Question 27: Do you agree with the proposed approach to managing development within the Central Seafront Policy Area and sites OS7, OS8, OS9 and CS1.1? Please explain your answer.

Comment

Representation ID: 1934

Received: 04/02/2016

Respondent: Ms Anna Hyndman Lahna

Lets hope that when the jetty is up and running, the nasty slot machine seafront will be brought upmarket with nice restaurants and shops.

Comment

Representation ID: 1955

Received: 08/02/2016

Respondent: Essex Chambers of Commerce

Agree with the proposed approach to managing development within the Central Seafront Policy Area and sites OS7, OS8, OS9 AND CS1.1 on the proviso that there is adequate car parking provision to support the growth in footfall

Object

Representation ID: 1982

Received: 20/01/2016

Respondent: Mrs Lise Hodgson

OS8 - Placing a cinema that close to the beach is a waste of valuable land. A cinema will not attract more people to the town. I do not know anyone who has ever decided to go on holiday somewhere because there is a cinema. If the Council wants another cinema in the town an area further inland would be far more appropriate.

Once you are inside a cinema you are not going to spend a lot of money in the area. In the SCAAP the Council says they want to create an area where people want to live, but who would want to live in a place where they have to look out on a cinema instead of beautiful sea views. The Council's plans are completely devaluing our homes and destroying our enjoyment of them.

If the Council really wanted to do the best for this area, (which I am beginning to doubt) instead of destroying it as at present, a series of restaurants and cafes with green areas in between would be more in keeping with a seaside town, perhaps with a large underground car park. That would attract people and get them to spend money in the area. Once you are inside a cinema you are not going to spend a lot of money in the area.

Object

Representation ID: 1983

Received: 20/01/2016

Respondent: Mrs Lise Hodgson

OS8 - Regarding the hotel, is there a need? Since I moved to Southend in 2006 the Royal Hotel in the High Street has been empty and is now being developed as a restaurant. If there was a need for another hotel in the area, surely someone smart would have snapped up this gem long ago.

Object

Representation ID: 1984

Received: 20/01/2016

Respondent: Mrs Lise Hodgson

OS8 - Traffic. Have anybody from the Council ever been in this area during a summer weekend or even weekends leading up to Christmas? The area around the roundabout and Chancellor Road get completely gridlocked at least once a day and the few extra parking spaces in the developer's plan will barely fill the shortfall, let alone accommodate more traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 1985

Received: 20/01/2016

Respondent: Mrs Lise Hodgson

Regarding the plans for the seafront, I am worried about all the high rise buildings being planned. If the Council are trying to create Benidorm on Sea, don't forget, we don't have the climate to make up for the dreadful buildings.

The Council do not want to make the most of the natural attractions of this place, but please, please, please do not destroy it completely.

Support

Representation ID: 1998

Received: 22/01/2016

Respondent: Burges Estate Residents Association

Southend has been the focus of working class seaside attractions for at least 80 years and continues to be so. It is the mainstay of many seafront businesses. Those day trippers often take advantage of the sea front and the town centre facilities so improving the connectivity between the two is crucial.

Comment

Representation ID: 2006

Received: 22/01/2016

Respondent: Burges Estate Residents Association

Central seafront policy area principles contain reference to the "use of high quality coordinated materials, durable and easy to maintain". May I suggest that such a requirement be applied to all policy areas where appropriate. There is no reason why the seafront should be singled out for exceptional treatment.

Support

Representation ID: 2014

Received: 25/01/2016

Respondent: Cllr Mrs Cheryl Nevin

Seaway Like cycle paths, would be happy to have more green area here, as natural viewing point towards seafront and Spanish steps

Comment

Representation ID: 2024

Received: 05/02/2016

Respondent: Anglian Water

We would recommend within each Policy Area a requirement is stipulated that the necessary sewerage infrastructure is in place to serve the area before development progresses.

Support

Representation ID: 2034

Received: 02/02/2016

Respondent: Mr Michael Victor Davies

OS8 - As a long-time resident of the Southend area (since 1959), I have the following comments to make about the proposed development. This area obviously needs development, as it has become progressively more and more run down over the past few years. The council is right to develop the area, and understandably, local business people are excited about the prospect. The SCAAP plan is bold and ambitious.

