Southend Borough Council

Southend Borough Council
Maybrook & Burland House

Development
I-Lab Session Report
University of Essex Southend

Friday 13th June 2008
Facilitator: David Goody
Page 1 of 48
Page 2 of 48
Southend Borough Council - Maybrook & Burland House
Development
A session to help to identify the best development for the Southchurch Road site previously
occupied by Maybrook House and Burland House.
Conference Agenda
Welcome, introduction to facilitator and ilab
Structure of the Day
Aspirations for the Site
Site Constraints
Whiteboard Matrix
Lunch
Site Visit
Moving Forward
a. Land Use Issues & Options
b. Sustainable Design Issues & Options
Site Plan
Summing Up and Finish
Page 3 of 48
Topic: Aspirations for the Site
1 - swimming pool
Comments:
1. Already close to Warrior Square, maybe a small sports hall, recreational area.
2. A new simming pool is less than 1 and half miles away -
also maybe considered as part of the new urban beach proposals
3. Another one?
4. here or a garons or still part of warrior sqaure redevelopment?
5. a leisure pool with chutes would be new
6. How about a network of squares within the town, this being one of them?
Swimming pools are always money losers. How can we make this a facility with a
difference? Free swimming pool access in the future according to the government... we
need a facility which is sustainable and attracts all round use
7. How about laying on free busses from town centre to Garons new pool?
8. Its a good idea to link to the network of town square idea s a part of any development.
Their is currently money to be had for this as part of TGSE Parklands (Victoria
Gateway Public Realm scheme) is being promoted as part of this scheme and this site
is on a key transport access axis across town
Group Avg: 0 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0

2 - some are of public open space
Comments:
1. yes creative play area along the lines of continental cities' pocket parks would work
here
Group Avg: 1.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69
Page 4 of 48
3 - Exemplar development - set a precedent for future development in Southend - set a standard
Comments:
1. Exemplar schemes may be able to attract greater levels of funding - low carbon agenda
important - sustainability
2. show how developments should be delivered in town centre considering that there are
2,000 plus houses and flats to develop

4 - extra care housing for older poeple
Comments:
1. This should be for both open market sale and affordable.

2. agree

5 - Include housing for both general needs and supported housing
6 - Excellent Design Quality, in line with SPD D&T Guide and CABEs building for life
Comments:
1. this should apply whatever uses are chosen

Page 5 of 48
7 - within any development make space for a pocket park
Comments:
1. what's a pocket park?

2. They are small play areas usually located on the corner of street blocks - sand pit ,
swing seating area for parents and (on the continent) a cafe for refreshements for adults
who site and socialise while toddlers play. It is not a fully functioning childrens play
area just a little patch about half the size of a penalty box with seating around

8 - extra care housing
Comments:
1. the past uses on the site should be reflexed to a degree

9 - include both flats and family accommodation
Comments:
1. a good mix is fundamental between types of housing
Page 6 of 48
10 - affordable housing some mixed tenure for sale as well as rented

11 - At least Level 5 in the code for sustainable homes
Comments:
1. will demonstrate to developers that this is what we expect in the rest of the town -
fundamental for regeneration which is sustainable
12 - carbon neutral demonstration scheme

Page 7 of 48
13 - A mixed use scheme with an element of creative space to support the cultural industries

14 - soem family housing
Comments:
1. very important we do not have enough

2. True, but the location of the development hints to a higher density development, this
could be achieved with small terrached housing?
3. should go the the north of the site where the exsiting character is for family housing
15 - sustainable contruction techniques

Comments:
1. materials as well as where the material are sourced from and delivered from

Page 8 of 48
16 - affordable homes not one bedroomed flats 3/4 bed
Comments:
1. Agree - there does seem to be an over-supply of one-bed and two-bed flats in the
Town.
2. Should we wait for the GVA Grimley housing needs study and look at its conclusions?
17 - supported living housing

Comments:
1. The location of the exisiting sheltered accommodation would make this an ideal
location for a small amount of supported accommodation
2. Agree - I think it would be difficult politically to develop the site without at least some
sheltered accommodation.
Page 9 of 48
18 - Need to recognise there's an expectation that sheltered housing will be provided on the site

