7. Option 3

I would like to raise the following points regarding the proposals for the public car park area in Southend Road:

There does not appear to be any reference to the Public Toilets in the plans, even Option 1 where there are no proposed changes - what has happened to these?

With options 2 and 2a, the proposed layout means that the existing footpath will exit onto Southend Road pavement right between two vehicular access points (for the Indian restaurant and the new car park entrance), opposite the vehicular entrance to the Spa Pub and also where the zebra crossing is - surely this is not a particularly safe proposal for pedestrians? (There is also the entrance to the Old Fire Station building just a few feet away too.)

Re options 3 and 3a, it is clear that the footpath will run along the new car park entrance, however what is the proposed access route for the car parks servicing the Indian restaurant, offices and new housing?

Options 2 and 3 mean that the car park entrance will be relocated nearer to the already very congested mini roundabout, zebra crossing and other existing entrances.

At the moment, the footpath is not defined - what, if any, proposals are being made to define the public footpath?

Why has the proposed change of usage of the retail units on Main Road to Rayleigh (currently Costcutters etc) been dropped from Option 3?

Will the remaining existing buildings be revamped? - the current building on the corner of Bramerton Road is a complete eyesore and desperately needs attention.

The attached sheet shows an identified residential opportunity in the Woodpond Avenue end of the car park - where did this come from as there is no mention of it in the options?

I look forward to the results of the consultation process and hope that the resulting improvements to Hockley will be able to happen sooner rather than later.

ROYAL MAIL REPRESENTATIONS TO ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL - HOCKLEY AREA ACTION PLAN OPTIONS REPORT NOVEMBER 2010

INTRODUCTION

We are instructed by Royal Mail Group Limited (Royal Mail) to submit representations to the Hockley Area Action Plan (AAP) Options Report November 2010.

BACKGROUND

Royal Mail formerly Consignia Plc, is the successor to the former statutory corporation, The Post Office. Although its management operates independently, Royal Mail is wholly owned by the Government through the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills. Its services are regulated by the Postal Services Regulator, Postcomm. Its letters business, Royal Mail is the operator of universal postal service functions through the Royal Mail letter post delivery and
collection services handling letters, postal packets, and high value (registered) packets. Royal Mail Group also operates Parcelforce Worldwide which is a parcels carrier. Post Office Ltd (a wholly owned subsidiary of Royal Mail) operates the national network of post offices and sub post offices.

The United Kingdom letter post business was fully liberalised in January 2006 by Postcomm and Royal Mail now operates in a highly competitive market place. As such, it effectively operates like any other business and is continually seeking to find ways to improve the efficiency of its business (e.g. increased automation) and respond to the changes in communications technology (e.g. email and internet). Put simply, the nature of the mail industry has and continues to change and Royal Mail's real estate needs to respond accordingly.

Royal Mail has a number of sites within the administrative boundary of Rochford District, including Hockley Delivery Office (DO), Eldon Way, Hockley SS5 4AA which falls within the area subject to the Hockley AAP.

REPRESENTATIONS

We set out below representations to the Hockley AAP Options Report, which revisits and updates earlier options developed for the AAP in 2009, in a format that corresponds with the Plan.

HOCKLEY AREA ACTION PLAN

â–  Section 4 - Overarching Framework and Principles

This section sets out the overarching approach for the Hockley AAP. One of the objectives of the AAP is to improve the public realm and pedestrian links. Under 'Approach to the spatial options' the AAP states that "In many cases, planning gain from developments can help to cross fund physical environment improvements nearby, which is particularly useful in a period of limited public funding".

Royal Mail acknowledges new development will create additional demand for infrastructure, services/facilities and public realm improvements. However, we request that any financial contribution towards the provision of such infrastructure, services/facilities and public realm improvements for Hockley is sought in areas where there is an identified need and at a level that ensures that the overall delivery of appropriate development is not compromised i.e. is subject to viability. This request accords with government guidance in Circular 05/05 which states that Section 106 contributions from development sites must be:

(i) relevant to planning;
(ii) necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms;
(iii) directly related to the proposed development;
(iv) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development; and
(v) reasonable in all other respects.

â–  Spatial Option 1

This Option is considered to be a 'minimal intervention approach'. The focus is on improvements to pedestrian links, parking and the public realm and shop front improvements along Spa Road, with a small number of poor quality buildings being replace by new shops.

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is not identified for development within Spatial Option 1. Royal Mail support this Option.

