3.5 Should we allow redevelopment of the poorest quality employment sites for other uses such as housing

Absolutely

be careful of gentrification where as in London "creatives" are forced out and is counter productive to sustainability of the area

If they offer completely nothing, have no potential to in the future, or housing sites serve to benefit the town and it's people more then absolutely.

I agree that certain areas and industrial parks should be re-developed to be used as housing.

Can only do this is we have considered the impact on the economic prosperity of the area. eg if we were to redevelop vanguard way for housing then we need to consider where the businesses will go as the people in Shoebury will not and can not travel far so without the industry in Shoebury the poverty and social problems will increase. Towerfield could be invested in as an industrial area to support more employment in this area. Currently it is not clear if this is an area that will long term be industrial.
Need to support the transport links to Shoebury as most businesses in this area complain that the road conjection on the A127 is impacting on their business.
Need to share the long term plans for the area
Need improvements in public realm in these areas to enhance the areas

Yes in context with wider local plans

Yes if employment is relocated

Yes - if employment sites have proved not to viable then empty properties should be developed for housing instead.

If reuse as employment is not a viable option then alternative uses should be considered.

Due to the significant shortfall of currently identified housing capacity compared to housing need in Southend a thorough review of all employment sites and uses on allocated and unallocated employment land should be undertaken to determine the potential for the less suitable employment sites to be used for other uses such as housing. It is noted the question is framed in terms of poorest quality sites and it is unclear what this refers to. The determination of whether a site is suitable for alternative use including housing should not just be its poor environmental quality or building quality on the employment site but also whether the a site is:
• Poorly located relative to other employment areas;
• Whether they are poorly located relative to the highway network and other access;
• Whether alternative uses would be located close to other infrastructure and services;
• Whether they represent bad neighbour uses close to, or adjoining residential uses.

Yes

The poorest quality employment sites should be considered for development to other uses and this could include returning to green space if this is regarded as the optimum use. This would help to increase the green space available in the Borough.
Andrew Barnes and Elizabeth Georgeou - Green City 2050 outcome leads

Spatial Development
Option 3 is the preferred solution for spatial development. Densifying areas can lead to the use of mechanical ventilation systems to protect residents from noise, rather than the ability for residents to control their own environment. This approach allows for the building of mixed housing types to meet different needs, sustainable developments and in the required infrastructure to support additional housing.

Housing
Where permitted development of office blocks, plus conversions and extensions are being built the opportunity should be taken to having design criteria which will mitigate ventilation issues and noise transmission.

With respect to Contaminated Land the Council’s contaminated land strategy will seek to set out how the Council will identify contaminated land in the borough in a rational, ordered and efficient manner. Where contaminated land is identified, the Council is required to ensure that any associated risks to human health and/or to the wider environment are addressed in an appropriate and cost effective manner. It is good practice to undertake investigation of any proposed Local Plan allocations as a priority within this contaminated land investigation strategy. This is to ensure that no development gives rise to or triggers unacceptable levels of pollution and land instability that could impact on human health, property and the wider environment including environmental designations. The Council will ensure that consideration is given to adopting environmental best practice measures in all cases.

The presence of contamination may affect or restrict the use of land, but equally development may address the issue for the benefit of the wider community, and bring the land back into beneficial use. The presence of instability in land can also be a major planning issue, and when new development is proposed it will be necessary to ensure that new buildings and their surroundings are safe for future users as well as ensure that their development does not have an effect on the immediate and surrounding area including neighbouring uses. In determining whether land contamination or instability is an issue when assessing a planning application, the Council will have regard to a range of information sources including its database of past industrial and commercial land uses, information provided by developers and third parties, statutory guidance and historic maps. In the case of development, where the use would be particularly vulnerable to contamination evidence should always be required to establish whether there is any concern about contamination which will need to be addressed.

Where the Council supports the redevelopment of the poorest quality employment sites for other uses such as Housing, consideration needs to be given to the environmental impact on residents of all socio-economic groups. See comments above under 2.7 with respect to noise, ventilation and contaminated land.

Improvements may be required to the sewer / drainage capacity for new developments, particularly those around the seafront, including dealing with misconnections. Ensuring the sufficient of sewer / drainage capacity for new developments and targeting and support agencies with responsibility for misconnections will improve the water quality and the objective of promoting Southend as a major resort.

Support the enhancement of tree planning and landscaping to both improve the public realm and providing a greener and cooler community.
Support the improvement of all transport systems serving Southend will help to improve air quality and social mobility. Where improvements to the main A127 and A13 increases the number of lanes consideration will need to be given to mitigation for existing residents and new developments to reduce the impact of noise and vibration and reduced air quality.

The introduction of Park and Ride Schemes would encourage the use of public transport.
Consideration to be given to green energy solutions, such as energy networks and solar panels to meet the energy needs of new developments, and the retrofitting of existing developments.
Agree that working in partnership will help to deliver the required outcomes, consideration should also be given to increasing the CIL charges, set out in the infrastructure delivery plan that supports local plans.

.