19 - family houses
supportive housing for people with disabilities to live independently
some young people housing
maximise the value of the land to help fund
20 - Consider inclusion of Barringtons, Leyland and nicholson House

Comments:
1. good idea -an opportunity to lift the quality of the wholes area
2. Leyland owned by Estuary Housing who have already indicated they would like to
consider redeveloping the whole site
3. Agree... the area should be planned well and set within the context of Town
Centre`Area Action Plan within whos boundary if falls
4. think there may be real scope for including others sites - provide better housing for
those in the existing houses owned by the Council and increase the options
significantly

Page 10 of 48
21 - Mix-use development, mix tenure and a good quality public realm
22 - should not create an affordable housing ghetto

Comments:
1. agree but too often this arguement is used to not deliver affordable housing ,it is why
we are so far off target
2. Is it possible to persuade developers to build houses rather than flats...
3. We should ensure that we maximise the affordable housing both type, tenure and client
group without having all AH
4. fundamentall whatever housing it is, it should be of good quality design
5. Development will need to be commercially viable and value needs to be maintained
where possible. In this location, more dense development will be preferable to
developers so we will need to be flexible on the capital receipt expected.
6. Need to get the right mix of tenure.
7. should not discount the availabiltiy of public funding we tend to led by what
developers want not what we want and our the publics priorities we get a poor press as
percieved as not delivering quality and having too desne devleopements of flats
8. Could be issues with A/H provision with the recent downturn of the economy and
housing market in general.
Page 11 of 48
23 - supported living housing
24 - incolude commercial which may will create a community feel. i.e. corner shop, restaurant,
small multi age gynmasiam
Comments:
1. is there an opportunity to look at a 'healthy living centre which encompasses local

services such as GPs, small business start ups, crafts, cafes, access to services, etc.
2. A gym is a good idea - new community facility
3. How about a community gym - to encourage health and fitness, could be subsidised to
encourage those on lower incomes and include other facilities - PCT may be interested

25 - landmark building
Comments:
Page 12 of 48
1. personally I think we need good quality housing that links to the current local
enviroment
2. Agree but a landmark building does not have to be a tower block it can be done using
exemplar design
3. remember that a building does not need to be tall to be a landmark building
4. Height may well increase density and therefore value so tall buildings should not be
disregarded. There are several in the vicinity also.
5. although there are does not mean that they should set standard necessarily as arguably
are poor quality
6. If we build tall we should be careful not to accept that this automatically means high
density which would result in shoe box flats. any residential units should be apartments
of robust room size with usable amenity space
7. the site is surrounded by fairly high buildings so there is already a precedent for some
height at the front at least

26 - Is it all housing?
Comments:
1. hope not - learn from Woodgrange drive estate

27 - business park
Comments:
1. I think we have a number of other sites for this I think we need to major on housing
2. maybe a higher percentage of housing but fundamentally must be mixed use in this
location as this is such a large site
3. Doubts over delivery in this ecomomy.
4. we are already delivering on market housing
Page 13 of 48
28 - Mix of HOUSES as part of residential development and of course a major element should be
affordable
Comments:
1. lets achieve something special - design, negotiating hard and consistently with our
developers to set a standard of expectation, showing we represent our whole
community

29 - specialised supported housing for adults with Learning disabilties to replace Saxon Lodge
Comments:
1. link with other needs eg older people and general needs and provide good transport and
retail links to ensure integration with community
2. What are the implications for the design of the housing to ensure adequate security abd
support for residents?
Page 14 of 48
30 - houses and flats in the residential mix - should ensure that housing is prominent - public can
see that we are delivering them
Group Avg: 1 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.89
31 - good public space and use of public art

Comments:
1. not enough good exemple of public art - they enhance the environment and should be
captured in schemes or at least scheme contribute to it around te town
2. agree would be really good to incorporate public art and space - we have lots of talent
in Southend
3. Important to distinguish between public and private realm using soft landscape
features.
4. I agree but art needs to be in the right places - intersections, open space etc. Sometimes
sculptures and large pieces of art and the like look out of place. I accept artists may
have a different view!