â–  Spatial Option 2

This Option provides a slightly higher level of intervention in the centre, in order to strengthen the uses in the centre and provide greater improvements to the public realm.Royal Mail's Hockley DO is not identified for development within Spatial Option 2. However the site located to the immediate north, which abuts the boundary of Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified for development comprising a new office building and an extension to the car park located to the west.

Royal Mail also support this Option. However should any sites surrounding Royal Mail's Hockley DO be redeveloped it would be vital that any new uses be designed so that they are cognisant of and sensitive to Royal Mail's existing operations.

â–  Spatial Option 2a

This Option is the same as Option 2, however there is a slightly greater level of intervention on Spa Road. The AAP further expands on the proposed development of this Option stating that "the Somerfield/Co-op store and house above these and the post office sorting offices are replaced by new retail units with homes above, which can help to provide quality retail space and strengthen the links between Spa Road and Eldon Way further, with the creation of a new
small public space". Further the AAP states that "additional homes are provided on the site of the sorting office, to help improve the environment here and complement the existing housing opposite on Eldon Way".

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified in Option 2a for houses/mews houses and the provision of amenity space.

We note that the figure on page 40 identifies Royal Mail's site, reference 3c, as part of a wider site with the land to the west which is identified for shops with flats above. Further, the table on page 41 indicates that Royal Mail's Hockley DO will provide 6 residential units totalling 700 sq.m of gross external floorspace.

The Hockley DO is a vital operational site. For Royal Mail's Hockley DO to come forward for residential led mixed use development in the future it will be essential to relocate or re-provide Royal Mail's existing operations. However, there are currently no plans or timescales for the relocation/re-provision of Royal Mail's operations. Notwithstanding this it is our opinion that the Hockley DO site presents a good opportunity for a range of uses as part of the redevelopment
of Hockley centre, including large scale and small scale retail, residential, employment uses. Further, to come forward, redevelopment must generate values sufficient to make a relocation viable and attractive to Royal Mail.

â–  Spatial Option 3 and 3a

The AAP states that "This Option provides a higher level of intervention in Hockley centre than Options 1 and 2, in order to strengthen the uses in the centre, provide new homes in the area and provide greater improvements to the public realm".

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified in Option 3 and 3a for a supermarket in conjunction with the adjacent site to the west. On the table on page 53, Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified as Site 3 as part of the land to the immediate north and west. The land to the north of Royal Mail's site is identified for leisure with the land to the north-west for shops with flats above. The table states that the redevelopment of Royal Mail's site would provide 22 flats totalling 1,830 sq.m of gross external floorspace. We request that the Council clarifies whether Royal
Mail's Hockley DO site is identified in the AAP Option 3 and 3a for a retail supermarket or residential units.

As previously stated, The Hockley DO is a vital operational site and the comments above stand for any potential future redevelopment options.

ROYAL MAIL REPRESENTATIONS TO SPATIAL OPTION 2a 3, and 3a

Given the above, we request that the Council includes Royal Mail's Hockley DO site within the emerging Hockley AAP for mixed use development, supported by an appropriate flexible policy requiring the re-provision/relocation of Royal Mail's operations prior to the site's redevelopment. This will ensure that Royal Mail's operations will not be prejudiced and they can continue to comply with their licence issued pursuant to the Postal Services Act 2000, which requires the provision of a 'universal service' for the UK. Furthermore, as a provider of infrastructure, we would promote in such circumstances Royal Mail receiving assistance in their relocation. Further, as previously stated, should any sites surrounding Royal Mail's Hockley DO be redeveloped it would be vital that any new uses be designed so that they are cognisant of and sensitive to Royal Mail's existing operations.

This request accords with:

â–  Para 10 of Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing states that the planning system should deliver "a flexible, responsive supply of land - managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate";
â–  Para 36 of PPS3 which states that "in support of its objective of creating mixed and sustainable communities, the Government's policy is to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which offer a range of community facilities and with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. This should be achieved by making effective use of land, existing infrastructure and available public and private investment";
â–  Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4): Planning for Sustainable Economic Development. PPS4 details that Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) should plan positively and proactively to encourage economic development, in line with the principles of sustainable development. In particular, PPS4 states that LPAs should develop flexible policies which are able to respond to economic change and notes the need for co-ordination with infrastructure and housing
provision; and
â–  Policy EC.2 (b) of PPS4 which states that LPAs should "supports existing business sectors,
taking account of whether they are expanding or contracting ...";
â–  Policy EC.2 (d) of PPS4 which states that LPAs should "seeks to make the most efficient and effective use of land, prioritising previously developed land which is suitable for re-use" including town centres.

