East Community Forum 18th October

I attended the first re-formatted Community Forum this week, an opportunity for Residents to learn more about what is happening in their area and meet their Councillors. There was also representation from local PCTs (primary care trusts) and the Police. Whilst the theme of the evening was "budgets" and the Leader of the Council, Terry Cutmore, invited questions from the audience on any aspects of the Council's spending plans, he also made it clear that questions on any subject were welcome.

In their previous incarnation, the Community Forums were arranged formally, such that the Councillors sat behind a row of tables, and questions ideally needed to be submitted prior to the meeting.

Whilst "special guest" attendees from the PCTs, and the Police, joined the Leader and Chief Executive of the Council at the top table, the local District and Parish Councillors sat with the residents. More importantly, questions could be raised at the meeting, and the intention was to answer them, as far as possible, there and then.

Funnily enough, no questions were raised about the Council's budgets. I guess, unsurprisingly, no one has studied the budgets in detail or no one present was affected by the consequences of some of the cut backs. Maybe when the West Community Forum takes place, residents from Great Wakering may have a thing or two to say about the closure of the Sports Centre for example.

Policing, however, was a popular subject.

Questions were raised about anti social behaviour in Hockley, in particular the nuisance caused by members of one family. It was interesting to note that the Police appeared to be well aware of the situation and visited the family daily to "harrass" them, at the same time gathering evidence. The Hockley Councillor advised that an eviction order was imminent.

Parking issues also caused the temperature in the room to rise significantly, in particular selfish parking where pavements are partially blocked. The Police advised that they generally only got involved if the offender's parking was dangerous, the vehicle potentially blocking ambulance access or parking on a blind corner. Otherwise, it is usually a Council matter.

In Rochford, concerns were raised by the imminent departure of a popular PC, Stuart Goldsack, who has helped reduce incidents of anti social behaviour in the Square by positively engaging with the youngsters responsible. We were told that Stuart's replacement has already been appointed by a volunteer for the role, and we were assured he was of a similar calibre.

Moving away from Policing, Tracey Chapman, Essex County Council Head of Transport, responded to a question on pot holes. She explained that they are graded according to severity, the most serious gaining the most urgent attention whilst those causing the least problems may be left until their condition deteriorated to the next grade level.

Representatives from the PCTs had a fairly quiet night. Questions were raised about Southend Hospital's new electronic "check in" system and we were assured that improvements had already taken place plus more staff had been made available to offer help.

I asked about an increase in noise and pollution from Purdeys Industrial Estate. Litter covers the footpath from Watts Lane to Stambridge Mill, apparently straying over from Purdeys. The noise levels seem to have increased recently, from a number of sources. The Council's paid Chief Excutive, Paul Warren, said he would investigate.

No questions were asked about the Council's plans for the future - its core strategy, improvements (or changes depending on how you see it) to the Square, Southend Airport, etc. Still, there will be an opportunity at the next Forum in the New Year.

Finally, news of the forum was delivered to every household in the District through the "Rochford Matters" newspaper. Further, it has been highlighted on the Council's website. I found it to be a very interesting event, and something I understand the Council is not required to hold.

So sad then that only approx 12 residents turned up on the night.

Do we not care about our District?

Another new bar for Rochford and planning news (Updated 30th Sept)

With the pub trade suffering, and many of Rochford's bars empty through the week, it may be surprising to learn that two new bars/restaurants are likely to open before christmas.

At 68-72 West Street, opposite the Marlborough Head, and at the corner of Union Lane, a Government Inspector has recently overturned local Councillors' refusal to grant permission to convert the existing disused car showroom into a bar/restaurant (The Councillors went against the Council's planning officers, who recommended approval back in April 2011).

Work is already underway, and the Owners expect to be trading before Christmas.

There is only so much spare cash to go round, so it will be interesting to see if this new venue can differentiate its offering without sucking the limited business away from nearby pubs.

Separately, the New Ship's refurbishment (East Street, Rochford, opposite the "Taste of Raj") appears complete and I'm told more news about opening date, and offering will be available within the next month.

