Jim Cripps re your post #44
I do not understand your post at all regarding spending public money, so I suggest you re-read my post #39 before you issue further comment malevolently alleging that I hold exactly the opposite view or intent of what I stated there.
RDC has only spent what was required to undertake the complex and voluminous work necessary to provide its Adopted Core Strategy, required of it if IN LAW it is to avoid the very costly consequences now faced by other planning authorities still without one.
For the umpteenth time it seems I must repeat,”No Adopted Core Strategy = Unlimited and Uncontrolled Green Belt Development with a financially extremely costly (and almost certainly ultimately losing) legal battle to stave off opportunist developers”.
Not everyone can ever be pleased by every part of it, but accept and be thankful that RDC does have its Adopted Core Strategy in place.
The vast majority of its specific site allocations are now also accepted by the Planning Inspectorate, with only relatively minor parts of that required to undergo further change and consultation.
When you say the next leaflet drop – when was the last one implemented? We live in the Downhall Park Way area and have not received any leaflets in the past. We have been aware of, and objected to, the “proposed” development for some years. We also attended the “Road Shows” that RDC arranged and for us to have only lived in the area for just over 7 years find it amazing that the people of Rayleigh were unaware of the Core Strategy that had been implemented. We agree that Rawreth/Rayleigh should not have the amount of the new build imposed on it, but where were you all that you did not read the newspapers or follow the information advertised all those years ago?
Colin – the Council might have cleared the in-tray by complying with remote Government instructions on quotas (Housing & Travellers) but it is a case of “never mind the quality- feel the width”. So spending a huge budget only to come up with –
South of London Rd proposal – found unsound (not going to happen).
Rawreth Ind Estate proposal – found unsound (not financially viable).
550 Houses to be built on Green Belt (classified as Flood Plain ) with absolutely no Infrastructure capacity available.- obviously study money well spent there then!!!.
Large mixed Traveller sites do not work – they don’t ‘mix’,, but iit is an easy fix for
RDC because they will not be accountable (ECC will own & run the site not RDC.).
And yes of course the (Government) Planning Inspectorate are compliant it itoo has
to deliver (Government) set quotas – too many /too quickly , am I clear now?.
No 55 above – Immediately prior to the Inspectors Hearing (10/09/13) , so August this year was a blanket leaflet drop (some 14000) – a massive task so we accept that coordination might well have missed small pockets. I myself delivered approx 200
on the Downhall Park estate, but not every house..
In answer to your awareness point , not everyone gets a copy of Rochford Matters either, and that is RDC’s main claim to consultation , the scale of the Core Plan aspects warranted a much bigger /more effective consultation effort – but did they really want to shout loud enough?.
Because once formed we only had 4 weeks (not 7 years)and collected 5000+ on the petition and a 1000 attended the Mill Hall meeting – how many attended the RDC meeting you attended?.
Hope that helps -JIM
The list of failures goes on Jim (no 56). Take Hockley as an example.
Ever since the initial consultation, residents repeatedly told RDC that their proposals were contrary to their own experts advice (Retail & Leisure Study 2008). Surprise, surprise the council ignored their own experts and residents. No surprise, the Inspector threw out RDC’s flagship proposals for a largish supermarket. So a missed opportunity with the council and residents both loosing out.
Bad enough but it gets worse. The council’s Evidence Base shows that yet another of their experts, echoed the initial R&LS report and warned in 2012 that there is very limited potential in Hockley for supermarkets (large or small) and offices (and only recently the council voted to change existing officers into flats). I won’t ask anyone to guess what the council’s final plans are based on!
So RDC regularly ignore their own experts as well as residents. Wasted costs and opportunity. We await the development of the Hockley Folly, which will no doubt be an edifice to council planning for years to come!
Thanks Jim, unfortunately we were unaware of your public meeting until it was too late otherwise we would have been there. I do not know how many attended the RDC Roadshows as they were around for most of the day on different days in different parts of the district but were a surprise to RDC by the numbers attending and the objections they received. With regard to Rochford Matters, I contacted RDC and they have very kindly sent a copy of the latest edition through the post. The next one is due to be distributed at the end of this month and I have been informed that if I do not receive a copy to contact them again as they are having problems with the company employed for distribution.
Further to reports and discussions on this thread and website regarding the poor delivery of the Rochford District Matters latest Autumn issue, I took the matter up with officers and gained the support of RDC Leader Terry Cutmore in taking the investigation further. You will doubtless be pleased to learn he has informed me that the contract of the new delivery firm involved has been cancelled due to its poor performance, and Royal Mail will again be handling the delivery of the Winter edition shortly.
Many thanks to those who responded either here or direct to RDC notifying non-receipt of their Autumn RDM edition. Please be sure to notify RDC in the hopefully unlikely event that you do not receive your Winter copy of RDM, as I understand some especially important information will be included in it.
Like you I requested a copy of Rochford District Matters and a reply email said that one had been dispatched by Royal Mail. Ten days later no RDM had been received so I email RDC again. Finally received it four days after the email was sent.
Brian, No 58 above – and let’s not forget poor Hullbridge , they canvassed a 98 per cent rejection rate against 500 houses – apparently ignored by the Inspector and RDC. Everywhere you look is a question mark against where democracy has gone in this country – the Council elections in 2014 and National elections in 2015 are an opportunity, I hope the public make a point by voting for anyone other than the “3 main parties”.
Re. my thread at 63. This turned out to be a fault of the Royal Mail and not an RDC employee. The envelope containing the RDM was delivered to my neighbour in error although it was correctly addressed to me. The problem was that my neighbour was on an extended holiday and did not return home until yesterday. I have sent a written apology to the person concerned at RDC.