Skip Navigation
Home > Planning and Environment > Planning > Planning Policy > Local Development Framework > Evidence base studies > Employment Land Review > Apportionment of new employment floorspace in South Hampshire

Apportionment of new employment floorspace in South Hampshire 

 

Summary

 

The South East Plan requires that provision be made for 2 million square metres of new employment floorspace in South Hampshire during the 20 years 2006 - 2026. The Plan splits this overall figure between South East Hampshire and South East Hampshire, and also by employment type (offices, manufacturing, warehousing). There is a need to apportion these totals amongst individual PUSH authorities in order to enable the preparation of Local Development Documents. Moreover, there is a need for continuity of new floorspace supply throughout the 20 year Plan period if the PUSH economic growth targets are to be achieved. The PUSH planning and economic development officers have completed an interim apportionment and those interim figures are set out in Tables 6 and 7 in the attached report. There remains a need to explore the possibilities for transferring some sites between employment types and time periods in order to further improve the continuity of supply of new floorspace. Some wholly new sites for employment development need to be identified later in the Plan period. The next step is for each authority to explore these matters and to report back to PUSH by 30 November 2007 in order that PUSH can finalise the apportionment process this winter. To assist that work, it is intended to commission a study of the types and locational requirements of the substantial forecast need for new warehousing space.

 

Introduction

The importance of land for economic development

The amount of employment land required

The existing supply of employment land

Comparing supply and requirements at sub-regional-level

The timing of floorspace requirements

Apportioning employment land requirements

South West Sub-area

Next Steps

 

 

Introduction

 

1       Policy SH6 of the Draft South East Plan states that land will be provided in South Hampshire to accommodate 2 million square metres of business floorspace.  The policy then sets out how much floorspace is required in the South West and South East areas by type of activity (offices; manufacturing; storage and distribution) and by type of land, including that required within the two SDAs.

 

2       Individual PUSH authorities will need to make employment land allocations in their Local Development Documents (LDDs) which in combination provide for the required 2 million square metres of floorspace.  To assist in this process, PUSH Planning and Economic Development officers have been working together on apportioning the 2 million figure amongst individual authority areas.  This will help inform the preparation of LDDs and provide a vital input to the PUSH Delivery Plan.  This report sets out the conclusions of the work which Leaders are asked to approve.

 

3       This report was also considered by the PUSH Planning and Sustainability Panel two days ago on 24 September.  Their comments will be reported orally to this Leaders meeting.

 

The importance of land for economic development

 

4       The PUSH strategy is based on a rising level of economic growth that is over and above that which might be expected without any intervention. Although many of the decisions that will determine the performance of the South Hampshire economy will be taken by businesses in the private sector, the public sector role – to create the conditions that will foster economic growth – will be critical. The DTZ “Economic Drivers and Growth” report identified three key areas where public sector interventions would be required to support the aspirational growth of the sub-regional strategy:

  • Skills
  • Enterprise, innovation and business support
  • Land, property and infrastructure
  • The above three themes now form the basis of the PUSH strategy and business plan.

 

5       The provision of land for economic development is critical to the success of the PUSH strategy. The scope of the actions required range from acquiring as full an understanding as possible of the future requirements for sites and premises to bringing sites forward for development both through the planning process and ensuring investment and delivery on the ground. The quality of sites available, together with their type and location, is just as important as the sheer quantity of floorspace available to the market or progressing through the planning pipeline. A full portfolio of sites will be required to provide the certainty that business needs to release investment. All of these issues will be kept under review by PUSH with an Employment Land Report produced annually.

 

The amount of employment land required

 

6       The aim of improving South Hampshire’s economic performance with the target of achieving GVA growth of 3.5% by 2026 will require around two million square metres of additional business floorspace. The scale, location and type of this floorspace, derived by PUSH either directly from the DTZ report or using a similar methodology, is expressed in policy terms in the draft South East Plan (Policy SH6). The panel who conducted the Examination-in-Public of the South East Plan accepted the employment floorspace figures in the policy and commended “the rigour and transparency of the background work undertaken in this sub-region, which provides a clear audit trail between these floorspace estimates and the GVA target sought”. The Policy SH6 figures are shown in the table below.

 

Table 1: Scale, location and type of employment development (Policy SH6)

All figures are square metres of floorspace

 

South West area

South East area

PUSH total

B1 Offices

680,000

535,000

1,215,000

B2 Manufacturing

93,000

123,000

216,000

B8 Warehousing

294,000

240,000

534,000

Total

1,067,000

898,000

1,965,000

 

 

7       B1 offices account for more than 60% of the total floorspace requirement, reflecting the DTZ forecast that business services will be the key area of growth in the South Hampshire economy.  The small B2 manufacturing requirement (11%) provides for the development principally of advanced manufacturing in which the area has a particular strength.  The B8 warehousing requirement (27%) reflects the DTZ predicted growth in the transport and logistics sector that arises from a nationally expected increase as well as the sub-region’s international gateway role based on the ports of Southampton and Portsmouth and Southampton airport.

