Q4.12 Do you agree with the proposed areas for change?

are you intending to take our home 10 Smallholdings
eastwoodbury Lane

No.

Yes

Yes

any green/park land should be left alone and not developed.

any existing brown site land could be viewed as becoming additional park/green land.

I was present at the meeting, some years ago, when approval was given for the improvements to the airport. It appeared very satisfactory then (improved communications; job creation in building, developments and maintenance; reduction in CO2 through the rail terminal; etc.)and appears vital if Southend and Rochford are to benefit. My support is for proposal 2(b).

Absolutely not, at worst the airport should remain at it's current size. Preferably it should be reduced until it no longer exists.

No. I think it is fine to make better use of underutilised existing industrial areas, internal reorganisation of Southend airport, etc. but I think it is unacceptable to swallow up agricultural and green belt land in order to grow an airport we do not need or want and which will only further increase emissions. Why do we need more industrial units if some we already have aren't used to capacity? if you have to do something with the land - how about growing some food? or planting trees to mitigate current airport emissions.

Yes. Appropriate landscaping to be carried out where appropriate, to minimise visual affects.

No I do not agree with this as an area for development, we should be looking at existing unoccupied buildings before we develop this area.

Yes - we have very little land for new economic development so this use is vital.

Dear Sir,

SOUTHEND BOROUGH COUNCIL AND ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL LONDON SOUTHEND AIRPORT & ENVIRONS JOINT AREA ACTION PLAN DPD: INITIAL CONSULTATION ON ISSUES AND OPTIONS

Thank you for consulting Sport England on the above document. Sport England is the Government agency responsible for delivering the Government's sporting objectives. Maximising the investment into sport and recreation through the land use planning system is one of our national and regional priorities. You will also be aware that Sport England is a statutory consultee on planning applications affecting playing fields.

In response to this consultation, I would like to respond to the following questions in the document:

Q4.12: Do you agree with the proposed areas for change?

Area 4ii (d) - Agricultural land to the north of Aviation Way Business Park

In the description of this area on page 48 of the consultation document, this area is described as consisting primarily of agricultural land. However, a substantial part of this area (site 4ii (d)) is Westcliff Rugby Club's and Kent Elms Tennis Club's facilities. As this area is proposed in scenario 3 for development, for transparency it is essential that it is made clear in all future JAAP documents all of the land uses that will be affected in this area. Sport England would object to the inclusion of site 4ii (d) as an area for accommodating an extension to the employment area unless all of the sports facilities affected were satisfactorily relocated in a suitable location.

Area 4(v) - Agricultural/amenity land to the south of the airport boundary

It is noted that this area accommodates a cricket pitch. Sport England would have no objection to potential environmental enhancements to this area if cricket pitch provision was maintained or improved.


Area 4(xi) - Land south west of Nestuda Way

It is noted that this area contains football pitches. While the football pitches within this area are not currently proposed for change, Sport England would object if as a result of the consultation, the football pitches were identified for development unless satisfactory relocation proposals were included as part of the JAAP.

Q5.1 - Which is your preferred Scenario for the future of the Southend Airport area

Sport England makes no comment on which scenario is preferred. However, it is noted that scenario 3 (high growth) would involve the Aviation Way Employment Area expanding onto the current site of Westcliff Rugby Club's and Kent Elms Tennis Club's facilities. If this scenario was selected, Sport England would be a statutory consultee on any future planning application involving development on this site. It is noted from figure 5.4 that the rugby club would be relocated on agricultural land (site 4ii(b)) to the north of the airport although there is no further detail provided about this in the document. From Sport England's perspective it would be essential that Westcliff Rugby Club and Kent Elms Tennis Club and any other sports facilities affected are satisfactorily relocated within the JAAP. In principle, no objection is made to the relocation site although to meet Sport England's playing fields policy and Government policy guidance in PPG17, replacement sports facility provision would need to be at least equivalent (to the facilities that they would replace) in quantitative and qualitative terms and the replacement facilities would need to be operational before any development commences on the existing site to ensure continuity of facility provision for the clubs. If scenario 3 is selected, this should be made clear in the JAAP.


I hope that this response is helpful. Please contact me if you have any queries. If any scenario is progressed in the JAAP that would affect sports facilities, Sport England would be happy to provide further advice.

Yours sincerely


Roy Warren
Senior Planning Manager
Direct Line: 0207 273 1831
E-Mail: planning.east@sportengland.org

I fully support these proposals and I live just 1 mile from the airport. We need all the investment and encouragement for people to start or move their business here. To all local people: if the last proposal (full expansion) takes place, then the local infrastructure must be upgraded to, benefiting us all!

In order to meet the future requirement for the expansion of the airport operations, development of the infrastructure and to create opportunities for the growth of the businesses in and around the airport, additional land will be required for employment purposes. The areas identified for employment growth to the west of the airport should be sufficient to meet the future employment land requirements for the airport, aviation cluster of businesses and general employment growth up to 2021. These areas should have minimum impact on the adjoining uses.

I think the airport has so much potential and to keep it as it is is a waste when it could bring so much to area.

There is great local demand for European flights whether day trips or holiday flights. During 70's and 80's Southend Airport was extremely busy and European flights were often wait-listed as flights were full.