Policy E3 - Saxon Business Park

We have been told by someone we believe to be informed that there are no utility services installed in Cherry Orchard Way. If this is the case this needs to understood in the project planning as it affects the viability of future development.

I must challenge the statement that "our analysis shows that growth in business numbers at Bournemouth Airport was 25%" and the conclusions that are drawn from this.

The increase in employment in areas adjacent to airports owes more to the reduction in property prices and consequent lowering of rents for industrial prtemises than to any perceived benefits asociated with the proximity to an airport. It is interesting that the JAAP uses Bournemouth Airport as an exemplar instead of Southampton. The movement of airlines and the associated jobs between these two locations in the past provides a salutary lesson to the local councils on the short term nature of such employment. Bournemouth Airport has a runway that is 2,271 metres long and it is likely that airlines (except those operating smaller aircraft on short routes) will again move from Southampton airport with its shorter runway, to Bournemouth to meet new Chapter 4 requirements. Passenger numbers peaked in 2007 (1,079,000) but have declined steadily to 613,000 in 2011.

Argee with these proposals

This policy makes the assumption that the airport will attract wealth and investment. There has been substantial investment in the airport since the extension of the runway was extracted from the last version of the JAAP, but it has yet to be demonstrated that any real benefit has been received by the towns of Southend or Rochford. before this development, it was stated that thousands of people would be beating a path into Southend to enjoy the shops and the beaches, but this has not transpired. Southend Council has failed to provide adequate provision for visitors to the town; its approach road is an eyesore, its shared space has now been discounted as an error, and it is now considering destroying its car parks in town to build a new library and a cinema complex. Such short-sighted measures do not oblige anyone to trust any long-term goal stated by Southend Council, particularly when they brush aside the views of their opponents, considering that they know best!

Draft Policy E3 explains that development in area 1A will be permitted subject to a schedule which sets out that the area should provide 20,000sqm of Use Class B1/ Education floorspace / 1,000 jobs. It confirms that supporting uses may also be accepted where they are required and explains that development will be required to make a contribution towards achieving the new open space to the north and east of the site.

C and S Associates support the designation of the site for development. The Brickworks site is previously developed land and is currently derelict and detracts from the surrounding landscape. Redevelopment will enhance the area, with the site becoming a positive addition in economic and visual terms. The proposals are therefore consistent with achieving sustainable development. However, such improvements will incur significant costs

The potential significant costs associated with remediation should be taken into account when considering the appropriateness or otherwise of any planning obligations. This will ensure that the development is viable.

We do not need more business park areas we need more businesses in the already vacant units! The JAAP talks about an award winning business park when it isn't even built yet! How evidence based is that?

The are a ridiculous number of vacant units within minutes of the airport already. in point of fact this is just a back door way of getting new additional brownfield sites in area (some at the loss of green belt) in order that these or other sites can be simply converted to housing in the future, but with local populace "not noticing" the net loss of green belt to housing development

I SUPPORT THIS. I have nothing to add concerning this particular heading. To leave as 'No Comments' gives the impression that the writer could be a 'Don't Know' and has not got a view either way. Those who do not comment must be assumed to be in favour, however, those who object will not interpret it as such. Who the heck compiled this document?