Main 5

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Schedule of Modifications to the Revised Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 2892

Received: 20/09/2017

Respondent: Essex Chambers of Commerce

Representation Summary:

We support the modifications to the first bullet point but are not convinced that it goes far enough in protecting parking provision. We are aware of the plans being developed for the Seaway site which suggest there may be fewer spaces after development than currently exist. We would like to see a commitment that any opportunity sites that are developed provide adequate parking for their own needs in addition to protecting existing levels of parking provision.

Full text:

We support the modifications to the first bullet point but are not convinced that it goes far enough in protecting parking provision. We are aware of the plans being developed for the Seaway site which suggest there may be fewer spaces after development than currently exist. We would like to see a commitment that any opportunity sites that are developed provide adequate parking for their own needs in addition to protecting existing levels of parking provision.

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) - Schedule of Modifications to the Revised Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 2926

Received: 22/09/2017

Respondent: Stockvale Group

Representation Summary:

We support the Modifications to the first bullet point, on the assumption that Table 5 is "corrected" to include all the key visitor car parks (see our objection to 'Main 7'). However, these amendments do not go far enough as they do not also amend the second part of the bullet point, which currently states: "...and to maintain overall capacity at a level that supports the vitality and viability of the SCAAP area, and enables the delivery of relevant Opportunity Sites". As currently worded, it states no net loss of key visitor car parks, but suggests that there is flexibility on "overall capacity" if it enables delivery of Opportunity Sites. This Modification does not, therefore, resolve our objection. To resolve our objection, the first bullet point should make reference to the overall level of parking and making it clear that development of Opportunity Sites retains existing levels as well as meeting its own needs. This issue was a key point made at the Examination, and as referred to in the RPS Response to Additional Document 13 (dated 14th July 2017), it is clear that the developer of the Seaway Site (Opportunity Site CS1.2) will potentially provide fewer spaces than are currently available without the development. This is extremely concerning and shows that the SCAAP as currently worded will not be effective. Our proposed modification for Paragraph 136 was simply aimed at clarifying the Council's expectation that if there is to be a redevelopment of an Opportunity Site then the existing spaces should be protected, and the development's own net needs should be additional to this, taking into account peak days for the seafront. The following amendment would resolve this objection:
"136 (first bullet point) ensure there is no net loss in key visitor car parking to the south of the Central Area (for the purposes of Policy DS5.2.b, these are the key visitor car parks (Table 5) located within 10 minutes' walk of the shoreline (see Map 4), and to maintain overall capacity at a level that supports the vitality and viability of the SCAAP area, generally aiming to retain the level of 3,668spaces as of June 2017, and enabling the delivery of relevant Opportunity Sites, whilst ensuring that these sites provide sufficient spaces to accommodate their own needs, in addition to protecting existing parking levels;

Full text:

Please find attached RPS's representations jointly made on behalf of both The Stockvale Group and The Seafront Traders Association regarding the Proposed Modifications to the Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP). The completed forms can be found in Enclosure No. 1 of this document, and should be read in conjunction with the statement and other representations made by RPS with respect to the SCAAP.