Issue - meetings
Update on Airport Business Park
Meeting: 28/01/2020 - Place Scrutiny Committee (Item 743)
743 Update on Airport Business Park PDF 97 KB
Minute 694 (Cabinet Book 2, Agenda Item No. 8 refers)
Referred direct by Cabinet
Additional documents:
- Appendix 1 - ABP Update Jan 2020 FINAL, item 743 PDF 2 MB
- Appendix 2 - ABP Update Jan 2020 - FINAL, item 743 PDF 351 KB
Minutes:
The Committee considered Minute 694 of Cabinet held on Thursday, 16th January 2020, which had been referred direct by Cabinet to the Scrutiny Committee for consideration, together with the report of the Deputy Chief Executive and Executive Director (Growth &Housing). This provided an update on the development of the Airport Business Park which is being progressed with the Council’s development partner Henry Boot Developments Ltd.
Resolved:-
That the following decision of Cabinet be noted:
“That the progress of the Airport Business Park development, be noted.”
Note: This is an Executive Function
Cabinet Members: Cllrs Robinson and Woodley
Meeting: 16/01/2020 - Cabinet (Item 694)
694 Update on Airport Business Park PDF 97 KB
Report of Deputy Chief Executive and Executive Director (Growth and Housing) attached
Additional documents:
- Appendix 1 - ABP Update Jan 2020 FINAL, item 694 PDF 2 MB
- Appendix 2 - ABP Update Jan 2020 - FINAL, item 694 PDF 351 KB
Minutes:
The Cabinet considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive and Executive Director of Growth and Housing providing an update on the development of the Airport Business Park which is being progressed with the Council’s development partner Henry Boot Developments Ltd.
Resolved:-
That the progress of the Airport Business Park development, be noted.
Reasons for Decision
The Airport Business Park Southend is a 2050 roadmap project and its ongoing development contributes towards a number of Southend 2050 outcomes. It is also significant for South Essex as SELEP’s largest LGF allocation and a key location in the context of the South Essex 2050 work.
Other Options
While not continuing with the project could be an option in theory this could not be achieved without disproportionate cost, legal challenge and disruption as the development is underway with funding, consents and a development partner in place. It would also undermine the 2050 roadmap and ambition.
Note: This is an Executive
Function
Referred direct to Place Scrutiny Committee
Cabinet Members: Cllrs Robinson and Woodley