Background

Both the Core Strategy and the Site Allocations DPD identify Rawreth Industrial Estate for re-allocation to residential uses. For the reasons set out by Countryside Properties in their submissions to the Core Strategy (re-iterated below), we do not consider that the site is necessarily desirable, suitable or deliverable for residential development. We consider that the site can remain as an important source of local employment, and this should be reflected in both the Core Strategy and the Site Allocations DPD.

Representations

The representations to the Core Strategy raise significant concerns regarding both the desirability/suitability of redeveloping Rawreth Lane Industrial Estate, and the achievability of this proposal.

The Core Strategy seeks the provision of an equivalent area of land to compensate for redevelopment, and notes that this will require the use of Green Belt land. Although notionally the redevelopment of the Estate for housing will reduce the amount of housing in the Green Belt, there will be no lesser amount of Green Belt development in total. Indeed, it will be evident that the existing Estate is actually already over-crowded, with substantial on-street parking, limited opportunities for servicing, limited landscaping, and no space for firms to expand.

To meet current standards and design expectations, the replacement Industrial Estate will inevitably end up being materially larger than the existing site, if it is to be attractive to occupiers and if it is to meet the Council's expectations. Ironically, this proposal is therefore likely to lead to a greater loss of Green Belt than would be the case if the Estate were to stay in its current location.

We have reservations as to whether or not existing firms will be able to relocate in any event. The Council will note that many of the existing businesses are relatively 'low value' users, that are well established in their existing premises. They are likely to be paying relatively low rents, given the nature of the site. Even if new premises can be provided at equivalent rents, relocating a business is expensive. Existing (and often fixed) plant, equipment, tools, stocks and materials have to be moved, as well as the disruption to trading caused by moving. Even where uses operate primarily from open yards, new portacabins/buildings have to be paid for and installed. Relocation will be a substantial cost to these existing businesses, and if the existing estate is redeveloped, it has to be open to question as to how many would in fact be able to afford to relocate.

In the meantime, in advance of redevelopment, there is likely to be a disincentive to owners to invest in the existing infrastructure, and a lack of will to take on new long-term tenants. The effect is likely to be years of decline and job losses, before new land is brought forward. Whilst this may be compensated in the future by the creation of new employment at West Rayleigh, this is as much likely to be based on new investment and new enterprises, as it is the relocation of existing users from Rawreth Lane.

We are also doubtful as to whether or not redevelopment will be practically possible. The existing Estate contains numerous tenants, many of whom may have long term tenancies or even own their own premises. The site has a long history of potentially contaminative uses, which would be likely to add significantly to the cost of redevelopment for suburban residential development, and which would also make partial redevelopment very unlikely. There is therefore no certainty either that the land is genuinely available for redevelopment, or that redevelopment is viable.

In accordance with representations made by Countryside Properties to the Core Strategy, we consider either that the Estate should continue to be identified for commercial purposes, or at least that the Site Allocations Document does not prevent or prejudice continued commercial use or commercial re-development, even if an option for residential redevelopment remains.