Independent Candidates – Rochford District Council Elections – 7 May 2015

Rochford District Residents has 8 candidates;

Hawkwell West – Christine Mason
Hawkwell South – Phil Capon
Hawkwell North – Elliot Mason
Ashingdon & Canewdon – Tracy Capon
Sweyne Park – Toby Mountain
Grange – Peter Scott
Lodge – Richard Lambourne
Hockley Central – Irena Cassar

Which Village Cops the Increase in New Houses from the Reduction in Rayleigh?

The Rochford Independent has been asked by residents to look at the original the housing allocations actually put forward to the public in the recent consultation and find out which parts of the Rochford District are the unlucky ones which receive the increase of 1060 houses from the Conservative Party resulting from the reduction in the allocation to Rayleigh.

• Rochford and Ashingdon increased by only 125 from 1000 to 1125
• Hawkwell and Hockley 400 (no change but Hawkwell West gets the lot !!)
• Smaller Settlements (Hullbridge,Canewdon,Stambridge & Great Wakering) increased by a MASSIVE 555 to 1055
• The difference between the increased allocation to the rest of the District of 1060 and the actual allocated increase of 680, namely 380 is, presumably, made up of the extra houses that are already planned to be built.

We hope this helps everyone in Rochford District understand what happens when a reduction is agreed in one place. And the decrease of 1060 was actually only an increase of 680 elsewhere. But that’s quite enough to be of concern.

NEW HOUSING FIGURES REVEALED FOR ROCHFORD DISTRICT

NEW HOUSING FIGURES REVEALED FOR ROCHFORD DISTRICT

“The Council sets out a policy allocating the total number of housing units to the top tier (90 per cent) and second tier (10 per cent) settlements , to gain a smaller number of large sites which will deliver the greatest number of infrastructure improvements. The split is as follows:

Completions 2001 -2006: 900

Rochford/Ashingdon : 1000

Hockley/Hawkwell : 400

Rayleigh : 1800

Smaller Settlements 500

====

TOTAL : 4600
(By “1st Tier ” this means towns and large villages – Rayleigh, Rochford, Ashingdon, Hockley and Hawkwell. By “2nd Tier” this means Hullbridge, Canewdon and Great Wakering. “Completions 2001-2006″ means houses already built.)

Despite Hawkwell coming out of this quite well, I decided to vote against this proposal which will mean a wholesale loss of green belt in the District as a whole.  The 3700 new homes are a Labour Government dictat not a rational view of the desires of local people or logical professional planning.  The East of England Plan does not deal with the infrastructural requirements to support an extra 4600 houses and residents.

As Rochford Officers had not put the planning reasons for choosing the allocations into the policy for review by Councillors I could not approve the draft.

The Liberals have said this on their web site:

“Independent councillor John Mason asked the most penetrating question. The government was forcing us to allow the building of 4600 houses in the district but where did the figures of 1800 for Rayleigh, 1000 for Rochford/Ashingdon come from? He wanted to know what was the logic behind these figures. The answer from the Head of Planning , Shaun Scrutton, was that Officers had come up with these figures. This was done partly by giving the most housing to be biggest towns and villages, and partly by judging what the capacity was around the edge of each of these places.”

Prior consultantion with the public had made it clear to the Council that the basis of allocation now presented was not favoured and that development should take place in the East of the District.  But the Council had made no attempt to explain why this was not possible and a logical basis put forward for the proposed allocation.

WHAT IS THE POINT OF CONSULTING WITH THE PUBLIC IF THEIR VIEWS ARE NOT TO BE FOLLOWED OR ANY EXPLANATION PROVIDED WHY THEIR VIEWS CANNOT BE FOLLOWED. ALL THAT WILL HAPPEN IS THE PUBLIC WILL BECOME DISENFRANCHISED AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION WILL NOT BE RESPONDED TO IN FUTURE. 

The Liberal Leader, Chris Black joined me in voting against. The Conservatives won the vote, 4 to 2. The 4 voting for were Terry Cutmore, Phil Capon, James Cottis and John Pullen.

Another example of the Tory Party Whip because James Cottis had previously said in the debate that the District would grind to a halt because of the extra development.

Mavis Webster, also Tory County Councillor, decided to ABSTAIN. That means to not make any decision.  What was the point of attending? This is not representation.  It is ABDICATION.

When it goes to the new super executive cabinet councillors after public consultation the policy will no doubt be voted through again by THE TORY PARTY WHIP. 

When Rochford District Council has an executive cabinet we will not even be able to try to stop these policies.

Planning Policy to 2021 – an extra 3000 houses

The District Council Planning Policy and Transportation Committee meeting on 12 September presented the Council’s Core Strategy on planning for the next 15 years or more. Nothing was decided and there is public consultation.

But it gave a strong bias as to where the council will allow 3,000 extra homes to be built up to the year 2021.

These are required by the Government and the East of England Regional Assembly is not even supporting the requirement. This is supposed to be a LOCAL framework and Government direction of the level of development WE want is a nonsense and anti democratic. The Council Officer recommendation is that 90 percent of the housing should be concentrated around the largest build-up areas of the District – Rayleigh, Rochford, Hockley ,Hawkwell and Ashingdon. About 10 percent should go to Hullbridge, Great Wakering and Canewdon.

This became a nonsense when I looked at some of the wording that related to th 90% option ” They are capable of sustaining some expansion, infilling and development”.

The Officers admitted that the word “some” was there as a requirement of the Government that there was no detail in the strategy !!

The highways and all services are overloaded with no realistic expectation of the level of improvement needed to sustain housing development. And the dreaded word “some” without enumeration creeps in. If it is only “some” then 90% is not probable; it is improbable. Hardly a strategy you can have any confidence in.

And coalescence of the “villages” is now on. A retrograde step which will lead to one urban mass.The Lib Dems say on their web site” Last night Hawkwell Councillor John Mason made it clear that he wanted it more fairly shared out.”  Nice to be appreciated for speaking out for the District.

I hope that you will also have your say and make your opinions known.

I hope that you will also have your say and make your opinions known.John Mason