We reserve the right to amend or supplement these representations at a later date if necessary. We would therefore be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of our representations and advise as to the next stage of public consultation for the Hockley AAP. Further, Royal Mail would welcome the opportunity to take part in the stakeholder engagement as part of the development of the Hockley AAP.

Please do not hesitate to contact me on the above contact details should you have any queries.

We look forward to hearing from you in response to the above.

ROYAL MAIL REPRESENTATIONS TO ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL - HOCKLEY AREA ACTION PLAN OPTIONS REPORT NOVEMBER 2010

INTRODUCTION

We are instructed by Royal Mail Group Limited (Royal Mail) to submit representations to the Hockley Area Action Plan (AAP) Options Report November 2010.

BACKGROUND

Royal Mail formerly Consignia Plc, is the successor to the former statutory corporation, The Post Office. Although its management operates independently, Royal Mail is wholly owned by the Government through the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills. Its services are regulated by the Postal Services Regulator, Postcomm. Its letters business, Royal Mail is the operator of universal postal service functions through the Royal Mail letter post delivery and
collection services handling letters, postal packets, and high value (registered) packets. Royal Mail Group also operates Parcelforce Worldwide which is a parcels carrier. Post Office Ltd (a wholly owned subsidiary of Royal Mail) operates the national network of post offices and sub post offices.

The United Kingdom letter post business was fully liberalised in January 2006 by Postcomm and Royal Mail now operates in a highly competitive market place. As such, it effectively operates like any other business and is continually seeking to find ways to improve the efficiency of its business (e.g. increased automation) and respond to the changes in communications technology (e.g. email and internet). Put simply, the nature of the mail industry has and continues to change and Royal Mail's real estate needs to respond accordingly.

Royal Mail has a number of sites within the administrative boundary of Rochford District, including Hockley Delivery Office (DO), Eldon Way, Hockley SS5 4AA which falls within the area subject to the Hockley AAP.

REPRESENTATIONS

We set out below representations to the Hockley AAP Options Report, which revisits and updates earlier options developed for the AAP in 2009, in a format that corresponds with the Plan.

HOCKLEY AREA ACTION PLAN

â–  Section 4 - Overarching Framework and Principles

This section sets out the overarching approach for the Hockley AAP. One of the objectives of the AAP is to improve the public realm and pedestrian links. Under 'Approach to the spatial options' the AAP states that "In many cases, planning gain from developments can help to cross fund physical environment improvements nearby, which is particularly useful in a period of limited public funding".

Royal Mail acknowledges new development will create additional demand for infrastructure, services/facilities and public realm improvements. However, we request that any financial contribution towards the provision of such infrastructure, services/facilities and public realm improvements for Hockley is sought in areas where there is an identified need and at a level that ensures that the overall delivery of appropriate development is not compromised i.e. is subject to viability. This request accords with government guidance in Circular 05/05 which states that Section 106 contributions from development sites must be:

(i) relevant to planning;
(ii) necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms;
(iii) directly related to the proposed development;
(iv) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development; and
(v) reasonable in all other respects.

â–  Spatial Option 1

This Option is considered to be a 'minimal intervention approach'. The focus is on improvements to pedestrian links, parking and the public realm and shop front improvements along Spa Road, with a small number of poor quality buildings being replace by new shops.

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is not identified for development within Spatial Option 1. Royal Mail support this Option.

â–  Spatial Option 2

This Option provides a slightly higher level of intervention in the centre, in order to strengthen the uses in the centre and provide greater improvements to the public realm.Royal Mail's Hockley DO is not identified for development within Spatial Option 2. However the site located to the immediate north, which abuts the boundary of Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified for development comprising a new office building and an extension to the car park located to the west.

Royal Mail also support this Option. However should any sites surrounding Royal Mail's Hockley DO be redeveloped it would be vital that any new uses be designed so that they are cognisant of and sensitive to Royal Mail's existing operations.

â–  Spatial Option 2a

This Option is the same as Option 2, however there is a slightly greater level of intervention on Spa Road. The AAP further expands on the proposed development of this Option stating that "the Somerfield/Co-op store and house above these and the post office sorting offices are replaced by new retail units with homes above, which can help to provide quality retail space and strengthen the links between Spa Road and Eldon Way further, with the creation of a new
small public space". Further the AAP states that "additional homes are provided on the site of the sorting office, to help improve the environment here and complement the existing housing opposite on Eldon Way".

