Policy E4 - Phasing of Saxon Business Park
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 29147
Received: 27/03/2013
Respondent: Sport England
Sport England supports the requirement that Area 2 of the proposed business park can only proceed once Westcliff Rugbt Club has been relocated and operational as this phasing requirement is necessary to ensure continuity of facility provision for the club. Without this there would be at least a temporary loss of playing field provision which is likely to prejudice the club's continuity.
Sport England supports the requirement that Area 2 of the proposed business park can only proceed once Westcliff Rugbt Club has been relocated and operational as this phasing requirement is necessary to ensure continuity of facility provision for the club. Without this there would be at least a temporary loss of playing field provision which is likely to prejudice the club's continuity.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32207
Received: 03/04/2013
Respondent: Mr G P Nicholls
Fully support this proposals in this area allowing for public transport/cycle routes
Fully support this proposals in this area allowing for public transport/cycle routes
Object
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32278
Received: 05/04/2013
Respondent: Mrs Catherine Theobald
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
A successful rugby club and a much-loved footpath will have been removed to facilitate this plan. The footpath n36 has been closed for a year temporarily without consultation from the public.
A successful rugby club and a much-loved footpath will have been removed to facilitate this plan. The footpath n36 has been closed for a year temporarily without consultation from the public.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32336
Received: 10/04/2013
Respondent: C and S Associates
Agent: Firstplan
C and S Associates support the designation of the site for development. The Brickworks site is previously developed land and currently lies derelict and detracts from the surrounding landscape. Redevelopment will enhance the area and will involve the remediation of the site.
As far as we are aware, Area Phase 1A should be deliverable by 2021. C and S Associates are committed to working with the Council and other landowners to ensure that this is achievable.
However, remediation is likely to incur significant costs and this needs to be taken into account in considering potential planning obligations.
Draft Policy E4 confirms that area 1A is expected to be developed as the first phase of the business park.
C and S Associates support the designation of the site for development. The Brickworks site is previously developed land and currently lies derelict and detracts from the surrounding landscape. Redevelopment will enhance the area and will involve the remediation of the site.
As far as we are aware, Area Phase 1A should be deliverable by 2021. C and S Associates are committed to working with the Council and other landowners to ensure that this is achievable.
However, remediation is likely to incur significant costs and this needs to be taken into account in considering potential planning obligations to ensure that the scheme is viable.
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32485
Received: 24/04/2013
Respondent: Westcliff Rugby Football Club
Provided that this section is adhered to: in other words, that Area 2 be reserved for development only at such time as the Westcliff Rugby Club has been relocated and is operational
Provided that this section is adhered to: in other words, that Area 2 be reserved for development only at such time as the Westcliff Rugby Club has been relocated and is operational
Support
London Southend Airport and Environs Joint Area Action Plan Submission Document
Representation ID: 32546
Received: 26/04/2013
Respondent: Mr. Terence DAVIES
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?
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?