Policy 4 - Increasing the availability of housing

Showing comments and forms 1 to 12 of 12

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28350

Received: 11/12/2012

Respondent: Hockley Residents Association

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Report proposes extra housing "north of rail line" by consolidating car parking in Eldon Way but inadequate parking proposed.
No Traffic Assessment (TA) to assess impact on traffic having to go through railway bridge bottleneck.

Full text:

Report proposes extra housing "north of rail line" by consolidating car parking in Eldon Way but inadequate parking proposed.
No Traffic Assessment (TA) to assess impact on traffic having to go through railway bridge bottleneck.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28351

Received: 11/12/2012

Respondent: Hockley Residents Association

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Insufficient parking levels result in Capacity Study being undermined.and inaccurate.

Full text:

Insufficient parking levels result in Capacity Study being undermined.and inaccurate.

Support

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28384

Received: 21/12/2012

Respondent: Ms Jean Townsend

Representation Summary:

If more houses must be built, then central, brownfield sites such as this are a good solution. It should be like the terraced houses beside the old Spa - of highest quality dimensions and materials. I do not know whether 50 dwellings per hectare is generous. There should be no housing with mean little rooms and no synthetic little flats. This is not the location for 'affordable' or mixed quality homes.

Full text:

If more houses must be built, then central, brownfield sites such as this are a good solution. It should be like the terraced houses beside the old Spa - of highest quality dimensions and materials. I do not know whether 50 dwellings per hectare is generous. There should be no housing with mean little rooms and no synthetic little flats. This is not the location for 'affordable' or mixed quality homes.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28403

Received: 04/01/2013

Respondent: Mr Richard Pryor

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

As previously stated Hockley is a VILLAGE not a Town and as such already has sufficient housing within the central area. Further having enquired about new housing in the Ashingdon area some 6 years ago I was told that the sewerage system was near to full capacity. If that applied then how is the sewerage system going to cope with an additiona 3,500 houses. Further the local roads are already congested and any additional housing in this area will increase the road traffic

Full text:

As previously stated Hockley is a VILLAGE not a Town and as such already has sufficient housing within the central area. Further having enquired about new housing in the Ashingdon area some 6 years ago I was told that the sewerage system was near to full capacity. If that applied then how is the sewerage system going to cope with an additiona 3,500 houses. Further the local roads are already congested and any additional housing in this area will increase the road traffic

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28440

Received: 13/01/2013

Respondent: Mr Kelvin White

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

i fail to see why several huge brownfield sites in southend (former tax and lloyds bank buildings along victoria road for example) cannot absorb the additional housing requirement that is 'needed'. hockley cannot support additional housing.

Full text:

i fail to see why several huge brownfield sites in southend (former tax and lloyds bank buildings along victoria road for example) cannot absorb the additional housing requirement that is 'needed'. hockley cannot support additional housing.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28459

Received: 15/01/2013

Respondent: Ms Jean Townsend

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The proposal is not sound judging by recent developments such as Alpha in Rectory Road. RDC should prevent developers cramming homes together, up against railway lines, with small rooms and plots. RDC should refuse any proposals for ugly THICK WHITE UPVC windows, doors, sofits and exterior boarding. Bad WHITE UPVC is a glaring mould or infestation which has blighted the district. The science of wood and aluminium fittings has advanced and developers should take pains to provide this or the finest, darkest top quality synthetics.

Full text:

The proposal is not sound judging by recent developments such as Alpha in Rectory Road. RDC should prevent developers cramming homes together, up against railway lines, with small rooms and plots. RDC should refuse any proposals for ugly THICK WHITE UPVC windows, doors, sofits and exterior boarding. Bad WHITE UPVC is a glaring mould or infestation which has blighted the district. The science of wood and aluminium fittings has advanced and developers should take pains to provide this or the finest, darkest top quality synthetics.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28460

Received: 15/01/2013

Respondent: Ms Jean Townsend

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The proposal to replace the station car parking with housing is NOT sound. No-one should have to live up against a railway line. Properties beside railway track suffer noise pollution, lack of privacy, and a sense of crushing from without.

There should be no reduction in these parking places at the station. There may be an increased need for spaces, especially for commuters, who should not have to park elsewhere.

Full text:

The proposal to replace the station car parking with housing is NOT sound. No-one should have to live up against a railway line. Properties beside railway track suffer noise pollution, lack of privacy, and a sense of crushing from without.