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified in Option 2a for houses/mews houses and the provision of amenity space.

We note that the figure on page 40 identifies Royal Mail's site, reference 3c, as part of a wider site with the land to the west which is identified for shops with flats above. Further, the table on page 41 indicates that Royal Mail's Hockley DO will provide 6 residential units totalling 700 sq.m of gross external floorspace.

The Hockley DO is a vital operational site. For Royal Mail's Hockley DO to come forward for residential led mixed use development in the future it will be essential to relocate or re-provide Royal Mail's existing operations. However, there are currently no plans or timescales for the relocation/re-provision of Royal Mail's operations. Notwithstanding this it is our opinion that the Hockley DO site presents a good opportunity for a range of uses as part of the redevelopment
of Hockley centre, including large scale and small scale retail, residential, employment uses. Further, to come forward, redevelopment must generate values sufficient to make a relocation viable and attractive to Royal Mail.

â–  Spatial Option 3 and 3a

The AAP states that "This Option provides a higher level of intervention in Hockley centre than Options 1 and 2, in order to strengthen the uses in the centre, provide new homes in the area and provide greater improvements to the public realm".

Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified in Option 3 and 3a for a supermarket in conjunction with the adjacent site to the west. On the table on page 53, Royal Mail's Hockley DO is identified as Site 3 as part of the land to the immediate north and west. The land to the north of Royal Mail's site is identified for leisure with the land to the north-west for shops with flats above. The table states that the redevelopment of Royal Mail's site would provide 22 flats totalling 1,830 sq.m of gross external floorspace. We request that the Council clarifies whether Royal
Mail's Hockley DO site is identified in the AAP Option 3 and 3a for a retail supermarket or residential units.

As previously stated, The Hockley DO is a vital operational site and the comments above stand for any potential future redevelopment options.

ROYAL MAIL REPRESENTATIONS TO SPATIAL OPTION 2a 3, and 3a

Given the above, we request that the Council includes Royal Mail's Hockley DO site within the emerging Hockley AAP for mixed use development, supported by an appropriate flexible policy requiring the re-provision/relocation of Royal Mail's operations prior to the site's redevelopment. This will ensure that Royal Mail's operations will not be prejudiced and they can continue to comply with their licence issued pursuant to the Postal Services Act 2000, which requires the provision of a 'universal service' for the UK. Furthermore, as a provider of infrastructure, we would promote in such circumstances Royal Mail receiving assistance in their relocation. Further, as previously stated, should any sites surrounding Royal Mail's Hockley DO be redeveloped it would be vital that any new uses be designed so that they are cognisant of and sensitive to Royal Mail's existing operations.

This request accords with:

â–  Para 10 of Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing states that the planning system should deliver "a flexible, responsive supply of land - managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate";
â–  Para 36 of PPS3 which states that "in support of its objective of creating mixed and sustainable communities, the Government's policy is to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which offer a range of community facilities and with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. This should be achieved by making effective use of land, existing infrastructure and available public and private investment";
â–  Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4): Planning for Sustainable Economic Development. PPS4 details that Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) should plan positively and proactively to encourage economic development, in line with the principles of sustainable development. In particular, PPS4 states that LPAs should develop flexible policies which are able to respond to economic change and notes the need for co-ordination with infrastructure and housing
provision; and
â–  Policy EC.2 (b) of PPS4 which states that LPAs should "supports existing business sectors,
taking account of whether they are expanding or contracting ...";
â–  Policy EC.2 (d) of PPS4 which states that LPAs should "seeks to make the most efficient and effective use of land, prioritising previously developed land which is suitable for re-use" including town centres.

We reserve the right to amend or supplement these representations at a later date if necessary. We would therefore be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of our representations and advise as to the next stage of public consultation for the Hockley AAP. Further, Royal Mail would welcome the opportunity to take part in the stakeholder engagement as part of the development of the Hockley AAP.

Please do not hesitate to contact me on the above contact details should you have any queries.

We look forward to hearing from you in response to the above.

HAAP Consultation January 2011

I wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road

We wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road

In response to the RDC Hockley Area Action Plan 2 please find my thoughts on these proposals in line with your online numbering system:

1) I would like to retain the village feel but would also like to see some gradual improvements to the village centre. I can not support any of the five proposals but would like to see some of the improvements included within them.

2) I am not against studies but this is the second major study on this subject and each one adds cost to our council tax.

3) Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution and expecting the public to fill in a complicated online response for a second time is an unfair method of consultation. I believe the public now have consultation fatigue and will not respond in sufficient numbers.

4) One of the obvious locations for improvement is the Foundry Estate that is missing from the list.

5) Option 1. This appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. I do not believe the parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. I do not believe table top crossings are a good idea. They will certainly not solve the traffic issues.

6) Option 2. To just replace the Coop funeral parlour and not the other single story buildings in this are does not make sense. Additional offices are not required as there are empty units on the Foundry Estate. Existing shops should not be turned into homes. The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the car park should be taken from Woodlands Road. A new home on Spa Road, close to the train station is unnecessary. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. Potters parking should not be changed especially as parking for flats would be necessary. If a green link walk way was created through the churchyard a crossing should be provided to cross Southend Road at its end.

Option 2a. I do not like the look of the proposed new shops and flats. They look like a bland row of characterless council homes. The sorting office area should not be used unless a replacement is built first, as we should not loose jobs unnecessarily. If the sorting office area was used the Junction of Eldon Way and Spa Road should be widened with a roundabout and Eldon way should be used to access a new free shopping car park. This also appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. Something should be included to replace the Foundry area. The area from Walton & Stanton's to Harrison's restaurant should also be replaced and additional parking provided.

7) Option 3. To replace the relatively modern building opposite Potters that appears to be in current use makes no sense.
The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the car park should only be taken from Woodlands Road. I cannot find the proposed replacement of poor quality building on Southend Road, with retail and homes to the rear. Additional offices are not required as there are empty units on the Foundry Estate. Existing shops should not be turned into homes. The replacement of the Coop is unnecessary. This also appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. A new home on Spa Road, close to the train station is unnecessary. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. Spa Junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. Potters parking should not be changed especially as parking for flats would be necessary. If a green link walk way was created through the churchyard a crossing should be provided to cross Southend Road at its end. The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road.

Option 3a. The new housing is provided to the north of the railway line, along Plumberow Avenue is a good idea but it would increase the traffic at the junction with Greensward Lane. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea.

8) Transport Options. The proposed modified roundabout would improve the situation but from schemes I have experienced of shared junctions I believe they are dangerous and should not be considered at this busy intersection. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the Southend Road car park should only be taken from Woodlands Road. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea. If the sorting office area was used the Junction of Eldon Way and Spa Road should be widened with a roundabout and Eldon way should be used to access a new free shopping car park.

9) Funding & Delivery. In the current financial climate I believe this kind of development will not happen. There seems be little demand for new shops and offices and even the demand for homes is hampered by the restrictions on mortgages. Any new developments would have to be carried out by a major developer who would need to pay for any infrastructure required.

10) To expect the public to make my online response to this document is not a fair request especially as this is the second consultation on this subject. I believe the public now have consultation fatigue and will not respond in sufficient numbers to get a realistic opinion.

My Response to the RDC HAAP

In response to the RDC Hockley Area Action Plan 2 please find my thoughts on these proposals in line with your online numbering system:

1) I would like to retain the village feel but would also like to see some gradual improvements to the village centre. I can not support any of the five proposals but would like to see some of the improvements included within them.

2) I am not against studies but this is the second major study on this subject and each one adds cost to our council tax.

3) Producing a heavy weight document that prevented printing and general distribution and expecting the public to fill in a complicated online response for a second time is an unfair method of consultation. I believe the public now have consultation fatigue and will not respond in sufficient numbers.

4) One of the obvious locations for improvement is the Foundry Estate that is missing from the list.

5) Option 1. This appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. I do not believe the parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. I do not believe table top crossings are a good idea. They will certainly not solve the traffic issues.

6) Option 2. To just replace the Coop funeral parlour and not the other single story buildings in this are does not make sense. Additional offices are not required as there are empty units on the Foundry Estate. Existing shops should not be turned into homes. The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the car park should be taken from Woodlands Road. A new home on Spa Road, close to the train station is unnecessary. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. Potters parking should not be changed especially as parking for flats would be necessary. If a green link walk way was created through the churchyard a crossing should be provided to cross Southend Road at its end.

Option 2a. I do not like the look of the proposed new shops and flats. They look like a bland row of characterless council homes. The sorting office area should not be used unless a replacement is built first, as we should not loose jobs unnecessarily. If the sorting office area was used the Junction of Eldon Way and Spa Road should be widened with a roundabout and Eldon way should be used to access a new free shopping car park. This also appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. Something should be included to replace the Foundry area. The area from Walton & Stanton's to Harrison's restaurant should also be replaced and additional parking provided.