32 - Open Public spaces to be useable. play areas, picnic, multiage play equipment
Comments:
1. is there space for MUGA's on the site - there is a lack of these in Southend -
particularly close to the town centre - would service the new population
Page 15 of 48
2. Very nice but need to recognise that this reduces the value of the site to a developer. A
balance needs to be struck between public/social value and housing/commercial
provision on the space available.
33 - Ensure the development is in line with secured by design adding to the sense of safety
throughout.

34 - some creative landscaping to engender feeling of space
help to reinstate pride in where i live
not a block of flats

35 - retail/ community shopping
Comments:
1. Need to see evidence of demand for additional retail in this area.

2. Incorporate clinic, dentist, doctors...
Page 16 of 48
36 - Mixed housing development will generate capital receipt that could(?) be earmarked for
investment in housing lesewhere in the town
Comments:
1. Is there a project in mind for the capital receipt?

2. Good idea

37 - business innovation - research and development

38 - public art as the focus
Comments:
1. metal would work with us on this if we wanted to do it

2. This would be a good idea as the site is at a 'gateway to the town one way and a
gateway to southchurch village the other way
Page 17 of 48
3. I don't agree this should be the focus - perhaps some inovative architecture instead.
This is a twon centre fringe site
39 - open park/cultural space

Comments:
1. not exclusively - include this as part of design concept to create sense of

place/integration with Southchurch village concept
2. the trees on the eastern boundary should be maintained

40 - supermarket for the east side of town
Comments:
1. smaller retail development would be more consistent with village idea

2. Currently both Sainsbury and Tesco looking at devleopments very near to site
3. Retail impact to be considered - depending on Sainsbury's and Tesco - may not be
sufficient demand.
Page 18 of 48
41 - Design wise frontage should respect grain and height of frontage opposite and reflect
gateway 'bouleveard to town centre and the other way to Southechurch Village Shopping area
Comments:
1. agreed - area should not be butchered anymore than it has

42 - Commercial to enhance employment opportunity for the local area.

43 - some design that fits within the surrounding area - mustn't overshadow the residential
surrounding streets
Comments:
1. higher scale at the south, lower to the north

2. needs to understand the existing urban grain
Page 19 of 48
44 - 'Grow on space' for businesses easy come easy go rent

Comments:
1. Not sure if there's that much demand in the area for this. We laready have the start up
Seedbed Centre, etc. These type of units are vary susceptible to economio ups and
downs - risk it could end up a white elephant.

45 - try to link Southchurch village and town centre
Comments:
1. should have cafes etc - create a focal point then
Group Avg: 1 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.77

46 - Opportunity to provide a green public space at the front of the site
Page 20 of 48
47 - use of local labour in development

Comments:
1. really good if we could link to the college and university to get students on placements
and offer jobs when they qualify
2. We are currently running a trial scheme with Prospects and a local residents association
in Kursaal which may lead to other projects.

48 - commercial to be avaiable for the local community

49 - ice rink
Comments:
1. or other leisure or cultural offer

2. Craft / art village / quater
3. Only as part of a wider leisure strategy, once demand for particular leisure /cultural
offers has been assessed.
4. a chance for something fun - ski slope??
Page 21 of 48
50 - create a "sense of place"

51 - Involve health services to support new accommodation and existing community

52 - Educational/ business support space for a range of community users linking to other
organisations/ institutions already existing -
Comments:
1. But is there really a demand for this type of facility?
Page 22 of 48
53 - Carefully consider ways to balance social and financial considerations for maximum benefit
- this site has a significant potential value as well as potential for commercial sale and
development as well as potential for the delivery of services/accommodation for vulnerable
groups.
Comments:
1. agree - need to look at how we can lever in external monies

2. there is a lot of social housing available now for southend proably a more secure route
of funding than private given the current property market

54 - look at possibility/cost effectiveness of enlarging the site if we want to modernise the
sheltered housing offer

55 - homes for life
Page 23 of 48
56 - Ensure the development incorporates the code for sustainable homes.