 

The existing supply of employment land

 

8       There is already a substantial supply of sites which are already earmarked for employment development because they have planning permission or are allocated in adopted Local Plans for that purpose.  These are referred to from hereon as ‘existing sites’.  The proposed employment allocations at the two SDAs are also classified in this report as ‘existing sites’ because they are, effectively, allocations in the draft South East plan.  Many PUSH authorities also envisage further sites being formally allocated in their forthcoming Local Development Documents (LDDs).  As they are subject to decisions by the Members of those authorities and then testing through the LDD statutory process, those are referred to in this report as ‘possible sites’.

 

9       All these sites need to be classified in relation to the types of employment development specified in the draft South East Plan Policy SH6. Some sites are allocated specifically for one of these three types of employment development, but this is uncommon.  So for most sites an assumption/judgement has been made on the employment use (B1 offices; B2 Manufacturing; B8 Warehousing) or combination  of uses for which each site will be developed.  As explained later, there is some flexibility to alter these categorisations in order to ensure there is sufficient provision across the PUSH area for each type of employment development.

 

10     The estimated floorspace which these sites could accommodate in each authority’s area is shown in Tables 2 and 3 below.

 

Table 2:  Existing and ‘possible’ sites in South West Sub-Area

Area

B1

Offices

B2 Manufacturing

B8 Warehousing

Total

Existing sites

 

 

 

 

Southampton

108,607

63,683

24,687

196,977

Eastleigh

158,224

103,195

46,800

308,219

N/NE of Hedge End SDA

45,880

8,140

19,980

74,000

New Forest (part)

7,693

12,782

26,889

47,364

Test Valley (part)

109,314

0

992

110,306

Sub-Total (existing)

429,718

187,800

119,348

736,866

Possible sites

 

 

 

 

Southampton

299,000

0

0

299,000

Eastleigh

0

0

0

 

N/NE of Hedge End SDA

0

0

0

 

New Forest (part)

0

0

0

 

Test Valley (part)

17,000

0

0

17,000

Sub-total (possibles)

316,000

0

0

316,000

Grand total

745,718

187,800

119,348

1,052,866

 

11        In the South West Sub-area (see table above) both Eastleigh and Test Valley currently have more office space available than Southampton. The Eastleigh figure includes the major allocation at the Northern Business Park and other sites within the Strategic Employment Zone, while Test Valley includes the Adanac site off the M271. Substantial office development is also expected at the N/NE of Hedge End SDA. Southampton, however, includes a very substantial figure for “possible” office development, largely comprising major sites at West Quay Road and Central Station, which is nearly three times its current available space.

 

12        Space for future manufacturing in the South West Sub-area is also found predominantly in Eastleigh and to a lesser extent in Southampton. Again the Eastleigh sites include the Strategic Employment Zone while Southampton includes the former Vosper Thorneycroft site at Woolston.

 

13        There are B8 warehousing sites currently available in each of the authorities in the South West with major allocations/permissions in the Strategic Employment Zone, the North/North east of Hedge End SDA, Test Lane in Southampton and Marchwood in the New Forest.

 

Table 3:  Existing and ‘possible’ sites in South East Area

Area

B1

Offices

B2 Manufacturing

B8 Warehousing

Total

Existing sites

 

 

 

 

Portsmouth

123,473

44,869

51,655

219,997

Fareham

22,275

13,013

2,026

37,314

N of Fareham SDA

72,000

16,600

32,400

121,000

Gosport

66,474

9,066

13,266

88,806

Havant

74,414

44,022

32,428

150,864

Winchester (part)

159,135

62,032

33,443

254,610

East Hampshire (part)

4,982

1,000

500

6,482

Sub-Total (existing)

522,753

190,602

165,718

879,073

Possible sites

 

 

 

 

Portsmouth

15,554

0

0

15,554

Fareham

0

0

0

0

Gosport

189,720

0

30,000

219,720

Havant

18,217

6,132

3,065

27,414

East Hampshire(part)

1,250

0

0

1,250

Sub-total (possibles)

224,741

6,132

33,065

263,938

Grand total

747,494

196,734

198,783

1,143,011

 

14     In the South East Sub-area (Table 3 above), the largest supply of future B1 offices floorspace is in Winchester District, which mainly comprises outstanding planning permissions at Solent Business Park (Whiteley) and the allocation at the West of Waterlooville MDA .  In contrast, Fareham Borough (setting aside the proposed SDA) currently has very little future B1 offices space.

 

15     Winchester District also has the largest amount of space for B2 manufacturing uses – largely at Solent 2 (Whiteley) and at Segensworth.  Portsmouth, Havant and Fareham (including the SDA) also have substantial space for future development for this use.

 

16     Portsmouth currently offers the most space for new B8 warehousing, with a considerable supply in Havant and Winchester Districts.  There is virtually none in Fareham until the SDA comes on stream in 2016 or thereabouts.

 

17     HMS Sultan – a ‘possible site’ in Gosport – could provide additional space for all three types of employment development although this is not expected to be available until 2017 at the earliest.