7) Option 3. To replace the relatively modern building opposite Potters that appears to be in current use makes no sense.
The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the car park should only be taken from Woodlands Road. I cannot find the proposed replacement of poor quality building on Southend Road, with retail and homes to the rear. Additional offices are not required as there are empty units on the Foundry Estate. Existing shops should not be turned into homes. The replacement of the Coop is unnecessary. This also appears to replace existing single story shops near the Factory Shop with single story shops. I believe a recent proposal to use the Factory Shop car park for a takeaway food outlet has already been turned down in the planning stage. A new home on Spa Road, close to the train station is unnecessary. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. Spa Junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. Potters parking should not be changed especially as parking for flats would be necessary. If a green link walk way was created through the churchyard a crossing should be provided to cross Southend Road at its end. The proposed redevelopment of the existing library and health centre to provide a new combined community centre with library and health facilities should not be squeezed into the area allocated and should not include shops in this area. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road.

Option 3a. The new housing is provided to the north of the railway line, along Plumberow Avenue is a good idea but it would increase the traffic at the junction with Greensward Lane. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea.

8) Transport Options. The proposed modified roundabout would improve the situation but from schemes I have experienced of shared junctions I believe they are dangerous and should not be considered at this busy intersection. Consideration should be given to include and replace the Indian restaurant area and the shop opposite Walton & Stanton's to bring the building line back from the road for Spa Junction improvements. The shops opposite Walton & Stanton's should be replaced with homes not shops and should be accessed only from Woodlands Road. This junction should be replaced with modern computer controlled traffic lights with additional lanes. The access to the Southend Road car park should only be taken from Woodlands Road. The creation of a new parking area on the south side of the train station, for weekday commuters is a good idea but I do not believe it will be used by weekend shoppers. The vehicular drop-off and pick-up points should not be in the car park but at the station. Maybe the seating area at the side of Kilnfield House could be utilized. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea. I do not believe the parallel parking proposals are practical and the width of Spa Road should not reduce with trees planted close to shops. I believe the new northern entrance to the train station is also a good idea. If the sorting office area was used the Junction of Eldon Way and Spa Road should be widened with a roundabout and Eldon way should be used to access a new free shopping car park.

9) Funding & Delivery. In the current financial climate I believe this kind of development will not happen. There seems be little demand for new shops and offices and even the demand for homes is hampered by the restrictions on mortgages. Any new developments would have to be carried out by a major developer who would need to pay for any infrastructure required.

10) To expect the public to make my online response to this document is not a fair request especially as this is the second consultation on this subject. I believe the public now have consultation fatigue and will not respond in sufficient numbers to get a realistic opinion.

Sirs,

We have previously raised objections to the HAAP, by e-mail and presume that despite the note on the RDC website methods other than use of the online link remain valid (we cannot be alone in finding the online "facility"
unhelpful).

Where we refer to option 2 and or 3 it refers to all variations of these options unless stated otherwise

Firstly we believe that the council should be clearer on the reasons for the necessity of the plan. We understand that this is two-fold:-
1) without a plan the council is stranded when refusing planning permission (particularly for housing and commercial development)
2) The council wishes to press ahead with housing development (despite national government withdrawing the requirement for 3,000+ homes in the are), because national government offers a council tax matching incentive, which will double the council's income from any housing development. This is referred to in the final pages of the document "Funding & Delivery - New Homes Bonus". Report also fails to mention other approved housing developments and proposals that have or are taking place at present and how many houses are actually being built in the area or have been built in last decade. These need to be offset against RDC's insistence in pressing ahead for more housing. Options 2 and 3 are unacceptable because of the extensive

Introduction - low density nature and reasonable character are mentioned yet several of the options (2 & 3) seek to completely destroy this and should therefore be rejected.

Firstly observe that the document is incorrect and out-of-date in places.

Pg 4 Retail Study - Alldays is now occupied; a second "supermarket" opened (although currently closed following a fire it is presumed it will re-open); planning application has been submitted to Factory Shop car park (which surely should be refused, given that other alternative locations exist and one of the main issues with Hockley is the lack of parking in the High St.

Noted that all the maps of Hockley show Spa roundabout as "give way" on all sides - this is incorrect vehicles exiting Spa Road and Woodlands Road are required to stop.


