Development Management Development Plan (DPD)

Support

Representation ID: 637

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Renaissance Southend supports the suggested Option for DM1.

Suggested that para.3 could be strengthened and amended to read: Ensuring that the requirements of sustainable development are fully reflected in the design and layout to give priority to the needs of pedestrians (including disabled people and those with restricted mobility), cyclists and access to public transport.

Para 8. should be strengthened with a clearer commitment to raising design quality standards and ensuring the D&A statements are prepared early enough on major schemes to inform the decision making process rather than justify what has already been decided.

Comment

Representation ID: 638

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

No but it should be recognised that the Urban Place Supplement to the Essex Design Guide does provide some useful advice on the approach to urban design principles that would be appropriate to Southend and is not wholly focussed on rural or the vernacular

Comment

Representation ID: 639

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

It would be inappropriate to include this level of detail in the Development Management DPD unless there was a physical constraint (eg. Airport Safety Zone)in a given area, or unless the Character Study identified particular evidence/justification for a height limitation.

Comment

Representation ID: 640

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

If the Character Study presently underway is able to provide the rationale where and where not tall buildings may be acceptable this will need to be adopted within a specific DPD and/or AAPs. Should DM DPD describe the process for how the spatial and design issues will become policy?

Some oif the wording used in the suggested option appears a little vague and may need to be tightened up to avoid unintentional loopholes; eg. 'relate well', 'a point of visual significance' and 'highest standards of architecture' could conspire to justify a tall building in an inappropriate suburban or remote setting.

Support

Representation ID: 642

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Renaissance Southend supports the thrust behind the suggested option to protect existing established residential areas and encourage development to specific locations, such as the town centre, where opportunity and scope exists for new housing. The Character Study should be incorporated to give additional robustness to policy that seeks to protect specific locations from overdevelopment or inappropriate schemes that cumulatively would result in a change in character to the detriment of local amenity.

Comment

Representation ID: 645

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

How is 'parking stress' to be defined?

What is definition of 'over concentration'?

Could the Character Study help in answering two questions above?

Most conversions are unlikely to meet the Lifetime Homes Standard. Is it advisable for the DM DPD to identify which elements are essential?

Comment

Representation ID: 649

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Renaissance Southend supports the policy intention that all non-residential development meets the BREEAM Excellent Standard. However, this may pose severe challenges to public and private sector projects in the short/medium term on grounds of both cost and viability.

Paras.3,5&6 relate to the Code for Sustainable Homes, BREEAM and Building Regs. Greater clarity is needed on whether the policy will seek to simply meet, or exceed these standards, both regulatory and voluntary.

The 10% on site renewables policy reflects the current Adopted Core Strategy but is likely to need review before the DM DPD is adopted re comments on SCAAP.

Comment

Representation ID: 667

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Some consideration should be given to the Government's previously stated intention that Thames Gateway should be developed as an Eco-Region for which it published a Prospectus in 2009. Reference also in East of England Plan. Whilst not suggesting a blanket policy the Council should consider in what circumstances encouragement could be given to innovation or exemplars,possibly through the use of Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) or similar.

Comment

Representation ID: 668

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Paras.2&3. The test in a case to alter or demolish a building of special architectural or historic interest is more exacting than the assessment of development either affecting or demolishing a 'locally listed' building or building in a Conservation Area. The narrative implies they are all equally protected and that the processes are identical. PPG15 sets out the tests.

Support

Representation ID: 669

Received: 09/08/2010

Respondent: Renaissance Southend Ltd

Renaissance Southend agrees with the statement that flooding issues should not impact upon future development with the proviso that detailed flood risk assessments are undertaken before permission is granted.

There should be consistency between the DM DPD and the SCAAP on this issue.