Southend Central Area Action Plan (SCAAP) Preferred Approach 2015

Object

Representation ID: 2350

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy CS1.10g - Against proposal 10g to further develop City Beach. Comments have been made about flooding, accidents, risks to pedestrians in non-stopping traffic and no marked and lighted official crossing with blister paving put down where there is no crossing risking the lives of blind people.
City Beach - Kerbs are not only a safety zone for pedestrians but help to direct rain water to drains which should be adequate.
The seafront shared space is dangerous, has no formal crossings and various accidents have occurred. A proper crossing should be in place and not further extension of any shared space.

Object

Representation ID: 2351

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy CS1.12.ii.c - The 'Spanish Steps ' are a thoroughly dangerous idea for all users and will have to go through property(ies). This should not be pursued.

Object

Representation ID: 2352

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy CS1.12.iii - The Museum is in the wrong place not in tune with the leisure area. If just to shore up the cliffs it should be a leisure building. We do not have the like of the Mary Rose in the town and the thought that people coming down for the day to the beach, pier or lagoon will spend time in a museum is not considered to be sensible.

Comment

Representation ID: 2353

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy CS2.3 - Under what circumstances could there be development and what is the 'public interest' that could make this possible.

Comment

Representation ID: 2354

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy CS2.6 - Would want to know more about 6 and what kind of high quality visitor facility is envisaged

Comment

Representation ID: 2355

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Similar to above in that it appears to open the possibility of development which could be manipulated. Transparency will be required in both nature conservation and the waterfront.

Comment

Representation ID: 2356

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy PA8.2 - Concerns that use of backland for 'lanes' type development might occupy car park areas needed for the redevelopment of the substantial buildings in this area into residential and business units forcing cars on to the nearby streets causing problems.

Comment

Representation ID: 2357

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Policy PA8.8g - This is a sensitive junction with an historic building and St, Mary's churchyard. While it will be the Council's intention to take care with any design and appointment of contractors some reassurance perhaps in the press would save questions from local people.

Comment

Representation ID: 2358

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

Regular updates on progress of projects would be valuable. The Council needs to be in control of its own plan and not be unduly influenced by the objectives of partners.

Comment

Representation ID: 2359

Received: 15/02/2016

Respondent: Belfairs Gardens Residents Association

The demographics have not been considered. There are statistics to show that the proportion of older people in Southend will increase. With age these people will become less able or mobile and therefore it is unlikely that the emphasis on walking or cycling will be viable. The plan is based on more active folk to the detriment of those who are living longer and still expect a reasonable quality of life. *