There should be no reduction in these parking places at the station. There may be an increased need for spaces, especially for commuters, who should not have to park elsewhere.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28550

Received: 20/01/2013

Respondent: Mr A James

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Again this would mean redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. I believe this light industrial area it completely unsuitable for housing. In other sections this document talks about increasing parking, which goes against building on the car park in Plumberow Avenue that I believe belongs to the railways. I therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Full text:

Again this would mean redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. I believe this light industrial area it completely unsuitable for housing. In other sections this document talks about increasing parking, which goes against building on the car park in Plumberow Avenue that I believe belongs to the railways. I therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28572

Received: 20/01/2013

Respondent: Mr Peter Symes

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

250 dwellings per year - for how many years (10,000 in 40) ? - until concreted over? Why, no consideration to the amount of building at other sites that is going through (am aware this is a fund raiser for council with central Gov providing extra money for each home buit) and sites to be identified - Bullwood Hall????
No traffic assessment - Spa Road is already very busy and access from side roads difficult,
Additionally no thought anywhere to lack of pavement along Spa Road from Eldon Way to Station

Full text:

250 dwellings per year - for how many years (10,000 in 40) ? - until concreted over? Why, no consideration to the amount of building at other sites that is going through (am aware this is a fund raiser for council with central Gov providing extra money for each home buit) and sites to be identified - Bullwood Hall????
No traffic assessment - Spa Road is already very busy and access from side roads difficult,
Additionally no thought anywhere to lack of pavement along Spa Road from Eldon Way to Station

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28646

Received: 23/01/2013

Respondent: Mr Philip Martin

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The houses, if approved, must be affordable for those on a normal wage and the council needs to make provision for extra schools, doctor's surgeries and dental practices.

Full text:

I have two major concerns regarding the 100 new homes planned for the site:

1) While Hockley needs affordable housing current local planning approval appears to favour large 4 or 5 bed houses that are clearly not within the reach of those on a normal wage and do not facilitate the development of the community by excluding those that work in professions that would improve social cohesion such as health and education professionals. If Hockley is not to become a soulless commuter enclave it needs to be inclusive when considering its housing policy.

2) The 100 new homes may be welcome (depending on size) but there is nothing in the plan to deal with the additional 100 families and their needs for local services. Plumberow school is already over prescribed as local Doctors and Dentists.

Support

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28795

Received: 25/01/2013

Respondent: Mrs Susan Martin

Representation Summary:

For the plan to be a sound document for Hockley housing issues should carefully consider what the area can reasonably support

Full text:

For the plan to be a sound document for Hockley housing issues should carefully consider what the area can reasonably support

Object

Hockley Area Action Plan Submission Document

Representation ID: 28894

Received: 21/01/2013

Respondent: Hawkwell Residents Association

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Policy 4 - Increasing the availability of housing

Comments: Again this would mean redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. We believe this light industrial area it completely unsuitable for housing. In other sections this document talks about increasing parking, which goes against building on the car park in Plumberow Avenue that we believe belongs to the railways. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Full text:

Hawkwell Residents Association Response to the RDC HAAP 2013

1.1 The big picture

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

Comments: Explain and include your residents in any decisions. Councils are supposed to foster localism but the Parish Plan produced by the residents has been completely ignored.

1.2 Working with our community

Comments: This is a lie; the Parish Plan produced by the residents has almost been completely ignored. Consultation has been minimal to avoid the confrontations that were produced by HAAP1. All RDC want to do is finance this plan by letting a developer build a large (up to 3,000 sq m) supermarket that residents do not want or need in the middle of our village. A large supermarket development will also cause the demise of our local shops causing them to struggle as they do in Woodham Ferrers. This will cause unacceptable amounts of traffic on the already overloaded B1013 bring traffic in our village to a complete standstill making it almost impossible to get in and out of Hockley village by car.

Changes: Keep changes to a minimum as requested by the majority in the Hockley Parish Plan produced by the Hockley residents.

1.3 Working with our partners

Comments: We do not know who these partners are but they certainly are not the Hawkwell or Hockley Residents Associations and as for localism RDC do not understand the meaning of the word. Very little attempt has been made to include the local residents in this process.

Changes: Include local people at all stages and get something that the majority agree with thereby avoiding confrontations.

1.4 The AAP area

Comments: At present there are fewer empty shops (one out of around 40 to 50) in Hockley than any other village we know. The plan to build a large supermarket will make that situation far worse. We currently have 3 small to medium size supermarkets in Hockley village and we believe that is enough for local residents.