Pg 4 and options 2 and 3 are insistent on the provision of further office space there are however several office locations awaiting letting (around Spa Roundabout and Kilnfield House are prime examples.

Still on pg 4 - improvements to frontage are mentioned, but nothing about considering potential to use historic style shopfronts to try and keep in line with older premises e.g. Spa and avoiding neon signage

Physical context and much of the report fails to mention that B1013 is already the busiest B road in Essex, continued development all along the road e.g. opp Rayleigh Cemetery and various in fill sites, plus proposals for Hall Road and Ironwell Lane will only lead to more traffic, as will any development in Hockley and Hawkwell. Any development should therefore be on a small scale 10's or 100's of dwellings are not acceptable.

Pg 8 Consultation feedback whilst agree with most comments questionable whether there are enough participants for this to be representative.

Pg 10 Foundry Industrial estate is not mentioned - existing businesses should be encouraged to stay, but consideration (if housing really must
occur) give to conversion of unoccupied premises. Area next to Station platform on South side, now proposed as a car park would also make suitable housing option - curious as to why this hasn't been explored - are there proposals to widen the rail network for freight?

Pg 14 Framework - consider moving Health facility at Eldon Way to site near Jones practice surgery/library - believe this was in original HAAP, but hasn't been carried over. Land to west of Eldon Way along Sap Road could all potentially be converted to housing.

Option 1
This offers very few benefits and doesn't go far enough in protecting the area. As with the whole of the document it is unhelpful in not naming the current occupier of the premises where changes are envisaged e.g the warehouse style premises at 2 Main Road and 34-40 Spa Road? It also isn't explained how established businesses are meant to adopt the plan.

Opening up the parking is a good idea, but with the Funeral Parlour at former Alldays site is likely to prove impossible there for the present.

Enhancing green pedestrian link between Bramerton Road and Eldon Way - Wasn't even aware there was a green link that's how well used that is

Why however, to ease stress on the road has a through road from Eldon Way to the Station not been considered - this would link two industrial sites provide additional access to the leisure facilities and remove some of the issues around the station. Indeed may be worth considering that this should be the only way of driving to the station - make station approach exit only and introduce waiting area?

What is "secondary road treatment" pg 22?

Would question planting of additional trees only seem to attract litter and dog's mess at the moment

Option 2 Unacceptable as it stands. If the council insist on building further premises, why are they to be built on some of the few attractions to Hockley i.e. Monkey Business and the Bowling Alley? Surely better use would be conversion of some of the premises on the Foundry Estate, particularly Kilnfield House, which is only partially occupied and would fit in as flats with the existing flats in the area (all of which actually were an improvement to what was there before).

We also have reference to more office space, but the existing office space is not utilised (Spa roundabout and Kilnfield House for example.

Again why only a pedestrian link to station from Eldon Way and not a road?
Why not provide pedestrian link from High St and open up existing Car Parks to rear of most of these properties - as with area behind shops on Main Road which is always utilised. Could link not also run though Pub beer garden or Old Fire Station area?

Pg 26 what is stronger frontage - meaningless phrase.

"a is even worse - development makes it look like a city suburb (perhaps preparation for Southend getting City status and Rochford being swallowed
up?) Where do all these premises go and in respect of the sorting office especially the jobs?

Major concern is that the redevelopment of Eldon Way is merely an excuse to try and move business to airport in order that the council can justify the
(over) development of the surrounding green belt there. Why are Council even considering movement of business attractions to Hockley e.g. Bowling and Monkey Business, just need to make access easier and these elements will surely bring trade.

Pg 35 C - why not housing if housing is necessary D - consider road entry/exit via Eldon Way to Station and exit only from Station Approach and/or alternate one-way on that Road and Spa Road between Station Approach and Eldon Way Evening/Morning

E - what about deliveries of stock etc

Option 3 - as with 2 this represents significant over development and is unacceptable in current form.

Pg 42 - Replacement of poor quality building on Southend Road - which one not specified New homes in churchyard curious option - access for cars etc and how does this fit with development proposed on Factory Shop car park?? Seems to be unnecessary cramming

Pg 44 table top crossing - doesn't mention whether the comparable sites are actually as busy as this road (very much doubt it) - one of the major issues at Spa roundabout is that drivers often commit offences (speeding, mobile 'phones etc), fail to signal correctly and fail to use the roundabout as intended (cut across). Simple improvement may be to introduce a flexible bollard to ensure vehicles navigate properly at low speed?

