134

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016

Representation ID: 2501

Received: 08/12/2016

Respondent: Ed Lee

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

The 10 minutes walk criteria does not recognise that there is a significant height difference between the central area and the seafront. For anyone of limited mobility it is not a practical walk. With the average age increasing this is likely to be an increasing percentage of visitors. This constitutes disability discrimination.

Full text:

The 10 minutes walk criteria does not recognise that there is a significant height difference between the central area and the seafront. For anyone of limited mobility it is not a practical walk. With the average age increasing this is likely to be an increasing percentage of visitors. This constitutes disability discrimination.

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016

Representation ID: 2506

Received: 10/12/2016

Respondent: Mrs Ros Sanders

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Representation Summary:

Parking on the seafront has become more difficult every year. I do not believe that encouraging tourists to use car parks 10 minutes walk away from the seafront will achieve anything other than encourage motorists to arrive earlier and park in residential areas on, and adjoining the seafront and Southchurch Park.

Full text:

Parking on the seafront has become more difficult every year. I do not believe that encouraging tourists to use car parks 10 minutes walk away from the seafront will achieve anything other than encourage motorists to arrive earlier and park in residential areas on, and adjoining the seafront and Southchurch Park.

Attachments:

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016

Representation ID: 2518

Received: 14/12/2016

Respondent: MR JAMES GIBB

Representation Summary:

In the light of 133 this conclusion should not be made as further work is required. One only has to look at the car queue stretching from Chalkwell Avenue to the Pier and beyond to note that with EXISTING Provision there is a severe problem. If we wish to grow the town economically we need to INCREASE provision substantially.

Full text:

In the light of 133 this conclusion should not be made as further work is required. One only has to look at the car queue stretching from Chalkwell Avenue to the Pier and beyond to note that with EXISTING Provision there is a severe problem. If we with to grow the town economically we need to INCREASE provision substantially.

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016

Representation ID: 2575

Received: 01/12/2016

Respondent: Burges Estate Residents Association

Representation Summary:

The Council should be encouraging more use of the car parks in the eastern and western parts of town. A free of charge land train during the peak summer periods has to be considered, with the car parking ticket being used as the free ticket to ride.

Full text:

