Object

Core Strategy Submission Document

Representation ID: 16201

Received: 02/11/2009

Respondent: Stolkin and Clements (Southend) LLP

Agent: Firstplan

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Draft Policy ED4 (part 3) is unsound because the proposal to allocate industrial land in proximity to Great Wakering, to provide local employment and mitigate the de-allocation of Star Lane Industrial Estate, is not justified as it is not founded on a robust or credible evidence base.

Additional evidence supplied, Council ref AE26

The alternative employment land is likely to be located within the green belt, which may have a greater impact than providing additional residential development on green belt land, in light of this, it is not consistent with PPG2.

Full text:

Draft Policy ED4 (part 3) is unsound because the proposal to allocate industrial land in proximity to Great Wakering, to provide local employment and mitigate the de-allocation of Star Lane Industrial Estate, is not justified as it is not founded on a robust or credible evidence base.

The amount of this land required, types of uses and location of the site are not set out in the draft policy. It therefore is not justified on a robust or credible evidence base.

The land could in fact be our clients site 'Tithe Park'. However, this is unclear

The draft policy is unsound as the alternative employment land is likely to be located within the green belt, which by virtue of the nature of employment uses, may have a greater impact than providing additional residential development on green belt land, in light of this, it is not consistent with PPG2 which provides the Government' guidance on green belts.