Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.

Option TC3 - Rochford Town Centre Boundary

We support this option

We certainly do not support change if, by making the boundary smaller, this will put the existing buildings outside of the conservation area.

We maintain that option TC3 should be the basis of any Town Centre Study and that to introduce any change will put constraints on the economic development of Rochford and there should not be any change without proper consultation and the production of a report on the findings of previous consultation.

Is it your intention to publicise the findings of the original consultation?

We see no evidence in this document that responses from the Rochford Area Action Plan Consultation have been taken into account. The Allocations Document should give due consideration to the views of stakeholders in the community.

The Chamber of Trade took part in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan consultation and consequently do not agree with the proposed boundary changes as it was not an issue raised in this consultation.

The town centre should be an area that consists of the primary shopping area and areas that are predominantly business, leisure and other associated town centre uses. i.e not only retail.

If the boundary was made smaller as in TC4, TC5 and TC6 there is a danger that existing businesses that fall outside of the boundary could be put in jeopardy. For example, the businesses in the lower half of West Street and the Riverside Industrial Estate could be outside the boundary which makes no sense at all. If it is not the case that these businesses are excluded from the protection of the boundary, then we see no merit, advantage or argument for change.

Bradley Way should remain within the boundary.

We do not agree with Back Lane car park being outside the boundary and again can see no merit in this proposal.