Object
Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016
Representation ID: 2856
Received: 15/12/2016
Respondent: Stockvale Group
Agent: Stockvale Group
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
We strongly object to the wording of 2b, which states that the Council will "Ensure that there is no net loss in car parking to the south of the Southend Central Area". We set out in some detail our concerns about this statement in our representations to Paragraph 135, and these representations should be read as representations to Part 2b of Policy DS5. The proposals to redevelop three of the Council's main seafront car parks (Tylers Avenue, Seaways and Marine Plaza) have resulted in great uncertainty for Stockvale, which is impacting upon its investment plans for Adventure Island (Southends most visited commercial attraction and the UK's most successful seaside fun park) and the Sea-Life Adventure aquarium attraction. Business needs confidence to invest; the SCAAP as currently drafted, and most worryingly Policies DS5 and CS1, have almost entirely removed confidence and this is now holding back investment and growth. It has already resulted in the cancellation of significant projects at Adventure Island. A Policy that results in such a lack of certainty and confidence is inherently unsound and not effective.
The RPS Technical Note shows that there is already significant pressure on car parks in the Central South Area that serve the seafront. The SCAAP recognises the need to support the growth of businesses on the seafront, as set out in the Vision and Strategic Objectives (page 12). It states in Paragraph 28 that the Council's vision is to promote economic growth. Specifically, in Paragraph 29 it
states that a Strategic Objective is to attract "greater visitor numbers", which is a direct reference to
the town as a resort. Paragraph 30 also reiterates that the Council is aiming to support growth, as does Paragraph 81. LTP3 also advises planning for a 25% increase in car parking demand in the central area (see RPS Technical Note). The businesses along Southend seafront had been planning for growth, including The Stockvale Group at their attractions Adventure Island and Sea Life Adventure, as well as investment in their various sea front catering establishments. Yet this policy is only looking for no net loss in car parking capacity, and when coupled with Policy CS1 (which allows for the redevelopment of the three most important car parks serving the seafront), it has left businesses with a level of uncertainty that is not conducive to investment as there can be no confidence that these policies will support growth. Quite the contrary, these proposed policies as drafted are the single biggest cause of business uncertainty amongst seafront operators.
In addition to not being effective, by having the opposite effect to that intended in the early sections of the SCAAP, this approach is also not justified, especially when our work has shown that "no net loss" is likely to mean a significant loss of parking in the seafront area.
RPS has prepared the following representations to Southend Borough Council's Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP), Revised Proposed Submission Version (November 2016) The following Headings represent Paragraphs or Policies contained within the SCAAP. These representations should be read in conjunction with the accompanying completed Representations Forms.
Our client operates the largest and most successful tourism businesses in Southend (The StockvaleGroup is the owner and operator of: Adventure Island theme park; Sealife Adventure; Three Shells beach café; Pavilion Fish and Chips; Feelgoods Pizza Pasta Restaurant; Sands Bistro restaurant; Adventure Inside and Radio Essex). We would like an opportunity to explain our client's business aspirations and explain why the policies in the Plan will not provide a firm basis for the growth of tourism in Southend, and indeed will have the opposite effect on tourism businesses to the objectives set out at the start of the SCAAP. It is very important to our client that the Inspector understands the consequences of adopting the SCAAP as currently drafted.