57 - adopt "Building for Life Standards"
Comments:
1. must be demonstrated in any design and access statement for the site

58 - Not sure live work as a concept works in southend but may be scope for artisan workspace
to capture creative arts growth in the town
Comments:
1. The Metal project looks at this idea - should we see how it works there first?
2. agree wouldn't see it as a priority for this particular site
59 - Link to town's growth sectors

Comments:
Page 24 of 48
1. Link to organisations who support & develop creative space (as on a number of sites in
Hackney).

60 - Is this a site which could be used to support the accommodation strategy? Could a
replacement Civic Centre go here?
Comments:
1. Can't see this fitting in with the largely residential nature of the block.
2. this is a mixed use area but may be to far from town centre for civic centre

61 - specialist housing for people with physical disabilities/ long term/ deteriorating conditions
Comments:
1. Part of homes for life concept
62 - Parking will be a key issue in deciding the residential mix or other uses for the site. The
impact on existing households adjacent to the site will also need to be taken into account.
Comments:
1. opportunity for underground parking

2. need to be mindful that developers use underground parking as an excuse not to
provide housing in development owing to land ownership issues (freehold, leasehold)
Page 25 of 48
3. This depends on the type of development also - this close to town centre and public
transport intersections we may get away with less. Underground parking has potential
but is very expensive to construct.

63 - ensure good transport links and easy access to the main town centre
Comments:
1. Public realm/ lighting and enhancing links to the town centre are crucial. Local
businesses have previously been concerned over staff safety in this area especially in
winter
64 - Specialist facility to support NEETS agenda, basic skills provision and learning
Comments:
1. A new youth centre facility is being proposed at Short Street very near to this
development. There will also be opportunity for some access to employment units there
for young people - this is currently being explored
Page 26 of 48
65 - In the short term the site could be laid to parking to generate interim income - costs would
need to be explored.
Comments:
1. Risk that once used as a car park, this will become an "expectation", and once taken
away will cause upset!
66 - heavily emphasis on sustainability

Comments:
1. important that any development is future proof

2. Totally agree this includes social\and economic sustainablity as well as addressing
climate change
3. The actual location of the site lends itself to one which is sustainable. Should not be
scared to reduce parking provision and help promote public transport use. Obviously to
a realistic and workable level.
Page 27 of 48
67 - Design to include homes for life, including level access showers, tracking for hoist, assited
technology in place for use when required
Comments:
1. Is this necessary in all homes or only designated homes?

2. agree a percentage of homes, so that a mixed community is provided
3. should be in all homes, but some could be identified for specific clients and have a
bespoke design by including OT's
68 - Ensure that transport standards and criteria does not stiffle the overall design/vision of the
development.

69 - could development site be extended to include block next door if owned by Counil to deliver
a much larger development site
Page 28 of 48
Comments:
1. the Block next door is Council Onwed sheltered Part II accommodation. Currently very
popular.

70 - Exemlar site possibly Code for sustainable homes level 6 or carbon 0
71 - What is deliverable in the current economic climate?

Comments:
1. need to look at longer term -

2. I agree, financial downturns are cyclical long term plans are really important

72 - Ensure that the affordable housing is mixed within the development and is not
distinguishable from the rest.
Page 29 of 48
73 - Coulc aprt of the site be used as a multi-storey car park to support the parking strategy? It's
only about 200 yards from one of the favoured sites.
Comments:
1. would multi storey be out of character especially with two story residential in the area -
must not make mistakes of the 1960s
74 - Ensure that the development is specific for southend, recognisable, not a development that
could be anywhere and everywhere.
Comments:
1. agree - should definately not be "anywhereville"

2. Agree - needs to be sympathetic to surrounding area
3. Provide a link better the southchurch village and the town centre regeneration.
4. The existing area does not have a strong positive character - this is a chance to create a
new, exciting and distinctive place

75 - good idea but our track record on this is poor we do not follow up with th ebuild elsewhere
this has often led to developemnts that are not suitable
Page 30 of 48
76 - There is a piece of research being done on the impact of tall buildings in London (by Colin
Buchanans) on the local economy. Watch this space it could be really valuable for future
information
Page 31 of 48
Topic: Site Constraints
What are the weaknesses and threats that may affect the site? What are the biggest risks to any
development? A chance for all to contribute their thoughts, and to comment on thoughts
contributed by others.
1. retaining trees and biodiversity

Comments:
1. Altough important, it must be realised this is an inner town development. Must be

handled realistically. Include soft features to improve biodiversity.
2. all the more important as it's an "inner town development"!

2. member buy in
Comments:
1. neeed to make sure that members are properly briefed about the potential for the
site and importance
3. public opinion
4. Downturn in the economy
5. Public perception - reflection of previous uses
Comments:
1. need to be brave with choices

6. lack of consultation with local residents
7. securing the whole of the site as not all owned by Council
8. Transport standards
Comments:
1. Although must be considered, should not stiffle the vision of the development
2. transport should be integrated not be an afterthought

9. Developer confidence in schemes due to financial situation
10. including transport network and services for the site i.e. waste
11. ability to deliver maximum housing whilst retaining good open spaces
12. need to make sure we are not driven by developers
13. Not all council owned
14. not enough money to deliver aspirations
15. Provision of parking
16. Poor links to town centre
17. The site is subject to restrictive covenants at present which will have an effect on what is
deliverable unless they can be deemed obsolete or relaxed (this should be ok). Covenants
restrict use essentially to what was there before.
Page 32 of 48
18. people scepitcal - have been waiting a long time for redevelopment of the site
Comments:
1. That's why we need to get on with it, even if we can't line up the adjacent sites for
a joint development.
2. don't be too speedy that you miss the opportunity - rushing things in the past has
meant that we have lost out
19. the need to balance the competing priorities
20. meeting previous occupants expectations
21. Economic Viability, securing good quality scheme that meets all aspirations in the face of
current economic downturn,
22. locality predominately residential
23. the present low confidence inthe housing market
24. attracting interest from the right high quality developers
25. ends up looking like a huge housing estate!
26. Economic climate prevalent when the site comes up for disposal will dictate value of
capital receipt and/or appetite of developers to deliver certain types of facility (e.g., large
family houses).
27. balance between different uses
28. being held to ransom when trying to purchase the other bits of land
29. contamination of land
30. access to the site
31. Does it fit with the Regeneration Framework/ Town centre plan? AND the Council's
priroities, what priority is at the top of the priority list?
32. losing pace of development - land lies fallow for too long
33. lack of confidence inside the authority to aim high
34. mix of current design may not give clear design style
Comments:
1. it needs to have a new style of its own - local character is weak and varied
2. stanadard house types will be inappropriate
3. does not need to follow existing styles - they are too random and some poor
35. Make sure design, affordable housing, parking, public realm, green space are not offet
against one another by a developer. All need to be considered, making sure the proposal
is still economically viable.
36. Managing expectations about what can be achieved on a relatively small site.
37. not being all things to all people!
Comments:
1. important, it needs a focus/identity.
2. remeber the right development for the site and for the town
38. parking will be an issue
Page 33 of 48
Comments:
1. parking should not dominate the scheme - 1 space per dwelling should be easily
achievable
39. Being able to negotiate strongly with developers
Comments:
1. Being absolutely consistent with message and no allowing any others to give
other messagfes
40. engagement of local businesses
Comments:
1. We know there is a shortage of fit for purpose business space and rents are high in
the town centre. It has the potential to be developed in to affordable space.
Businesses are always going to look at their bottom line in decision making on
where they are located. I deal location in some ways
41. Safe journey to school
42. Have we utilised our information base to guide the need. What are the identified gaps/
shortages in service delivery and what is the need?
43. Make sure appropriate level of S106 is captured. Infrastrcuture levie in place
44. Too long a delay in getting the site to market - loss of momentum.
45. Financial receipts are essential to the Council's finances - delivery of the Corporate
priorities is also essential and the two need to be balanced.
46. ability to deliver - lots of schemes being talked about but few cranes in the town!
Comments:
1. 100% agree - we must set an example by getting on with this. Compared to some
other proposed developments, this should be relatively straight forward. If we
can't get this done, then....
47. site location -not the most attractive area for developers
Comments:
1. disagree - has good main road access, near town centre,

2. Dedmans are on the same street... I am sure they would disagree
3. Also disagree - we have lost of willing and keen private developers and housing
associations interested in bring it forward as soon as we can decide what we want
and they can assess viability.
48. securing S106 money
49. Life is a car park ...
50. engagement of third parties whether housing associations and or developers
51. potential contamination
52. comtamination issues
53. TPOs, tree preservation issues.
54. ensuring that it s complementary to immediate neighbourhood
55. ensuring that existing green elements are not lost in redevelopment i.e. trees etc
Page 34 of 48
56. manage disruption once site agreed - impact on local residents
Comments:
1. Other places such as Belfast & Sheffield have undertaken large scale housing
renewal and decanting programmes. While residents in reality did not move back,
this is an inevitable consequence of progress and development
57. Density of development without quality of design
Comments:
1. Again early interaction with developers.
2. yes, but lets make sure we are being clear with developers what our expectations
are
58. ensure that site promotes safety
59. we always just think of private developers Homes and Communities monies will be
available as we are part of the Gateway
Comments:
1. Need to learn from past lessons 'Heath & Carby House' where funding is
concerned & affordable units/ key working housing issues and relationships with
RSLs/ Housing Association expectation
60. local deprivation
Comments:
1. Do we have any analysis of the current "standards of living" in the ward? Would
the development of the site improve or reduce quality of life in the area?
2. We have analysed IMD2004, need to do it for IMD2007. Index of Multiple

Deprivation.
61. better sites, more lucrative site in the town centre
62. take up of any commercial interests - already have a number of shopping sites close by
63. traffic congestion
64. Risk that site will include facilities for which demand has not been identified (swimming
pool? ice rink? start-up business units? large bits of artwork?) at the expense of other
things with a higher social or commercial value.
65. end up with too many rabbit hutches
66. Competing agendas
67. disruption during construction period
68. Political resistance in some quaters to affordable housing and the ease with which any
public good element of commercial schemes gets eroded if developers say unviable. WE
need stronger approach to open book scrutiny of scheme finansce and confidence that we
wont accept any old thing for the sake of getting the site developed
69. not achieving a good balance betwene quality as well as quantity
Comments:
1. Engaging with the developer at an early stage shall reduce this risk.
Page 35 of 48
70. Limited parking available on the site.
Comments:
1. who lives in a car?
2. accessible site who needs a car??

71. I believe we should try and be more poractive on the site, not focussing on constriants too
much. Constraints should not govern the overall vision of the development. Some
constraints may need to be broken to achieve...
72. poor pedestrian links to town centre
Comments:
1. s106 money should be used to upgrade links

2. Queesnway, roundabout needs to be improved. get rid of sub-way.
3. integrate public realm and transport otherwise get muddle appearance
4. agree but not for today but neede to feed into the towncentre developemnt
73. consultation throughout process to keep public with us
Comments:
1. really important to take residents with us

2. agreed currently public opinion want affordable h0mes not more high density
flats- members are raising this all the time
3. I agree! They may also have some interesting ideas. Perhaps we should set up a
questionairre through the website to seek public views.
74. not achieveing the right mix of development - thinking too narrowly
75. inability to realise capital receipt to helpf deliver other priorities
76. Risk of not creating a sense of place
77. As at today's date there seems to be no consensus about what should go on the site - this
needs to be sorted first.
Comments:
1. But today is the starting point for generating ideas and taking them forward in the
context of the council's priorities and capital programme
2. I agree - today is the starting point - it needs to be open and then narrow down as
the day progresses
3. This is an exploration of ideas for the team to take back and test against Corporate
Prioirities and priorities in the Community Strategy and ADOPTED COre
STrategy DPD
4. and key council prioties and LAA targets affordable housing is one we cannot fail
to deliver
78. not seeing the potential of more wholesale redevelopment by including site next door
Comments:
Page 36 of 48
1. should definately be looked at before dimissed
2. must be considered - it could be a missed opportunity to create an amazing new

gateway - let's not be shortsighted - considered it before dismissing
79. Potential Waste production, need SWMP to show how this waste is managed.
80. Economics
81. traffic impact, a large road
82. Risk that the sope of the scheme may "creep", so that the project gets delayed, costs
increase, etc.
83. developing cycle paths/pathway/transport links routes suitable for electric mobility cars
Comments:
1. s106 money
84. be aware of finanical viability
Comments:
1. It may be that during times of economic uncertainty, a Council sponsored scheme

would be attractive to developers, since we can't go bust halfway through the
project, or pull out of the deal and flee the country.
85. Lack of support by existing residents for what's being proposed may be a risk to delivery.
86. homezone
Comments:
1. why is this a risk?
2. not a risk, sorry forgot to add it earlier!!

87. not being prepare to take some risk to achieve something exeplar
Comments:
1. need to wait for the right option not just take the first thing that comes along
88. resistence to affordable and social housing models
Comments:
1. Housing Stategy delivery is a key Council priority

2. In theory.... sorry but in practice not all are signed up
3. Do we need Member education/ officer training in relation to planning issues in
relation to what we are required to deliver in any housing scheme
4. members need to understand that affordable housing must not be be substituted on
site or be the first thing to fall off the list of requirements - that is partly why
delivery is not occurring!
5. education a good idea - we are still looking at interests in isolation and need to
look at developments holistically - need to get the planning concepts in place
6. Definatley How about a session in the ilab based around "what do we need to do
over and above existing action to deliver LAA targets for Affordable homes?"
7. We're way below target at the moment and there needs to be political support for
affordable housing, which appears lukewarm at present, across all parties. They
Page 37 of 48
even have affordable housing at Sanbanks in Poole, so why not in Southend?
8. appreciate not always been a high priority, however, new ways of working and all
that - isn't that why we are all here today and have just sent out a bland planning
brief for developers to tell us what we need...
89. we seem to have a view here in southend that only private devleopers will bring in a high
captial receipt-this is wrong other councils manage to bring in a mixture of housing
development in parts of London they asre getting 50% and still get capital receipts how
do we challenge this outdated idea
Comments:
1. agree - need to be creative when looking at getting monies in

2. RSL's as no profit making organisation will re invest any surplus on the sale units
into the scheme or an alternative if required.
3. we need to be better using data to support our arguments when developers argue
that developments aren't profitable
90. Risks of site assembly - depending on what we put on the site, we may spend much more
assembling a wider site than we might get for our land if we are too prescriptive against
commercial development. Our part is the easiest part to deliver may be preferable
exploration of developers doing the site assembly.
Comments:
1. need to look at cost benefits and do the analysis early - don't want to miss the
opportunity of delivering more for less whilst on the other hand don't want to
spend too much time pontificating and not delivering anything!
91. A sound, commercially driven development could deliver a full capital receipt, 30%
affordable housing, the art work, public realm, mix, design principles without anything
more prescriptive than a straight sale and usual s.106 contributions.
Comments:
1. so why have we only delivered 7% to date? and most of that flats

2. Because the majoriy of sites brought forward are too small to trigger the 30% AH
3. but that assumes we cannot negotiate on off site and other ways of delivering and
we hav ent achived 305 on the big sites have we?
Page 38 of 48
2. Community Safety
6. Environment
9. Transport and Access