Changes: If additional shops are necessary Hockley can take it but don't include a large supermarket.

2.1 The Hockley Context

Comments: The Hockley Parish Plan produced by the residents has almost been completely ignored.

Changes: Include local people at all stages of the process.

2.2 Place profile

Comments: The Hockley Parish Plan produced by the residents has almost been completely ignored.

Changes: Include local people at all stages of the process.

2.3 Policy context

Comments: There are a number of proposed changes on parking, planting trees, improvements to the spa roundabout etc and some of these items are desirable but they are completely reliant on finance from the developer. The only way this will be achieved is by letting a developer build a large supermarket in Hockley that residents do not want and do not need. We believe this is not legal as this would be against localism and the published Hockley Parish Plan.

Changes: Work within the Hockley Parish Plan and include local people at all stages of the process.



2.4 Retail issues

Comments: In 2008 Hockley only had one supermarket and now has three. We believe the current supermarkets do not get a massive turnover during weekdays and do not need the competition of a large supermarket on their door step. A large supermarket would probably mean the demise of one or two of the current supermarkets we have reducing the choice residents have once again. We do not believe a developer of a large supermarket would finance all the improvement measures already stated plus enhancing the current shops. We believe that what RDC is proposing is not possible and therefore not legal.

Changes: Include local people at all stages of the process.

2.5 Employment issues

Comments: RDC are using a study that is 5 years old and we believe this is unacceptable and not legal.

Changes: Cary out an up to date study.

2.6 Land ownership context

Comments: It is not stated but we believe the term Hockley Trading Estate includes Eldon Way and The Foundry Estate. We are informed that these areas are not owned by the same owner. RDC is stating that the Hockley Trading Estate is largely owned by a single land owner, which we believe is not true and therefore not sound.

Changes: Statement made is too vague and should be investigated before publishing them.

2.7 Property market overview

Comments: It would appear that by referring to the 2007 credit crunch some 6 years ago, that most of the information stated is out of date. Since that time we have had two additional supermarkets in our village. Eldon Way is holding up very well despite having the blight of the HAAP hanging over it. RDC have stated that Eldon Way offers a good opportunity for residential development. As most of the units are occupied this is not true and therefore not sound. The main area that has empty units is local to the currents shops and could form a natural extension to the shopping area. We do not believe there is any demand for offices, there are plenty of empty ones already.

Changes: Use up to date information not statements that are no longer true.

2.8 Movement issues

Comments: There is no mention of improvements to the Spa Road junctions with Eldon Way and the Foundry Estate that would be required if additional use was made of these areas, only enhanced crossing facilities is mentioned. Some of these improvements are worthy but removing guardrail along Spa Road is crazy, as the local police meetings are requesting additional guardrail outside Sainsbury's. This highlights how out of touch RDC are with local requirements making these statements unsound.

Changes: Use up to date information not statements that are no longer true.

2.9 The Sustainability Appraisal

Comments: There are proposals to make changes to the Spa roundabout but no mention of improvements to the Spa Road junctions with Eldon Way and the Foundry Estate that would be required if additional use was made of these areas. The appraisal is not comprehensive enough and in our opinion therefore not sound.

Changes: Make a more comprehensive appraisal.

3.1 What makes for a sustainable Hockley?

Comments: Hockley may need additional housing but not at the expense of a thriving trading centre. The current trading centre is sustainable as the majority of its work force live in our village and can walk to work. Moving the trading centre out of our village would result in additional travel to work and hence make this proposal unsustainable and unsound.

Changes: Leave the trading centre where it is.



3.2 Vision & objectives

Comments: 1) Hockley now has three supermarkets competing with each other, which means most food shopping can be carried out locally. 2) In our opinion Hockley does not need a new public space. 4) We do not see how this is compatible with building an additional supermarket and housing in this area, which makes this statement unsound.

Changes: Leave the trading centre where it is. This area is unsuitable for housing accept for some flat above shops near the current shopping area.

3.3 Arriving at a framework

Comments: It is very difficult to make a full assessment as these proposals are too vague but we do not believe a large supermarket is required in our village (which is not a town centre), as we currently have three. If the Foundry Business Park has been upgraded we had not noticed it as it still looks a complete mess. If RDC want to keep the current trading area we fail to see where new housing would be built as this is not made clear in these proposals. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Clarify the proposals.