Car parking and development overview
Having read the consultation document please see BERA's comments below regarding the Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP).
It appears to me that there needs to be some clarification concerning parking. It has to be borne in mind that the more car parking spaces there are along Southend seafront, the more chance there is of substantial traffic flow problems throughout the town in high seasonal periods, including the seafront. It is on this basis that officers should be instructed to consider a number of options. These options should include having zone parking charges in individual car parks, depending whether they are north or south of the railway line, to encourage footfall along the High Street.
To try and alleviate problems in relation to the re-development of Queensway, Seaway car park, Marine Plaza and the town centre, proposals should be considered to multi-storey Tylers Avenue car park as a first stage, before developing the car parks in Clarence and Alexandra Street and of course Warrior Square. The aim should also include relocation of the bus station from its current position, to that of the rebuilt Tylers Avenue car park, to encourage greater use of the bus service. This could also boost the chances of Southend-on-Sea becoming a City in the future. Another phase to be considered would be the compulsory purchase of the old gas works site to enable car parking to take place while the Seaway car park and the town centre were being developed. Also we should be expediting the plans to build the 200 space car park for the new museum as a first stage of that development, replacing the unofficial car park on the Marine Plaza site, opposite the Kursaal.
Finally, the Council should be encouraging more use of the car parks in the eastern and western parts of town, a free of charge land train during the peak summer periods has to be considered, with the car parking ticket being used as the free ticket to ride. The planning and phasing of this would be in conjunction with whatever development proposals come through first. It is BERA's opinion that no matter how many car parking places are provided, there will, at some point during the year, be a potential for lack of capacity. What we cannot do, is have empty parking spaces for the majority of the year, which will have no financial benefit to the town at all. The plans should also consider maximising the use of public transport, with serious consideration especially given in encouraging people to use the Southend-bound trains. One thing is for certain, the Council should never contemplate putting a decked car park on the beach side of the sea front, as this would restrict sea views and create a narrowing effect on the promenade between any proposed decked car park and the beach.
Southend-on-Sea, over the next 10-15 years, has a fantastic opportunity to develop and be financially and economically stable, mainly because of the proposals of the growing business projects coming forward. The planning of all these opportunities will, instead of restricting our tourism industry, be crucial in creating opportunities in education, skills, jobs and infrastructure improvements.
I will now go into detail on the SCAAP document itself.
Below are the revised proposed amendments from the original consultation process.
As part of the local planning framework it would be useful to have an indication of likely timescales of the forthcoming aspects of the plan process. Specifically the new Local Plan will set out new long term growth targets which will include a review of SCAAP proposals but there is no indication of timescales. We have no idea at this stage of when SCAAP is expected to be adopted and therefore how long it may be valid.
The introduction also makes reference (1.2 para 7) to a joint assessment of needs for the housing market but, and this was asked at the consultation draft stage, no indication as to who the joint assessment will be with.
Context and Issues
Page 8 Housing
There seems to be a preoccupation with footfall to the extent that this supposed increase in footfall is the sole argument for providing more housing in the plan area. But the validity of this point is dubious. Residential areas are devoid of on street activity in the evening. The justification for more housing in the SCAAP area needs to be more robustly made. If greater footfall is required then leisure activities and housing are required, not solely housing.
Page 9 Access and car parking
The policy on accessibility appears to be skewed towards satisfying the demands of the residents of the Central area whereas additionally accessibility improvements must satisfy those wishing to access the area from outside. You appear to ignore the fact that a significant factor in determining car park usage overall and in particular the town centre and between individual car parks is the cost of parking, eg zoning.
Page 18 para 48/49
The reality is that the High Street no longer provides any unique shopping experiences. The lack of investment shows that there is little sign the retailers have any interest in boosting Southend. Already most disposable income of Southend residents for non-food shopping finds its way to the regional centres including Chelmsford because the quality of merchandise on offer in our high street is so poor.
Para 52
One way of encouraging a temporary uplift to empty units is to provide an example by dealing with the council's own property, and although it is not on the primary shopping frontage it is in a prime location. We are talking about the unit at the foot of the pier lift which has been empty since it was built. Perhaps the local college could be encouraged to join with businesses to provide visual displays.
Page 20 Policy DS1
Are you able to define in a planning context how a particular café/restaurant would contribute to the vitality of the town centre .Because Southend at present probably has as many restaurants/cafes/fast food outlets as anywhere in the country but the overwhelming majority are of poor quality. The prospect of more of the same potentially making up 40% of the High Street is an appalling prospect not a unique and diverse visitor/shopper experience you are seeking.
Map 3
It is difficult to see why the western side of the High street south of Alexandra Road has been downgraded to a secondary shopping frontage when a) the eastern side is primary and b) it is immediately at the meeting between the high street and the sea front. It seems to offer no less potential than the eastern side and is important in setting the scene for visitors from the sea side activities into the town. It should remain primary shopping frontage.

Attachments:

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Revised Proposed Submission 2016

Representation ID: 2848

Received: 15/12/2016

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Agent: Stockvale Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Paragraph states that "collectively the car parks located in Southend Central Area have the potential to serve both the Town Centre and Central Seafront, facilitating linked trips and increasing
the potential for associated shared spend". This is not correct. As appears to be acknowledged in the second part of this paragraph, the town centre car parks are not all well located to accommodate visitors to Southend who are visiting for the seafront area. These visitors would not find it attractive
to park in car parks in the town centre, particularly those north of the railway line. There will undoubtedly be an opportunity for linked trips, but the most important factor for those operating businesses is to ensure that the visitors are able to get to Southend and park conveniently for the seafront. Once these people are parked, then they will be able to use both the seafront and town centre, especially if routes between the two are improved.
We know that convenience of car parking spaces is a major factor in the attractiveness of Southend as a tourist destination. The survey of Adventure Island visitors undertaken by The Stockvale Group (set out in the accompanying RPS Technical Note) shows that this is a very important issue for visitors.
When asked how important parking and the journey to Southend is in making a decision to come back again (on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is the highest importance), 10 was the category most
commonly provided by the 1,484 respondents, with 33% of respondents giving 10, and 65.03%
scoring this issue 8, 9 or 10. This cannot be underestimated. As stated in our representations to paragraph 58, return visits forms the basis of businesses such as Adventure Island, and they operate
in a very competitive environment. If visitors cannot get access to convenient car parks they may choose not to return to Southend. The tourism economy of the town relies on these day visitors, and a reduction in availability or attractiveness of parking will potentially reduce visitor numbers, shorten season, reduce employment levels and ultimately will reduce the attractiveness of Southend seafront. It is essential that the Plan recognises why tourism-related traffic has to be considered differently to traffic associated with journeys to work, school and other regularly used destinations.

Full text:

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.

Attachments: