8a - Redevelop with a smaller scale scheme comprising expansion of leisure and entertainment uses and a substantial area of public green space

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 387

Received: 26/07/2010

Respondent: A thomas

Representation Summary:

having looked and commented on the earlier Victorias Scheme for this area i agree with that and wonder why all this is being brought up again.

Full text:

having looked and commented on the earlier Victorias Scheme for this area i agree with that and wonder why all this is being brought up again.

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 388

Received: 26/07/2010

Respondent: A thomas

Representation Summary:

would be a wasted opp

Full text:

would be a wasted opp

Object

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 551

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Representation Summary:

This would fail to realise the opportunity on one of the few sites with development potential in the AAP and the area north of London Road should be the subject of a separate Development Brief as part of the AAP

Full text:

This would fail to realise the opportunity on one of the few sites with development potential in the AAP and the area north of London Road should be the subject of a separate Development Brief as part of the AAP

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 595

Received: 07/08/2010

Respondent: Herbert Grove Residents

Representation Summary:

Herbert Grove Residents believe that this development is an issue for the local people.

Full text:

Herbert Grove Residents believe that this development is an issue for the local people.

Support

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 805

Received: 13/08/2010

Respondent: Conservation Association Westcliff Seaboard (CAWS)

Representation Summary:

8a,8b, 8d

Full text:

General Comments
A1) Unique Victorian and Edwardian streetscape and vistas - Need to be very carefully preserved - Both short views and long views - In the High Street, there are still some key well designed upper stories with features we will not see again.

A2) We believe that our 'lost community spirit in our towns and cities today is caused by a lack of identification with an area. Everything runs into everything else, except from wholly identifiable areas (e.g. Leigh-on-Sea, Milton). Identifying current 'community areas' and new ones and building their identities will, we believe lead individuals toward a closer community feeling and more mutual co-operation and interest.

A3) We do need to focus on the small design and 'bottom-up thinking', as well as on the 'grand designs'. It will be the availability of smaller, specialist shops and the uniqueness of their setting, which will distinguish Southend as a 'special shopping' centre, instead of just, another town centre.

A4) 'Tall' buildings are not necessarily the right approach to an iconic town centre. Visitors will not come to Southend to view the tall buildings, they will come to see 'something different' that they cannot find in Chelmsford, or Basildon, or Bluewater, etc. It's creating that 'special buzz' - Like the lanes in Brighton, or for new build - Gehry's unique buildings. The bland square-box glass designs just won't do it - Although excellent buildings with sea vistas just might.

Specific Comments
2.11 We believe that there is a great opportunity to revive Hamlet Court Road as a special shopping centre again. It has the character, but it is presently over-burdened with restaurants. A mixed use would enhance the whole Westcliff area.
2.14 We believe that this has been missing recently. Building which involve people inter-action (covered walkways, shops at street level) are vastly preferable to blank glass walls. Building like this - just fill the space - They don't offer new interesting space.
3.4 (See A1-A4 general comments above) Tall is not necessarily good - 'smart' is better.
3.10 'Bulky food outlets sounds like a recipe for disaster - Opportunities for smaller, distinct, specialist restaurants give us 'differentiation' - Otherwise we are in danger of creating 'Basildon-on-Sea'.
3.11 Southend should perhaps consider taking a development route which is focused on new high-tech opportunities (Nano technology, Green technology) linked into our educational future focus. This could act as a magnet for incoming investment, which can start on a small-scale and be housed in a new 'nursery' units in and around Southend Airport (and possibly on ex-military sites at Shoeburyness). It could also magnify the educational focus greatly.

(Obviously 3.15 supports this).

Option Box 1: 'Yes', although there is a great danger of buildings for buildings sake - Bulk outlets', Tall buildings, are a big red danger area.
Option Box 2: 'Yes', identification of micro-sites e.g: High Street opposite the Royals on the North to Alexander Road - This is a unique site forming a 'min-lanes' area - similar to Brighton. Another option is development of the Kursal as a 'Covent Garden type' mini centre, but it would need good strong links back to the High Street, or development of the 'Golden Mile' as retail/restaurants area. A diagonal road would also help if it stretched to the Kursal and opened up that vista, perhaps as a wide, stepped pedestrian avenue, with shops.
Option Box 3: 'Yes', bearing in mind 'micro planning' for people's enjoyment and 'bottom-up thinking' which meets 'top down thinking'.
Option Box 4: 'Yes', except I would add options under Employment and Offices to promote: Small combined shops, with workshop space behind the shops to encourage artisans to create, train and sell unique designs in Southend. Plus, also the creation of small design development workshops to enable small-scale advanced technology prototyping.
Option Box 5: No. This looks like the best option, provided it doesn't lead to 'meaningless' over-development. If a key focus is on 'new quarters' and centres of interest, without the 'soulless' blank walls (Glass or brick). The balance between 'city' and 'town' is 'interesting' and worrying - Expanding the feel of Southend, without losing its heart and integrity would seem to be a strong challenge.
6.15 We are against tall landmarks on the water's edge. This destroys the 'horizontal nature' of the coast and suggests a Costa- Del-Sol - type approach. A really awful example is the 'Nirvanha' building on the Western Esplanade, which has significantly downgraded the whole area and the long coastal views too.
Option Box 6: Maybe, or it could deliver 'Basildon-on-Sea' unless it is very well thought through as a quality, pedestrian experience.
Option Box 7: 7a
Option Box 8: 8a, 8b, 8d
Option Box 9: 9b
Option Box 10: 10a
Option Box 12: The car Park tends to be a 'dead area', but the gardens are uplifting, perhaps a similar 'look' for the street on the other side (s), would transform that street. At the moment it is a car park, 'concrete' area. Certainly a green swathe with trees would make a difference.
Option Box 13: The ideas here are good so long as a 'village' feel can be created with 'pedestrian scaled' buildings and squares - Sounds very good, as this area does have a 'down energy'.
Option Box 14: 14b
Option Box 15: This area requires great care in order to retain the best of its Victorian/Edwardian, even Georgian feel. Further development could possibly destroy its unique feel.
Option Box 16: 16a (i0, 16a (iv), 16e (Combination)
Option Box 17: 17a & 17b & 17c
Option Box 18: 18a, 18c, 18e
Option Box 19: 19b
Option Box 20: 20c, 20d, 20e
Option Box 21: 21a, 21b, 21c(iii)
Option Box 22: Yes
Option Box 23: 23a, 23b (Mixed Approach)
Option Box 24: 24b & 24c
Option 25: 25c
Option 26: Locally evaluated per area, as required
Option 27: 27b

Support

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 855

Received: 13/08/2010

Respondent: South Westcliff Community Group (SWCG)

Representation Summary:

8a, 8b, 8d


Full text:

General Comments
A1) Unique Victorian and Edwardian streetscape and vistas - Need to be very carefully preserved - Both short views and long views - In the High Street, there are still some key well designed upper stories with features we will not see again.

A2) We believe that our 'lost community spirit in our towns and cities today is caused by a lack of identification with an area. Everything runs into everything else, except from wholly identifiable areas (e.g. Leigh-on-Sea, Milton). Identifying current 'community areas' and new ones and building their identities will, we believe lead individuals toward a closer community feeling and more mutual co-operation and interest.

A3) We do need to focus on the small design and 'bottom-up thinking', as well as on the 'grand designs'. It will be the availability of smaller, specialist shops and the uniqueness of their setting, which will distinguish Southend as a 'special shopping' centre, instead of just, another town centre.

A4) 'Tall' buildings are not necessarily the right approach to an iconic town centre. Visitors will not come to Southend to view the tall buildings, they will come to see 'something different' that they cannot find in Chelmsford, or Basildon, or Bluewater, etc. It's creating that 'special buzz' - Like the lanes in Brighton, or for new build - Gehry's unique buildings. The bland square-box glass designs just won't do it - Although excellent buildings with sea vistas just might.

Specific Comments
2.11 We believe that there is a great opportunity to revive Hamlet Court Road as a special shopping centre again. It has the character, but it is presently over-burdened with restaurants. A mixed use would enhance the whole Westcliff area.
2.14 We believe that this has been missing recently. Building which involve people inter-action (covered walkways, shops at street level) are vastly preferable to blank glass walls. Building like this - just fill the space - They don't offer new interesting space.
3.4 (See A1-A4 general comments above) Tall is not necessarily good - 'smart' is better.
3.10 'Bulky food outlets sounds like a recipe for disaster - Opportunities for smaller, distinct, specialist restaurants give us 'differentiation' - Otherwise we are in danger of creating 'Basildon-on-Sea'.
3.11 Southend should perhaps consider taking a development route which is focused on new high-tech opportunities (Nano technology, Green technology) linked into our educational future focus. This could act as a magnet for incoming investment, which can start on a small-scale and be housed in a new 'nursery' units in and around Southend Airport (and possibly on ex-military sites at Shoeburyness). It could also magnify the educational focus greatly.

(Obviously 3.15 supports this).

Option Box 1: 'Yes', although there is a great danger of buildings for buildings sake - Bulk outlets', Tall buildings, are a big red danger area.
Option Box 2: 'Yes', identification of micro-sites e.g: High Street opposite the Royals on the North to Alexander Road - This is a unique site forming a 'min-lanes' area - similar to Brighton. Another option is development of the Kursal as a 'Covent Garden type' mini centre, but it would need good strong links back to the High Street, or development of the 'Golden Mile' as retail/restaurants area. A diagonal road would also help if it stretched to the Kursal and opened up that vista, perhaps as a wide, stepped pedestrian avenue, with shops.
Option Box 3: 'Yes', bearing in mind 'micro planning' for people's enjoyment and 'bottom-up thinking' which meets 'top down thinking'.
Option Box 4: 'Yes', except I would add options under Employment and Offices to promote: Small combined shops, with workshop space behind the shops to encourage artisans to create, train and sell unique designs in Southend. Plus, also the creation of small design development workshops to enable small-scale advanced technology prototyping.
Option Box 5: No. This looks like the best option, provided it doesn't lead to 'meaningless' over-development. If a key focus is on 'new quarters' and centres of interest, without the 'soulless' blank walls (Glass or brick). The balance between 'city' and 'town' is 'interesting' and worrying - Expanding the feel of Southend, without losing its heart and integrity would seem to be a strong challenge.
6.15 We are against tall landmarks on the water's edge. This destroys the 'horizontal nature' of the coast and suggests a Costa- Del-Sol - type approach. A really awful example is the 'Nirvanha' building on the Western Esplanade, which has significantly downgraded the whole area and the long coastal views too.
Option Box 6: Maybe, or it could deliver 'Basildon-on-Sea' unless it is very well thought through as a quality, pedestrian experience.
Option Box 7: 7a
Option Box 8: 8a, 8b, 8d
Option Box 9: 9b
Option Box 10: 10a
Option Box 12: The car Park tends to be a 'dead area', but the gardens are uplifting, perhaps a similar 'look' for the street on the other side (s), would transform that street. At the moment it is a car park, 'concrete' area. Certainly a green swathe with trees would make a difference.
Option Box 13: The ideas here are good so long as a 'village' feel can be created with 'pedestrian scaled' buildings and squares - Sounds very good, as this area does have a 'down energy'.
Option Box 14: 14b
Option Box 15: This area requires great care in order to retain the best of its Victorian/Edwardian, even Georgian feel. Further development could possibly destroy its unique feel.
Option Box 16: 16a (i0, 16a (iv), 16e (Combination)
Option Box 17: 17a & 17b & 17c
Option Box 18: 18a, 18c, 18e
Option Box 19: 19b
Option Box 20: 20c, 20d, 20e
Option Box 21: 21a, 21b, 21c(iii)
Option Box 22: Yes
Option Box 23: 23a, 23b (Mixed Approach)
Option Box 24: 24b & 24c
Option 25: 25c
Option 26: Locally evaluated per area, as required
Option 27: 27b

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 888

Received: 19/08/2010

Respondent: Councillor Ian Gilbert

Representation Summary:

Should Sainsbury's relocate, option 8(a) is favourable, given the scarcity of public green space in the area, though option 8(b) would have considerable benefits if practical.

Full text:

Please find below comments on the public consultation on the Central Area Action Plan, submitted on behalf of the local Labour Party.

Option box 3
1) Objective 4 should be strengthened to include a specific reference to preserving the mature trees that we still have left in the central area. Planting saplings cannot make up for the loss of mature trees for many, many years, even assuming the trees survive to maturity.

The council has alienated significant sections of the community by removing mature trees, and further destruction of healthy trees will damage public approval for any regeneration plans.

2) The Action Plan should include particular reference to facilities for young people. Opportunities for outdoor recreation, eg a skateboard park, should be encouraged, and the administration's previous commitment to a recreational pool in the centre of Southend should be restated.

Option Box 5
Clearly the economic situation and the financial cutbacks cast doubt on whether large scale physical regeneration projects are viable. Local residents are deeply sceptical of such plans. Given these constraints, it may be that change of a more evolutionary character is the best that we can achieve.

Option Box 16
Development of the gateway neighbourhoods should focus on the needs of existing communities. These communities have had to bear the brunt of the problems associated with living close to an urban centre, including overcrowding, noise and anti-social behaviour. The needs of the people living their now should be put first.

Option Box 8
Should Sainsbury's relocate, option 8(a) is favourable, given the scarcity of public green space in the area, though option 8(b) would have considerable benefits if practical.

Option Box 18
Refurbishment of existing buildings should always be the first option for both economic and environmental reasons.

Option Box 19
The energy needs of new developments should be supplied by renewables to the maximum practical extent. We should support micro-generation.

Option Box 21
See above regarding trees. Development South of the sea wall should not be permitted.

Option Box 24
We should definitely use all powers to ensure that the maximum number of larger family homes are built in any gateway development.

Option Box 25
We support higher percentage of affordable housing in all developments, and a lower threshold. We also believe that a proportion of new developments should be not just affordable, but social-rented.

Comment

Southend Central Area Action Plan

Representation ID: 1151

Received: 03/11/2010

Respondent: Montagu Evans

Representation Summary:

Option 8 - London Road Broadway
This site currently includes the Sainsbury's store and a number of development options are considered should the Sainsbury's store close. None of the considered options include the retention of the site within a retail use. This should be considered, given the constrained nature of the High Street area. This site presents one of the few sites in close proximity to the town centre where additional retail development could be developed once all in-centre options have been developed. The site should be considered as comprising a site which is still suitable for retail development and this should be included within the AAP.

Full text:

REPRESENTATIONS TO CENTRAL AREA ACTION PLAN -ISSUES AND OPTIONS

These representations are submitted on behalf of Delamere Estates Ltd and the National Grid Pension Fund, the owners of The Victoria Shopping Centre at the northern end of the High Street, in relation to the recently published Central Area Action Plan - Issues and Options consultation, The shopping centre has recently been the subject of significant investment resulting in enhancing and refurbishing the existing retail f1oorspace.

Introduction
The Council is currently in the process of preparing a Retail Study, which we understand is expected to be
published shortly. The AAP states that the contents of the Retail Study will inform the submission version of
the document The findings of the Retail Study will be an important consideration when deciding how much
additional floorspace can be supported in order to ensure that adequate sites are identified.

In these circumstances we consider that the current consultation is premature prior to the publication of the
Retail Study. The soundness tests of PPS12 require that in order for an LDF document to be justified it should be founded on a robust and credible evidence base. As the Central Area Action Plan currently stands it is not founded on such an evidence base because the Retail Study is the only independent assessment which can determine the appropriate retail strategy. This is particularly important in Southend where there are competing out of centre schemes to consider.

The Council should reconsult on the Issues and Options Central Area Action Plan once the Retail Study has
been published in order to enable representations to be submitted in full knowledge of the contents of this
document.

Option 5 - Are there any significant sustainability or viability reasons why the Borough Council
should reject at this stage the City by the Sea option?
The City by the Sea option is based on a holistic and comprehensive approach which sees the development
of a series of urban Quarters. It incorporates a strengthened retail spine with the retail circuit being optimised through a more comprehensive approach to the Seaway site and Chichester Road. The evaluation of this option states (page 32);
*Creates a circuit with a strong third anchor, large enough to make a significant claw back of lost
spending which also relates well to the boutique area, small Office, more diverse evening economy
market, creating conditions for stimulating further business growth. The link between Chichester
Road and Seaway is a strong design feature.*


The AAP recognises at paragraph 3.7 that
~The focus for retail activity should continue to be the established town centre; however there is an
opportunity to achieve critical mass by delivering a strong retail circuit and new units to the east of the
High Street focusing on the Tylers Avenue site. This would add a fresh component to the retail offer.
In order to reinforce the primary of the High Street it is important that The Victoria and The Royals
continue to improve as anchors...

The development of the Seaway site and the Queensway and Southchurch site (see Option10) will increase
the number of anchors at each end of the High Street. This will serve to strengthen and enhance the existing retail circuit.

The City by the Sea approach will create a number of developments which will be attractive to investors and
provide the ability to respond to an increased demand for additional retail floorspace and develop new
anchors.

Option 8 - London Road Broadway
This site currently includes the Sainsbury's store and a number of development options are considered should the Sainsbury's store close. None of the considered options include the retention of the site within a retail use. This should be considered, given the constrained nature of the High Street area. This site presents one of the few sites in close proximity to the town centre where additional retail development could be developed once all in-centre options have been developed. The site should be considered as comprising a site which is still suitable for retail development and this should be included within the AAP.

Option 9 - The High Street
The current anchors in the High Street are The Victoria (north) and The Royals (south) shopping centres.
Retail development should be encouraged in and around the High Street. Extending the retail activity into the St John's Quarter will further strengthen the retail offer at the southern end of the High Street which will
balance the proposed supermarket development at the northern end of the High Street. These two developments will serve to strengthen the two anchor locations within the town centre creating a strong retail circuit between the two areas. The link between these two anchor locations should be retained, although the exact distribution of uses between these two points should not be tightly controlled. Cafes, bars, restaurants, banks and building societies and smaller retailers all have an important role to play in the diversity of the High Street and represent part of the nature of the town centre which will serve to attract customers.

There are currently a number of vacant units in and around the High Street (see attached Goad plan).
Consideration should be given to how these units can be brought back into an active use and that any further retail development in the town centre complements the existing retail offer and type of units available. Further retail development in the town centre should seek to attract new occupiers to the town centre rather than lead to the relocation of existing retailers.

Option 9b is supported which states:
-Extend major retail activity into the St John's Quarter inclUding the central seafront.*
As outlined above this will enable the establishment of a second anchor in the southern section of the High Street, further strengthening the High Street. Once the findings of the Retail Study are known it will be possible to ensure that sufficient sites are identified in an on the edge of the town centre to accommodate additional retail development. In the first instance, the creation of additional retail anchors will increase the attraction of the centre.

Option 10 - Queensway and Southchurch
Paragraph 3.10 of the Central Area Action Plan recognises that

"The need for additional bUlky food outlets is acknowledged because of the expanded role for the
central area and the accompanying planned increases in new homes and jobs. Such outlets have a
key role as part of a wider expanded retailing offer in the central parl of Southend though contrary
views are acknowledged. "

The identification of this site for a large foodstore is therefore in accordance with an identified need. Without
the finalised Retail Study it is not possible to comment on the appropriate scale of the proposed foodstore.
However, there is general policy support for such a development based on the changing role of Southend.
Given the constrained nature of the High Street this offers one of the few opportunities available for the
establishment of this form of retail development which will support the High Street as well as clawback
expenditure lost to existing and proposed foodstores. The proposed foodstore will provide a second anchor at the northern end of the High Street to balance the creation of a second anchor at the southern end of the High Street. The creation of additional anchor attractions will selVe to enhance the overall role of Southend and create and increase in the number of people passing between the anchor points to enhance the existing retail circuit.