Policy 1 - Hockley Area Action Plan framework

Comments: As we have stated in 3.3, it is very difficult to make a full assessment as these proposals are too vague. The drawing provided is unclear and we believe has many errors on it. Some of the parking is show in Eldon Way where access ramps to existing building are at present. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Clarify the proposals.

4. Proposals plan & area-wide policies

Comments: The area show on the drawing marked as Eldon Way Opportunity Site is where the majority of employment is currently. This would imply that this area would be redeveloped, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Clarify the proposals.

Policy 2 - Delivering environmental improvements

Comments: We do not believe Hockley requires an additional public space. We consider a raised entry on Woodlands Road would be dangerous as they give a false sense of security. There is no street clutter to speak of and trees planted near existing buildings could undermine foundations and add to street clutter. We believe the Spa roundabout could be improved by adding extra lanes but with the limited space available we cannot see how pavement could also be widened. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Most of these proposals are unnecessary and undesirable.

Policy 3 - Promoting better movement

Comments: We do not believe that a developer would do any of this work unless it could make a massive redevelopment of the area including a major supermarket and mass house building, which Hockley does not want or need. This would mean redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. There are no estimated costings, which we believe would cost many millions of pounds. Some of these proposals would be on railway property, which are notoriously difficult to deal with. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Change to more realistic proposals.

Policy 4 - Increasing the availability of housing

Comments: Again this would mean redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. We believe this light industrial area it completely unsuitable for housing. In other sections this document talks about increasing parking, which goes against building on the car park in Plumberow Avenue that we believe belongs to the railways. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Change to more realistic proposals.


Policy 5 - Protecting jobs

Comments: We do not believe there is a demand for offices. Offices were planned near the airport and were cancelled and there are many empty ones in and around the village at the moment. It appears that this proposal is based on a 5 year old study that we believe to now be unsound. If the Foundry Estate has been upgraded it is not obvious from the outside of this asbestos roofed building. We do not believe any of these proposals will protect jobs and we therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Use up to date studies.

Policy 6 - Improving retail choice for local people

Comments: Hockley now has three supermarkets and we now have sufficient choice for our village. We do not require an additional supermarket up to 3,000 sq m as the current supermarkets do not get a massive turnover during weekdays and do not need the competition of a large supermarket on their door step. We believe a new large supermarket could lead to closure of one or more of our current ones and hence give us less choice. Again this has been based on a 5 year old study and we therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Use up to date studies.

Policy 7 - Ensuring a healthy centre

Comments: As this item is based on a 7 year old plan and a 5 year old study we therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Use up to date plans and studies.

Policy 8 - Encourage leisure opportunities

Comments: If the previous proposals mentioned in other items go ahead some of the current leisure facilities will be replaced by housing and CJ Bowling would be surrounded by shops and homes. This is completely unclear on the drawings provided and we therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Give clear information and drawings.

5.1 Working in partnership

Comments: We believe this will be a very complicated as we do not believe that most of the area proposed for redevelopment is largely in the control of a single land owner. There is no telling what ECC Highways will propose. One thing that seems to have been completely overlooked is the bottle neck under the railway bridge. In our opinion this needs to be widened by providing a separate pedestrian tunnel as in Wickford and Shenfield. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Working in partnership is easy to say but not so easy to achieve. As we have said on previous items we cannot believe a developer will take this on without a major development project. We believe some of this work would only be achieved by not using a developer but by obtaining government funds as they do in Southend and other places.

5.2 Financial viability

Comments: This again means redevelopment of Eldon Way, which contradicts the previous statements of retaining Eldon Way as a trading centre. There is no mention of what happens to all the current businesses using this area, all the job losses if they cannot afford to move to other premises and the travelling miles that would be required if they moved miles away from Hockley. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Make a more sensible financially plan.

5.3 Community infrastructure

Comments: These costings seem on the low side especially the Spa roundabout upgrade, which we believe would be in the order of £1 m alone. Nothing has been allowed for the bottle neck under the railway bridge. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Make a more sensible financially costings.
5.4 Monitoring change

Comments: We do not believe RDC have complied with the Localism Act 2011 as very little attempt has been made to include the local residents in this process, they have certainly not included the Hawkwell or Hockley Residents Association. They say they have included items from the Hockley Parish Plan but we see no evidence of this. We therefore believe this proposal to be unsound.

Changes: Include local people at all stages and get something that the majority agree with to avoid confrontations.