3. Culture and Leisure
4. Economic Well-Being
7. Health and Social Well-Being
8. Housing
5. Children and Learning
Engagement1. Community Cohesion and
Topic: Whiteboard Matrix
Aspiration
2 - some are of public open space       
3 - Exemplar development - set a precedent for future development in Southend - set a standard       
4 - extra care housing for older people    
5 - Include housing for both general needs and supported housing         
6 - Excellent Design Quality, in line with SPD D&T Guide and CABEs building for life       
9 - include both flats and family accommodation        
10 - affordable housing some mixed tenure for sale as well as rented       
11 - At least Level 5 in the code for sustainable homes       
12 - carbon neutral demonstration scheme   
14 - some family housing       
15 - sustainable construction techniques  
16 - affordable homes not one bedroomed flats 3/4 bed       
17 - supported living housing     
19 - family houses     
20 - Consider inclusion of Barringtons, Leyland and Nicholson House    
21 - Mix-use development, mix tenure and a good quality public realm      
24 - include commercial which may will create a community feel. i.e. corner shop, restaurant, small multi age gymnasium    
28 - Mix of HOUSES as part of residential development and of course a major element should be affordable    
29 - specialised supported housing for adults with Learning disabilties to replace Saxon Lodge     
34 - some creative landscaping to engender feeling of space  *  *
41 - Design wise frontage should respect grain and height of frontage opposite and reflect gateway boulevard to town centre and  *  * 
the other way to Southchurch Village Shopping area
55 - homes for life    
61 - specialist housing for people with physical disabilities/ long term/ deteriorating conditions      
66 - heavily emphasis on sustainability  
67 - Design to include homes for life, including level access showers, tracking for hoist, assisted technology in place for use when     
required
70 - Exemlar site possibly Code for sustainable homes level 6 or carbon 0    
Page 39 of 48
74 - Ensure that the development is specific for southend, recognisable, not a development that could be anywhere and everywhere.         
Page 40 of 48
Topic: Moving Forward – Land Use Issues & Options
Page 41 of 48
Page 42 of 48
Page 43 of 48
Topic: Moving Forward – Sustainable Design Issues & Options
Page 44 of 48
Page 45 of 48
Page 46 of 48
Topic: Summing Up
Page 47 of 48
Page 48 of 48

Southend Borough Council - Facilitate Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Southend Borough Council - Facilitate Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maybrook & Burland House

I-Lab Session Report

University of Essex Southend

Facilitator: David Goody

Welcome, introduction to facilitator and ilab

Structure of the Day

Aspirations for the Site

a. Land Use Issues & Options

b. Sustainable Design Issues & Options

Summing Up and Finish

Group Avg: 0 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0

Group Avg: 1.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

Group Avg: 1.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.65

1. This should be for both open market sale and affordable.

Group Avg: 1.27 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.9

Group Avg: 1.45 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

1. this should apply whatever uses are chosen

1. what's a pocket park?

Group Avg: 1.18 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.75

1. the past uses on the site should be reflexed to a degree

Group Avg: 1.27 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.9

1. a good mix is fundamental between types of housing

Group Avg: 1.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.65

Group Avg: 1.64 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.5

12 - carbon neutral demonstration scheme

Group Avg: 1.27 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.65

Group Avg: 0.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.79

1. very important we do not have enough

Group Avg: 1.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.82

15 - sustainable contruction techniques

Group Avg: 1.45 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.52

Group Avg: 1.45 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.82

17 - supported living housing

Group Avg: 0.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.79

Group Avg: 1.36 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.92

20 - Consider inclusion of Barringtons, Leyland and nicholson House

Group Avg: 1.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

Group Avg: 1.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.65

22 - should not create an affordable housing ghetto

Group Avg: 1.18 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.87

1. is there an opportunity to look at a 'healthy living centre which encompasses local

Group Avg: 1.45 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

Group Avg: 0.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.9

1. hope not - learn from Woodgrange drive estate

Group Avg: 0.45 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

Group Avg: 1.36 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.81

Group Avg: 1 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.89

31 - good public space and use of public art

Group Avg: 0.91 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.83

Group Avg: 0.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.9

Group Avg: 1.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.82

Group Avg: 1.27 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.9

1. Need to see evidence of demand for additional retail in this area.

1. Is there a project in mind for the capital receipt?

Group Avg: 0.91 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.83

Group Avg: 0.73 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.79

1. metal would work with us on this if we wanted to do it

Group Avg: 0.55 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.69

39 - open park/cultural space

1. not exclusively - include this as part of design concept to create sense of

Group Avg: 0.64 - Voters: 11 - Standard Deviation: 0.81

1. smaller retail development would be more consistent with village idea