Comment

Representation ID: 2035

Received: 02/02/2016

Respondent: Mr Michael Victor Davies

In para 192, it mentions a proposed large development area known as Marine Plaza", and that "The site offers potential for taller and larger buildings" However, I feel that this proposed development requires carefully consideration as regards its impact on the local area. Has the Council considered the following aspects?
The Kursaal is a historic landmark in a historic seaside town. A tall, multi-storey building right next to it will completely overshadow it, and in my view, look totally out of place. I believe that any building plan should take the current building style into account. In my view, the proposed development may well not do that. If this proposal goes ahead, it will probably not be sympathetic with the existing architecture, and character of the area.
I realise that the developers need to make a reasonable profit from their endeavours, and building upwards is always a good way of achieving that end. However, the people of Southend will be the ones that have to live with the result, not the developers, who may not live in the area, and therefore it may not be too much of a consideration for them. A local example of a development that does not fit into the local scene can be found not far away, along the Cliff tops near the Cliffs Pavilion in Westcliff. There are two high rise buildings along there. One is Westward Ho, which has 10/11 storeys (depending on whether you count the ground floor). A little further along is Tower Court, rising 16 storeys into the sky. What a couple of eyesores they are! In my view they should never have been given planning permission. These two buildings look totally and completely out of place. But, now, of course, it's too late. They will remain there, in all their 'glory', and outlive us all. Once mistakes like that have been made, that's it. End of story. There's no going back. Demolition, (although desirable!), is not a realistic option now.
In my view, they are on a par with what's now being proposed for the Seaway area. Two nearby cliff top buildings, Stratton House (7 storeys?) and Heathfield House (5 storeys?), are about the same height as the historic Westcliff Hotel (5 Storeys), and the former Overcliff Hotel (long since demolished), and so, don't look too out of place. In my view, a similar approach should be taken with the proposed Seaway development.
Another example is- in the 1960s, a long string of tall, square office blocks were thrown up along Victoria Avenue. They now look like shabby eyesores. They served their purpose at the time, of course, but I hope that Southend Council will consider these examples, and bear the future in mind.

Comment

Representation ID: 2037

Received: 02/02/2016

Respondent: Mr Michael Victor Davies

Serious thought needs to be given to what to do to the local traffic situation. If the plan includes a large number of residential flats, how many cars will that mean? Which way will they go to get out of town? Along the 'Golden Mile' and seafront towards Westcliff, then up Chalkwell Avenue to the London Road, or up Southchurch Avenue to try to join the A127 arterial road via Bournemouth Park Road, Sutton Road, or Victoria Avenue? Either way, it will mean added congestion, frustration, and stress for road users in an already very congested town.

Comment

Representation ID: 2038

Received: 02/02/2016

Respondent: Mr Michael Victor Davies

If the whole of the Seaway car park is built on, where will people who now park there to shop in Southend High Street and the Royals, and use the seafront facilities, park? The Royals car park and the ones at the back of Marks and Spencer already get filled up. If Seaway car park disappears, or is severely reduced in size, those two car parks will have even more strain put upon them, much to the frustration of local shoppers and visitors to the town, some of whom may well decide it's just not worth the bother, and head out to Basildon, or other seaside resorts. I note that local traders are also now expressing concerns about parking, as reported on the front page of the Yellow Advertiser of Friday 29 January 2016.

Support

Representation ID: 2083

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Supports the enhancement and quality of the Green and Open spaces along the Central Seafront and the protection of Southend's unique heritage including the nationally important Grade II Listed Southend Pier.

Support

Representation ID: 2089

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Support a higher intensification of residential uses in the Central Area together with a broader mix of commercial uses ranging from A1 retail, A3 restaurant café, D2 leisure and B1 offices to provide a more diverse multi-use High Street and Central Seafront.

Comment

Representation ID: 2093

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Some members of the STOCKVALE GROUP and representatives of the Seafront businesses believe that one way in which the congestion into the Town could be improved is for an additional 3840 parking spaces to be made accessible and available within close proximity to the Seafront and core High Street Area. This is due to the day visitor attraction industry, particularly family attractions such as the Seafront receiving the vast majority of its income in a few weeks of the year. These generally coincide with the school holidays. During this peak period a visitor attraction business needs to be able to accommodate every visitor that wants to visit as these peak days effectively subsidise the operation for the rest of the year.
If the access to the main attractions is limited on peak days by the availability of car parking spaces, this could and does have serious impact on the viability of the Seafront businesses. The main parking areas are generally at capacity on peak holiday periods. Any loss of capacity as a result of the SCAAP proposals would result in a cap of visitors during these peak periods. This limits the amount of investment within the Seafront to the current status quo.
Transport and access is not just limited to the Seafront and does have a huge impact on the High Street, combined with parking tariffs, access and egress, and poor legibility around the Town Centre. Whilst the changes outlined in the SCAAP from a space and use perspective will do an awful lot to reinvigorate and regenerate the High Street, this must be inclusive of a renewed and fresh approach to parking provision within the SCAAP Area.

Comment

Representation ID: 2101

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Various improvements have been made to the Central Seafront including improved connectivity through Pier Hill and the City Beach. Whilst there have been some improvements to the landscape of the High Street, this needs a much greater consideration and linking to new development. There needs to be greater inclusion of soft landscaping and public spaces and improved connections from the High Street through to the Seafront. This is particularly the case with Seaway Development. This development site represents a great opportunity to create a gateway development and pedestrian links and improved Public Realm linked to the Seafront. The STOCKVALE GROUP would wish to see a breaking down of the linearity of the High Street and the creation of a number of destination and unique quarters. This resonates particularly through with the Tylers Avenue, London Road and Alexandra and Clarence Street opportunity sites.

Support

Representation ID: 2103

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

The STOCKVALE GROUP note the townscape improvements and guidance on design quality and Heritage preservation and enhancement are inextricably linked to improvements to Public Realm and pedestrian connectivity. The STOCKVALE GROUP like the majority of the Town support the continued regeneration and reinvention of the Towns greatest icon Southend's Pleasure Pier.