Option 10a is seeking to bring forward the comprehensive regeneration of the area whilst Option 10b is
seeking partial redevelopment of the area. In order to ensure that the proposed foodstore is brought forward
in a timely fashion Option 10b is supported. This will enable the new foodstore to be brought forward to the
benefit of local residents and businesses. The requirement to bring forward a comprehensive redevelopment of the area will require a comprehensive masterpran and land assembly. Undertaking this work will delay the provision of the foodstore. It would be necessary to ensure that the proposed foodstore was well integrated with the existing High Street in order to encourage linked trips between the two.

Option 14 - St John's, Central Seafront and the Eastern Esplande
The text in relation to this option makes reference to the potential for the creation of a new retail circuit
providing a high quality retail offer to complement the High Street and states that Seaways has the potential to become a new retail. residential and leisure mixed use hub.

In terms of providing a linkage between any new and proposed retail circuits an approach should be adopted which ensures sufficient linkages between the two are provided which will encourage pedestrian circulation. Any additional retail circuit should complement and enhance the existing retail circuit.

Option 11- Development Management
With regard to meeting the challenge of climate change and in order to bring about a significant reduction in
carbon emissions there should be recognition that there are fewer viable options for reducing carbon
emissions where existing buildings are being refurbished. The particular challenges and opportunities for the existing buildings within the town centre should be recognised and where owners are looking to enhance the existing building stock there should be recognition of the sustainability and affordability of introducing carbon reduction technologies into these schemes.

Options 18 and 19 - Addressing resource minimisation and carbon emissions
Where existing buildings are refurbished within the town centre recognition should be given to the additional
costs associated with accommodating these technologies into existing buildings. In some instances it is not
always practical to introduce these technologies and there should be recognition that it this is not always
possible.

Option 20 - Travel
Recognition should be given to the role that centrally located and well managed car parks can play in creating the opportunity for linked trips. These provide an important role in the functioning of the town centre and should be supported.

Options 23, 24 and 25 - Addressing housing growth, need and affordable housing
Whilst the provision of housing is recognised as being important and has an important role to play in the creation of a diverse and active mixed community it is important to ensure that the specific characteristics of
individual locations are considered carefully. There should be an explicit recognition of where, in allocating sites, the retail use is the primary reason for that aHocation because of the site's location in relation to the town centre's boundary, as well as the limited availability of sites. In this way, while mixed use development (incorporating residential for example) may be preferable, it should not be at the expense of risking the delivery of the primary retail use. If this happens, the inadvertent effect is that it can increase the likelihood of out of centre retail development being brought fOlVlard successfully because town centre sites have had to be discounted because of the difficulties of their viable delivery.

Careful consideration needs to be given to whether residential accommodation above retail and leisure uses is the most appropriate solution. A cautious approach should be adopted which ensures that the existing and proposed retail floorspace is able to function in order to enhance the role of the town centre and is not restricted due to the presence of residential development.

Summary
The Central Area Action Plan has been prepared in advance of the Council's Retail StUdy. The Retail Study
comprises an important part of the evidence base when considering an AAP which addresses the town centre and its future development. The preparation of the AAP is therefore considered to be premature relative to the publication of the Retail Study. The Council's experience when the retail elements of the Fossett's Farm and Roots Hall developments were being considered should reinforce the need to ensure that policy is produced in a robust way.

The AAP recognises that the existing town centre should be the focus for further retail development. The
existing Sainsbury's site should still be considered as a suitable retail location even if the unit closes subject to the normal PPS4 tests being satisfied. This site would represent an opportunity for other retail formats to be located within a short distance of the town centre as an alternative to out of centre sites. The key issue in this AAP is ensuring the town centre continues to operate as a whole and that the proposed developments enhance this function of the centre. Links along the High Street should be maintained, the AAP contains plans to create a new focus at each end of the High Street which will serve to enhance the number of trips along the High Street.

Careful consideration should be given to the role that the existing built fabric can play in the future
regeneration of the centre, and there should be recognition that the refurbishment of existing buildings cannot always reduce carbon emissions to the same extent that can be achieved in new builds. Residential development needs to be sensitively located in order to ensure that there are no conflicts between the land uses. Housing is recognised as being a sensitive land use, and therefore caution needs to be exercised whether mixed use development is appropriate on every identified site.