79. Do you agree with the suggested option?

Comment

Representation ID: 493

Received: 03/08/2010

Respondent: Carole Mulroney

no comment

Support

Representation ID: 673

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Renaissance Southend supports the principle of a managed approach to the existing industrial estates but would recommend that Progress Road be included within Group 1 rather than Group 2 as it is not considered that Progress Road is suitable for a mixed used development and the flexibility on uses implied for Group 2 is inappropriate for Progress Road which should remain in employment and commercial use.

Comment

Representation ID: 703

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Planning Perspectives LLP

Question 79 and 81
The suggested approach is broadly supported as it is consistent with the adopted Core Strategy and the Employment Land Review 2010. However, with respect to the sites identified for the "maintenance and supply of modern employment floorspace... within a mixed use context" further clarification is required about the Council's aspirations for these sites. The "flexible, managed approach" is wholeheartediy supported, but this does not tie in particularly well with the aspiration to maintain the same level of employment floors pace at
these sites.

Comment

Representation ID: 704

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Planning Perspectives LLP

Viability of redevelopment should be recognised as a key consideration for sites in need of regeneration. It is understood that the Council accept the need for some level of enabling development as part of a comprehensive redevelopment of the Prittle Brook Estate, but this has not been expressed clearly in this document. Indeed the Employment Land Review is more explicit in stating that redevelopment of this site should be enabled through a flexible approach to development. The ELR notes that the land would not be allocated today for the same mix of employment uses as exist on the site, and that employment use should not be the only acceptable form of development. It is in fact recommended in the site appraisal of the ELR (Ref EMP017) that a more appropriate buffer between the site and residential uses is required.

Comment

Representation ID: 705

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Planning Perspectives LLP

As part of the recommended flexible approach, it shouid be acknowiedged that an improvement in the quality of employment floorspace will be weighed favourably against the need to maintain the same level of supply. Prittle Brook Estate represents an opportunity to provide new employment uses which meet the Council's aspirations for improving the quality of stock of employment premises, and could meet the demand for more business related jobs over industrial related jobs, as identified in the Employment Land Review. As the employment density for modern business units is greater than with older stock and industrial uses, there will be an opportunity to use a substantial part of the site for the enabling residential development. Indeed, a residential led mixed use scheme may in fact be the most appropriate way forward given the context of the surrounding area and the need for a comprehensive redevelopment to optimise the use of the site.

Support

Representation ID: 1035

Received: 20/10/2010

Respondent: Savills

The plan states "land in employment uses or desirable locations for employment development in market and sustainable terms, needs to be safeguarded or allocated to facilitate economic growth."
We support this approach, which logically also includes only retaining industrial estates and employment land which are in desirable locations or which meet other sustainability criteria.
Further clarification is required.

Object

Representation ID: 1036

Received: 20/10/2010

Respondent: Savills

We dispute the findings of the Employment Land Review.
We object to the allocation of Grainger Road as a location for the "maintenance and supply of modern employment floorspace.....within a mixed-use context. A flexible managed approach will be sought at these locations through planning briefs". Given the quality of accommodation on Grainger Road, the impact on the amenity of the surrounding uses and vehicular access problems that have been a consequence of its location within a high density residential context, Grainger Road is not an appropriate location for retaining employment floorspace.
The stock of floorspace ageing, the quality of buildings and facilities are poor and there is a lack on modern planning controls over its use. There is little prospect of employment or employment-led redevelopment on feasibility, including access or viability grounds.
There is also some potential discrepancy between this proposed policy and the preferred option for Grainger Road in the CAAP which envisages employment - led mixed use development at Grainger Road.
Further clarification is required in the Submission Draft DMDPD on the interaction between this policy and the requirement of DM22 in particular the requirement to reprovided equivalent jobs under DM22 1(ii) (see below). Does that requirement relate to any redevelopments of the List 2 and List 3 sites?

Comment

Representation ID: 1270

Received: 20/10/2010

Respondent: Savills

The stock of floorspace ageing, the quality of buildings and facilities are poor and there is a lack on modern planning controls over its use. There is little prospect of employment or employment-led redevelopment on feasibility, including access or viability grounds. There is also some potential discrepancy between this proposed policy and the preferred option for Grainger Road in the CAAP which envisages employment - led mixed use development at Grainger Road. Further clarification is required in the Submission Draft DMDPD on the interaction between this policy and the requirement of DM22 in particular the requirement to reprovided equivalent jobs under DM22 1(ii) (see below). Does that requirement relate to any redevelopments of the List 2 and List 3 sites? We propose that Grainger Road should be redeveloped for residential use - with a high proportion of family accommodation and affordable housing. It is preferable to see the site brought back to active use and to meet an identifiable need rather than hope that employment will flourish
Grainger Road should be reclassified as one of the List 3 sites - those where appropriate non-employment uses will be allowed.