UPDATE: I walked past the New Ship this morning and a notice in the window invites applications for Bar Staff, Waiting Staff, Cleaners, and Commis Chefs - drop a CV in or telephone 01702 544797.

Turning to other planning news, this month the Council gave outline permission for 100 houses at Brays Lane, Rochford. This scheme is likely to proceed quickly unless the Government decides to intervene.

No news yet when Stambridge Mill will go before Planning Committee, but full demolition of the existing structures could take place very soon.

Rochford's revised core strategy (its development plan for the area for the next 10 - 15 years) is now likely to submitted to a Government Planning Inspector in October and, assuming no final hitches, could well be in place by Christmas. Rochford's approach contrasts starkly with nearby Castle Point, which has decided, for now, to abandon attempts to get a development plan in place.

The point of the Core Strategy is that it provides a Council with control over where development in its locality will take place, as controversial as some upcoming schemes may be. Castle Point's approach means that housing schemes will be decided on a case by case basis, and Developers will undoubtedly exploit what they see as a weakness in the decision not to get a plan in place.

Call me a cynic, but Castle Points' decision may well be politically motivated. When Government Planning Inspectors overrule a planning refusal to tarmac greenbelt land at Daws Heath, local Councillors can pin the blame at Whitehall.

I'm glad Rochford hasn't adopted this approach with the core strategy, although I have little doubt there are a number of individual schemes which Councillors refuse in the knowledge they are likely to be agreed on appeal. In fact, the new West Street bar/diner mentioned above is perhaps such an example.

Brays lane - 100 houses planned

The Council is holding an extra planning meeting next week to vote on plans for a housing development near The King Edmund School at Brays Lane. Full info can be viewed by clicking on the Title Post. An application for 150 homes was submitted last year, but withdrawn. The site is on green belt, but the Council believes there are exceptional reasons why planning permission should be granted. See also my post from 9th July 2010.
EDIT: This Application has since been approved

Southend to Salisbury by steam

Not a post about Rochford, but I know that many local residents were on board for a one off steam train journey from Southend Central to Salisbury on Wednesday 31st August. Averaging 30mph, but with occasional spurts above 75mph, we were hauled by a 60 year old locomotive called Britannia along the c2c line to Barking, then diverting round the North London line, and eventually joining the main South West line near Feltham. The loco, famous for pulling George VI's funeral train in 1952, has been fully restored, and re-entered service this year. It hauled a hotch potch of ancient rolling stock ranging from old "standard" second class to full silver serviced pullman class, complete with fine dining and champagne (the closest we got was oggling through the window - too expensive). The journey took four and a half hours each way and, apart from a short delay due to a signal failure at Basingstoke, ran to time. The take up appeared to be close to 100%, and it was great to see so many onlookers, some looking more surprised than others, along the route. When we pulled into Southend at 10pm, the final destination, a crowd of youngsters did not seem to notice that it wasn't the usual type of loco and rolling stock that runs between Fenchurch Street and Shoebury these days, and couldn't understand why they couldn't board for Shoebury! Steam Dreams, the company that runs the services known as "Cathedral Expresses" plan further trips from Southend, the next being Winchester on 10th December.

Rochford forced to build more houses more quickly?

The Government Inspector's refusal this week to the Council's request to suspend its core strategy until December places Rochford under greater pressure to agree more house building schemes.

When the Coalition Government announced its Localism Bill, it gave Councils the opportunity to review the annual housing targets foisted upon them by central Government. Rochford reduced its annual requirement from 250 units to 190 (though the total numbers remained the same as the annual build was spread over a longer period). Unfortunately for Rochford, and other Councils, various legal actions have found that it was illegal to change annual house building targets until the Localism Bill becomes fully effective. Coupled with the Coalitions's desire to free up the planning process, and for the country to "plan for growth" it is looking increasingly likely that Rochford will be under pressure to build more, not less.

