Development Management - Proposed Submission

Search representations

Results for LINPAC search

New search New search

Comment

Development Management - Proposed Submission

Policy DM11 - Industrial Estates and Employment Areas

Representation ID: 1196

Received: 02/06/2011

Respondent: LINPAC

Agent: Planning Perspectives LLP

Representation Summary:

Part 2 of Policy DM11 notes that those sites listed within Policy Table 7 should be maintained and promoted for modern employment floorspace. The policy lacks flexibility as it fails to recognise that viability will be an important consideration in the regeneration of the Prittle Brook Estate as outlined by the Southend-on-Sea Employment Land Review (ELR) 2010. Redevelopment will only be a possibility therefore if the viability is taken into consideration and a flexible policy allowing mixed-use development applied.

Attachments:

Object

Development Management - Proposed Submission

Policy DM11 - Industrial Estates and Employment Areas

Representation ID: 1198

Received: 02/06/2011

Respondent: LINPAC

Agent: Planning Perspectives LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

On the basis that modern business floorspace is developed at a higher density than old stock/industrial floorspace, a substantial part of the Prittle Brook Estate would be available for enabling residential development. Given that residential led redevelopment of the site may be the only way to bring it back into an active use, the policy is ineffective and will prevent redevelopment. Allowing mixed use development would be supported by PPS4 which encourages policies to remain flexible. Therefore, it is considered that DM11 is not compliant with national policy as it doesn't provide the desired level of flexibility to plan for sustainable economic growth.

Attachments:

Object

Development Management - Proposed Submission

5.14

Representation ID: 1199

Received: 02/06/2011

Respondent: LINPAC

Agent: Planning Perspectives LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

In the present market redevelopment of Prittle Brook Estate for modern employment purposes would not be viable. Further clarity is needed to acknowledge that the ability of the site to provide employment opportunities in the future will depend upon the ability for any redevelopment to be viable. Considering the conclusions of the ELR, paragraph 5.14 is neither justified nor effective without recognising the implications of viability and will impose barriers to the redevelopment . In addition, Linpac Ltd has a lease on the site to 2070 and pays substantial ground rent which further reduces prospects of securing a viable.

Attachments:

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.