Pg 53 6 replacing existing business with so many houses, no consideration of infrastructure requirements, drainage and effluent waste - (flooding and power problems exist on the Betts Farm Estate of this nature and will surely be mirrored here).

Pg 59 - doubtful this would work, insufficient vehicles turning right from Southend Road to permit vehicles to exit Spa Road. Also poor sight lines for vehicles turning left

Pg 63 varying heights are a nightmare for elderly and partially sighted especially in poor weather. Further problems would occur if there is a repeat of the recent lack of gritting of surrounding roads and pavement areas.

Pg 68 Without repeating previous arguments there seems little justification for further office building when can't let existing. How is it justified that demand is strong - there are several sites that are long term vacant - Alldays only recently occupied, Butchers recently occupied as a taxi office (why they needed such a big space - perhaps they though they could park in it); Greengrocers, Electrical Store and further back on Main Road old Chemist, plus various sites opposite Potters.

All in all seems council want too many houses and to move established businesses without properly considering how to make pedestrian access and movement easier and therefore proposals should be rejected.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Hockley Area Action Plan document.

The area covered in the Hockley AAP is served by Rochford Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) where there is adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed flows from all three Spatial Options. Currently there are no significant issues with the sewerage network.

Spatial Option 1:- This option has no major impact to the foul network or the WwTW. Surface water should comply with PPS25 and be removed from the public surface water (SW) system where possible.

Spatial Option 2:- This proposal includes for 56 new properties. This option has no major impact to the foul network or the WwTW. Surface water should comply with PPS25 and be removed from the public SW system where possible.

Spatial Option 3:- This proposal includes for a total of 159 properties (95 flats and 54 houses). The full impact to the foul network will have to be properly assessed to determine if infrastructure upgrades will be required prior to connection. Surface water should comply with PPS25 and be removed from the public SW system where possible.

Spatial Option 3a:- This proposal includes for a total of 107 properties (82 flats and 25 houses). The full impact to the foul network will have to be properly assessed to determine if infrastructure upgrades will be required prior to connection. Surface water should comply with PPS25 and be removed from the public SW system where possible.

I wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road

I wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road

I/we wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road

I wish to register the following objections regarding the above consultation:

Chapter 4. Overarching Frame work: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements.

Option 1: Object: Insufficient benefits.

Option 2a: Object: Inappropriate changes and missed opportunities.

Options 3: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Options 3a: Object: Inappropriate changes and over development.

Chapter 8. Transport options: Object: Previous consultations have made clear that highways infrastructure improvements to the key junctions at: Spa roundabout; Eldon Way; Station Approach and Plumberow need to be determined as a precursor to any redevelopment. Insufficient attention has been paid to these key requirements and the sketch proposals provided have not been researched and may not be viable.

Option 2: Object: This option forms the basis of an appropriate plan but does not go far enough but support an enhanced version as follows (changes in italics):

Roads (key priority and subject to viability confirmation)

Improvements to Spa Roundabout e.g. Slip lanes or Table top crossing
Improvements to Eldon Way, Station Approach, and Plumberow junctions

Parking:

Added/Consolidated parking square behind shops on west side of Spa Road reached via Eldon Way and (if possible) Bramerton Rd
Added on-street parallel parking in Spa Road and pick-up/drop-off points both sides of Hockley Station

Building changes

Redevelop shops on Southside of Main Road, opposite Potters, to remove 'pinch -point' on B1013
Change from retail to housing at Costcutters Parade of shops
Modernised retail units with 4 flats above Seemore Glass
Modernised retail units with 2 added retail units at Factory Shop/Car park area (to remain single storey)
Redevelop Co-Op Undertakers etc and extend to join existing shops either side, removing access roads creating additional Retail
Community centre with library/health centre/shops at current library location with 13 flats and 2 retail units
2 large format retail units in Eldon Way (delete from proposals)
Replacement of one industrial building with light industry/ offices/ parking square on Eldon Way
Retail unit near station in Spa Road replaced by house
Housing on north side of Station along Plumberow Ave, to include railway drop-off point
Retail option (possibly a market) to be considered for Sorting Office site
Options for undeveloped portion of Foundry Estate to be considered.

General

Enhanced station frontage & Pedestrian link to Eldon Way (but care re safety considerations)
Enhanced shop fronts, paving and streetscape Spa Road / Main Road / Southend Road
Improved safety, consolidated and new leisure space on Eldon Way
Flexible employment opportunities, enhanced frontages to leisure/other buildings on Eldon Way
New link through Catholic Church from Spa Road to Southend Road