As there are a number of opportunity sites outlined in the SCAAP document, the STOCKVALE GROUP would suggest that the Council (through the SCAAP document) develop design codes and development briefs to ensure that the townscape improvements and quality of design of future developments meet the aspirational high standard to create a coherent and consistent Central Area. This needs to reflect on the Towns Heritage and look towards the future to create Southend as unique place and destination for leisure, shopping, living and working.

Comment

Representation ID: 2106

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

There is concern that proposals for the Seaway Car Park (OS8) are missing the opportunity to see this as a key gateway site for both the Town and Seafront and an opportunity to provide a greatly enhanced Public Car Park provision as part of the overall site redevelopment.

Support

Representation ID: 2107

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

In relation to OS9 the STOCKVALE GROUP wholly support the Museum but would seek the inclusion of a public car park which would appear to be feasible as the construction method for creating the Museum would involve extensive ground work, which could utilise the lower levels for a covered car park.

Support

Representation ID: 2120

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

The STOCKVALE GROUP support the Public Realm improvements and further connectivity down through and into the Seafront. The STOCKVALE GROUP recognise that Pier Hill has had a huge success in this regard.

Comment

Representation ID: 2121

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

There is a greater opportunity to look at the Seaway site as a Gateway both connecting the High Street around St Johns through Lucy Road and down onto the Seafront. This is a fantastic opportunity that could yield both greatly improved Public Realm, High Street offer and experience and a significant number of residential units.

Comment

Representation ID: 2129

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

The STOCKVALE GROUP would wish to ensure that the Queensway policy area provides connectivity into the Seaway Car Park and the opportunity to see Seaway as a Gateway to the Seafront and the first visual connection to the Sea is not lost.

Comment

Representation ID: 2135

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Due to the topography of the Seaway Car Park there is an opportunity to cut into the site and create a formal entrance that can create a visual gateway as part of the access route. There is an opportunity to accommodate somewhere in the region of 1500 parking spaces arranged over 2-3-4 floors. Traffic movements would then come in directly at the northern edge of the site and filter through into the layered car park.
To the south side Lucy Road could then be completely pedestrianised and a punch through to the seafront creating a large piazza activated by new A1, A3 uses to compliment both the Central Seafront and the links into the High Street. The pedestrian link would then improve the environs around St John's church. To drive some additional value it is perfectly legitimate to consider a number of floors of residential uses above the car park and retail/A3 commercial offer.

Support

Representation ID: 2185

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Southend BID

Supports the enhancement and quality of the Green and Open spaces along the Central Seafront and the protection of Southend's unique heritage including the nationally important Grade II Listed Southend Pier.

Support

Representation ID: 2186

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Southend BID

Support enhancement of the Pier as national icon and a significant regeneration and enhancement of this key tourist attraction, which at present underperforms both in terms of its attraction and in terms of its visitor experience.

Support

Representation ID: 2192

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Southend BID

Support a higher intensification of residential uses in the Central Area together with a broader mix of commercial uses ranging from A1 retail, A3 restaurant café, D2 leisure and B1 offices to provide a more diverse multi-use High Street and Central Seafront.

Comment

Representation ID: 2196

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Southend BID

Some members of the BID and representatives of the Seafront businesses believe that one way in which the congestion into the Town could be improved is for an additional 3840 parking spaces to be made accessible and available within close proximity to the Seafront and core High Street Area. This is due to the day visitor attraction industry, particularly family attractions such as the Seafront receiving the vast majority of its income in a few weeks of the year. These generally coincide with the school holidays. During this peak period a visitor attraction business needs to be able to accommodate every visitor that wants to visit as these peak days effectively subsidise the operation for the rest of the year.
If the access to the main attractions is limited on peak days by the availability of car parking spaces, this could and does have serious impact on the viability of the Seafront businesses. The main parking areas are generally at capacity on peak holiday periods. Any loss of capacity as a result of the SCAAP proposals would result in a cap of visitors during these peak periods. This the amount of investment within the Seafront to the current status quo. Transport and access is not just limited to the Seafront and does have a huge impact on the High Street, combined with parking tariffs, access and egress, and poor legibility around the Town Centre. Whilst the changes outlined in the SCAAP from a space and use perspective will do an awful lot to reinvigorate and regenerate the High Street, this must be inclusive of a renewed and fresh approach to parking provision within the SCAAP Area.

Comment

Representation ID: 2204

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Southend BID

Various improvements have been made to the Central Seafront including improved connectivity through Pier Hill and the City Beach. Whilst there has been some improvements to the landscape of the High Street, this needs a much greater consideration and linking to new development. There needs to be greater inclusion of soft landscaping and public spaces and improved connections from the High Street through to the Seafront. This is particularly the case with Seaway Development. This development site represents a great opportunity to create a gateway development and pedestrian links and improved Public Realm linked to the Seafront.
The BID would wish to see a breaking down of the linearity of the High Street and the creation of a number of destination and unique quarters. This resonates particularly through with the Tylers Avenue, London Road and Alexandra and Clarence Street opportunity sites.