, Site A We agree with removing the ugly east side Spar building and replacing it with a traditional building more like the one demolished in the 60s. Perhaps with three (or four) floors like other buildings in Rochford would make the site economically viable. A design which is traditional or the same, similar or harks back to the original demolished building would benefit Rochford. We must commend you on the Rumbelows site houses.

3.9, Site B We have no objection to removing parking in Market Square and its pedestrianisation providing free parking is made available nearby.
We agree to café or restaurant use with outdoor seating in Summer.

We believe that if Market Square is pedestrianised, the asphalt surface which has a relatively short life should be replaced with cobblestones like thousands of locations in the UK. Cobblestone surfaces are very durable and long lasting.

We believe the bus route should remain through West Street.

3.10, Site C We are not against improvements to the existing garage site. But, we would be against the loss of businesses and jobs if it is closed.

We are against the removal of Haynes florists and the restaurant next door because they are attractive old buildings which should be kept.

3.13, Site D We have no objection to your proposed improvements to Site D. But, we would expect RDC to make provision for new accommodation for the charity and businesses located there.

3.14, Site E We strongly object to the removal and redevelopment of this site because it is an attractive and (late 19th century) historic Dutch barn building style, typical of old motor and tractor works in rural towns.

3.15, Site F We have no objection to proposals for this Bradley Way site.

3.16 - 3.18, Sites G & H We have no objection to improvements in those sites. But, we do not wish to see the loss of parking in that area, especially if parking is lost elsewhere, such as in Market Square.

3.19, Site J We have no objection to the proposals for Site J.

But, we believe that this area should be opened up for pedestrian access and passing through the hospital site. If a multi-story car park were built for public (and hospital staff) use, there would be little point if it were difficult for the public to gain access to their cars, except through one long circuitous route. Thus the re-opening of pedestrian routes is vital.

3.20, Site K We have no objection to your proposals for these parking sites.

3.28 We have no objection to North Street being made two way.

We object to installing traffic signals at the North Street / South Street junction. A mini-roundabout or "give way" or "stop" would work very well. One of the best ways of slowing traffic is by allowing roadside parking. Yellow lines simply clear the road and make traffic speeds much higher.

3.31 We have no objection to on-street parking along Bradley Way. We believe it would be beneficial and would make traffic slower and safer.

We believe Rochford DC should have a clean sweep plan of removing yellow lines throughout most of the town and District and remove islands and pinch-points. "Traffic calming" does not calm traffic, it infuriates drivers. Also, it cause bottlenecks, it creates hazards, it puts people into the path of oncoming traffic. It causes people to increase speed to get through a pinch-point before the chap coming the other way. It causes delayed drivers to speed to make up lost time. It causes drivers annoyed by the delay to speed to show their annoyance. Yellow lines and pinch-points have more adverse affects than benefits.

We object to installing traffic signals at the West Street / Bradley Way junction. There have been no problems with traffic passing through that area. The mini-roundabout works perfectly well. Rochford is one of those small towns which has no traffic lights, never has had them and does not need them.

3.32 West street, North Street, East Street and Back Lane are narrow and short, they should remain open to traffic, but could benefit from a 20mph speed limit.

3.33 We object to traffic signals at the West Street / Hall Road junction. The mini-roundabout works perfectly well. The terrible queues before Cherry Orchard Way opened have long gone, so signals which might have served a purpose in the past are now not necessary.

3.36 We believe that buses should continue to pass through Market Square because the only way they pass the town centre and pass close to the railway station is by leaving the town via West Street. Or, if they go via Bradley Way, or do not pass the station, they will stop 350m from where they are needed.

MORE OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS :
We are amazed that the new road beside the Golden Lion to the Library (is it Roche Close?) has had yellow lines put along both sides. In spite of the lorries passing, there could still be parking, certainly on one side, probably on both sides. That side road could be 20mph and if cobbled, it would slow the traffic.

The practice of putting yellow lines around corners extending 15m or more is pointless and a waste of parking space. Clear roads with too many yellow lines speed up traffic. If yellow lines are needed at corners 3m to 5m is more than enough

North Street has been made to look a mess by the considerable changes to road architecture, kerbside changes, build-outs and excessive yellow lines.

A pointless road alignment change about 10 to 15 years ago was in Ashingdon Road where it turns into Dalys Road. It was made narrower, the east side was built out, and they painted 2 lanes, i.e. "straight on" and "left turn", where there were none before. But, the narrowed road was made too narrow for two lanes. That junction should be re-widened for two lanes, while leaving the island.

I hope that I have explained it all clearly on our behalf and I thank you in advance.

You may reply to me, but I suggest that you should also address all replies to our Ashingdon Parish Clerk - John Dyke.

If you wish, I could submit this letter as a Word document file by email.

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.