Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Search representations
Results for Aber Ltd search
New searchSupport
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Eldon Way/Foundry Industrial Estate
Representation ID: 21687
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
This site has good access to the road network, and is well located with regards the train station.
This site has the opportunity to be redeveloped for a mixed use commercial scheme, including both employment and community and leisure uses appropriate to a town centre location, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
This site has good access to the road network, and is well located with regards the train station.
This site has the opportunity to be redeveloped for a mixed use commercial scheme, including both employment and community and leisure uses appropriate to a town centre location, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E9 Star Lane Industrial Estate
Representation ID: 21688
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
To meet the number of new jobs required in the RSS, if sites are de-allocated, then additional employment sites will be required. As the supply of employment land within the District is limited, any new sites will require the release of Green Belt land. As these sites will be outside of the existing urban areas, it is unlikely that these sites will be in as sustainable locations as the existing employment sites.
This site is well located with regards the strategic road network and as such it is considered to be a sustainable location
In addition, it is noted that Great Wakering is proposed to have an additional 250 new dwellings as one the preferred housing options (WGW). Combined with the housing proposed with the Star Lane Industrial Estate and Star Lane Industrial Estate, would significantly increase the size of the settlement, without providing sufficient employment opportunities. This would increase the level of out commuting and given the characteristics of the District, the majority of this would be by private car.
Instead of developing the whole site for residential, it would be more appropriate to redevelop the site for a mixed use scheme, including an element of new purpose built commercial space to meet current employment demands, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
To meet the number of new jobs required in the RSS, if sites are de-allocated, then additional employment sites will be required. As the supply of employment land within the District is limited, any new sites will require the release of Green Belt land. As these sites will be outside of the existing urban areas, it is unlikely that these sites will be in as sustainable locations as the existing employment sites.
This site is well located with regards the strategic road network and as such it is considered to be a sustainable location
In addition, it is noted that Great Wakering is proposed to have an additional 250 new dwellings as one the preferred housing options (WGW). Combined with the housing proposed with the Star Lane Industrial Estate and Star Lane Industrial Estate, would significantly increase the size of the settlement, without providing sufficient employment opportunities. This would increase the level of out commuting and given the characteristics of the District, the majority of this would be by private car.
Instead of developing the whole site for residential, it would be more appropriate to redevelop the site for a mixed use scheme, including an element of new purpose built commercial space to meet current employment demands, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
Support
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E10 Eldon Way Industrial Estate. Please also see representations made against Options TC7, TC9 and TC10
Representation ID: 21689
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
This site has good access to the road network, and is well located with regards the train station.
This site has the opportunity to be redeveloped for a mixed use commercial scheme, including both employment and community and leisure uses appropriate to a town centre location, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
This site has good access to the road network, and is well located with regards the train station.
This site has the opportunity to be redeveloped for a mixed use commercial scheme, including both employment and community and leisure uses appropriate to a town centre location, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E11 Stambridge Mills
Representation ID: 21690
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
This is an existing employment site, which is in a fairly isolated location within the Green Belt and as such it would be difficult to create a defensible boundary if this site is developed for residential.
In addition, this site is subject to a high risk of flooding (Zone 3), and its redevelopment for residential would replace a less vulnerable use (employment) with a more vulnerable use (residential).
The preference would be to safeguard the site for employment and see it redeveloped for light industrial use.
This is an existing employment site, which is in a fairly isolated location within the Green Belt and as such it would be difficult to create a defensible boundary if this site is developed for residential.
In addition, this site is subject to a high risk of flooding (Zone 3), and its redevelopment for residential would replace a less vulnerable use (employment) with a more vulnerable use (residential).
The preference would be to safeguard the site for employment and see it redeveloped for light industrial use.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E12 Rawreth Industrial Estate
Representation ID: 21691
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
To meet the number of new jobs required in the RSS, if sites are de-allocated, then additional employment sites will be required. As the supply of employment land within the District is limited, any new sites will require the release of Green Belt land. As these sites will be outside of the existing urban areas, it is unlikely that these sites will be in as sustainable locations as the existing employment sites.
This site has very good accessibility, with links to the road network and close to the train station.
Instead of developing the whole site for residential, it would be more appropriate to redevelop the site for a mixed use scheme, including an element of new purpose built commercial space to meet current employment demands, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
To meet the number of new jobs required in the RSS, if sites are de-allocated, then additional employment sites will be required. As the supply of employment land within the District is limited, any new sites will require the release of Green Belt land. As these sites will be outside of the existing urban areas, it is unlikely that these sites will be in as sustainable locations as the existing employment sites.
This site has very good accessibility, with links to the road network and close to the train station.
Instead of developing the whole site for residential, it would be more appropriate to redevelop the site for a mixed use scheme, including an element of new purpose built commercial space to meet current employment demands, in accordance with the provisions of PPS1 and PPS4.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E13
Representation ID: 21692
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E14
Representation ID: 21693
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E15
Representation ID: 21694
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E16
Representation ID: 21695
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Option E17
Representation ID: 21696
Received: 28/04/2010
Respondent: Aber Ltd
Agent: Colliers International
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
The proposed employment locations (E13, E14, E15, E16, E17, & E18) are all located within the Green Belt between Rayleigh and Rawreth. There are a number of concerns with this option:
* These locations would be difficult to access by public transport (would be further away from the train station than the existing industrial estate that they seek to replace), which means that it would be in not as sustainable location;
* The locations of new offices in the proposed location would not accord with the locational requirements detailed within the policies of PPS4.
* The proposed employment locations would be in an isolated location (Options E17 & E18 more so), within the Green Belt, which would make it difficult to establish a defensible boundary and also contribute to the coalescence of the neighbouring settlements, contrary to the provisions of PPG2.
As Rawreth Industrial Park is a sustainable location, a better approach would be to redevelop the industrial park with a commercial scheme with a design of unit that is flexible enough to accommodate a range of employment uses.
The idea of de-allocating land in a sustainable location in order that it can be allocated for housing and then identifying new employment sites in less sustainable locations than the existing site is a contradiction.
The preference for future employment and housing provision should be to take a co-ordinated approach to the release of Green Belt land, and the requirements for employment and housing land considered together to limit the potential loss of Green Belt to the most sustainable locations, accessible by a range of means (including public transport), and with defensible boundaries.