Rochford's core strategy, its development plan for the district, which includes its housing commitments, has been significantly delayed due to the change of Government and advice from central Government which was successfully challenged in the High Court (above). It decided recently to suspend the Core Strategy until December when, it believed, it could take advantage of new legislation (the Localism Bill) which would free it from centrally imposed targets. The Government Inspector, overseeing the progess of the Core Strategy has, however, declined the Council's request to delay and she has given it two choices, either to withdraw its Strategy altogether or to continue but make a firm and early commitment to address the housing shortfall. In effect, if choosing the latter path, the Council may feel it has a "get out of jail card" because it can get its Core Strategy in place with the lower annual housing numbers. They will then look to the Localism Bill to enable them, in the early review required by the Inspector, to try to avoid making any changes to its plans. However, the same Bill, whilst apparently giving Council more freedom, will also give Developers more ammunition to challenge Councils if planning schemes are refused under the planning for growth clauses.

The Council will meet on 31st August to discuss their preferred route forward.

It looks as though Rochford's green belt will be under continuing and increasing threat with the Coalition, surely not what the Electorate thought when casting their vote. The Coalition promised, in their campaigning literature, to return decison making to local Councils as they were in the best position to know what the local area wanted. The reality is looking to be something quite different.

UPDATE 23rd August 2011
Council Officers have recommended that Rochford Council reverts to an earlier version of the core strategy, and submits this for Government approval. Whilst this will force the Government to build more houses more quickly - 250 pa instead of the 190 pa proposed in the later version - the rationale is that the Council will have more control over new housing sites. By having a development plan in place, sanctioned by Government, Developers will have less likelihood of succeeding in legal challenges to build on non preferred sites (eg Coombes Farm). Click on the title to see the Officers' Proposals for debate at a full Council meeting on 31st August.

UPDATE 1st September 2011
Majority vote to revert to earlier version of core strategy.

Stambridge Mill planning application goes in

After much speculation, a formal planning application to redevelop Stambridge Mill has finally been submitted to the Council. In what is a significant scale down of original plans, the intention is to build 45 houses plus a total of 51 flats across four blocks up to three storey in height. Originally, there was talk of approx 250 units at this site, so the reduction to a total of 96 marks a sharp reduction in numbers. This is probably due to the economic climate, although some will question whether this leaves open the option for further development in the future.

This has been a challenging project for Inner London Group, the owner, which has seen a number of architectural revisions aside from the number of units proposed. Not only will it involve the bulldozing of most of the existing Mill structures (though parts will be retained), the scheme also requires a significant investment in the flood defences on this river front site, as well as associated landscaping works, including the bridle path, bridge, communal spaces and the river frontage itself.

ILG will be focused on making a return on their 4 year old investment. They acquired the 4.1 acre site in 2007, paying £1.8million to previous owners, Associated British Food (Allied Mills).

The Council originally wanted to retain the site for industrial/employment use, but changed planning permission approx two years ago to allow the possibility of residential development.

The reduction in units, if this is the total planned, will offer some relief to nearby residents, though there will be objections due to the increased pressure it will place on the local road network and utilities.

There is no news yet whether ILG will hold a community event to display their plans, but the Council are broadly in support of the scheme, not least because it saves the tax payer the expense of urgent remedial work of the ageing flood defences.

This Blog will be following this project as it progresses.

Rose Garden Restaurant - Fine Dining comes to Rochford

Sumptuous food, fine wine, super surroundings - not normally a description you would instantly associate with Rochford's dining options. But for those of us who feel that our area has been left off the food map, a new arrival may just be the emphatic answer to our prayers. Although The Rose Garden, located above "The Miley" in Union Lane (click on title of post for link to website) is not strictly a new restuarant, rather it has relocated from Hockley after protracted planning battles. Still Hockley's loss is our gain. I'm told that it wasn't unusual to have to book 3 months' ahead at times to secure a table and after visiting last night, I can see why.
The menu (accessible from their website) provides a choice of European dishes, including Vegetarian. We opted for Beef Wellington and Monkfish. Quite simply, it was one of the best meals we have enjoyed in Rochford, and sadly left us too sated to enjoy the famous dessert menu.
Sunday lunches are also likely to prove successful, along with a monthly "Curry" night.
Whilst located above a popular local Bar, you could easily imagine you were somewhere else with the modern dining furniture and white painted brick walls, and soft relaxing music playing in the background.
This is going to be a very popular Restaurant, and we'll defnitely be returning shortly.