 

Comparing supply and requirements at sub-regional-level

 

18     A comparison between the supply of existing sites and the South East Plan requirements (Table 4 below) during 2006-2026 shows that there is a substantial shortfall of B1 offices space in the South West Sub-area and a shortfall of B8 warehousing space in both areas.  Also in both areas, the available space for new B2 manufacturing development substantially exceeds what is required. 

 

Table 4:  Comparison of existing sites and requirements in South West and South East Sub-areas (square metres of floorspace)

 

B1

Offices

B2 Manufacturing

B8 Warehousing

South West Sub-area

 

 

 

    Existing supply

430,000

188,000

119,000

    Requirement

680,000

93,000

294,000

    Surplus (+) or shortfall (-)

-250,000

+95,000

-175,000

South East Sub-area

 

 

 

    Existing supply

523,000

191,000

166,000

     Requirement

535,000

123,000

240,000

    Surplus (+) or shortfall (-)

-12,000

+68,000

-74,000

        

NB:  The figures in this table exclude ‘possible sites’.

 

The timing of floorspace requirements

 

19     The PUSH strategy is “front-loaded” in terms of job growth, with productivity increases driving GVA growth in the later part of the plan period. This means that the requirement for employment floorspace is also likely to be weighted towards the earlier years.

 

20     This means that the simple comparison of total 20 year floorspace requirements and supply (Table 5) may mask substantial variations over the 20 years with a surplus of supply in one period and a shortfall in another.

 

 

21     The DTZ work which was the foundation for the policy figures in Policy SH6, did not split the 20 year floorspace requirements into time periods. So it was necessary for PUSH officers to calculate floorspace requirement figures for the separate time periods 2006-2011, 2011-2016 and 2016-2026. For this, a very simple methodology based on the employment growth trajectory of the DTZ forecasts was used based on the principle that “front-loading” of the PUSH strategy in terms of employment growth will mean that the requirement for employment floorspace is also likely to be weighted towards the earlier years. This front-loading allocates 30% of the 2006 to 2026 floorspace requirement into the first five years up to 2011, 25% into the second five years up to 2016, and 45% into the remaining ten years of the plan period up to 2026 – shown in Table 5 below.

 

Table 5: Floorspace requirements by phasing period

All figures are square metres of floorspace

 

 

 

 

 

South West area

2006 - 2011

2011 - 2016

2016 - 2026

2006 - 2026

B1 offices

204,000

170,000

306,000

680,000

B2 manufacturing

27,900

23,200

41,900

93,000

B8 warehousing

88,200

73,500

132,300

294,000

Total

320,100

266,700

480,200

1,067,000

 

 

 

 

 

South East area

2006 - 2011

2011 - 2016

2016 - 2026

2006 - 2026

B1 offices

160,500

133,800

240,700

535,000

B2 manufacturing

36,900

30,700

55,400

123,000

B8 warehousing

72,000

60,000

108,000

240,000

Total

269,400

224,500

404,100

898,000

 

22     One important point arises from the above estimates of the floorspace requirement. Whilst the annual floorspace requirements for the whole 2006 to 2026 period are broadly similar to the completion rates achieved in the recent past, the estimates for the phasing periods (based on the "front-loaded" employment growth trajectory) paint a rather different picture (see chart below).

 

PUSH Floorspace

 

23     The requirements estimated for the immediate period up to 2011 reveal a difficult challenge for PUSH and at the same time presents an opportunity. The challenge will be to bring sites forward for development more quickly than in the recent past (although the development rates envisaged are lower than were achieved in the 1988 to 1995 period). The extent of this challenge is highlighted by reports that the building and construction sector in the area is already working at full capacity. However, the opportunity this presents is two-fold. First, success in this area would demonstrate the effectiveness of PUSH not only in developing ideas and strategies but also in delivery, achieving results on the ground.  Secondly such success would also create a buzz factor in the sub-region; a sense that South Hampshire really means business, which might impact on market sentiment and the general perception of the area both amongst the existing community as well as potential investors from outside. However it is regarded, success in meeting this employment floorspace target is essential to achieving the PUSH strategy.

 

Apportioning employment land requirements

 

24     The PUSH Economic Development and Planning Officers have, through a dedicated sub group and a series of technical analyses and workshops, explored the inter-relationships of land supply and requirement by authority, by floorspace type and by time period (2006-2011, 2011-2016 and 2016-2026).  Considerable advances have been made towards identifying floorspace requirements for each authority, for each floorspace type and for each time period (amplifying Policy SH6), but the work has gone as far as it is possible to go at this stage. 

 

25     The existing supply situation produces a number of deficits and surpluses many of which have been resolved although a number remain unresolved at this stage. The means of achieving alignment included:

  • transferring existing sites between floorspace types, e.g. B2 manufacturing to B8 warehousing
  • transferring existing sites between time periods, e.g. post 2011 to pre 2011
  • relying on increased densities as existing sites are redeveloped
  • allocating new sites

 

26     This completed work (referred to from here on as the ‘interim position’) provides a platform for employment land reviews by individual authorities as part of their LDF preparation, including further changes to the time period in which sites will be developed, examining further the potential for altering the employment types on particular sites, and/or investigating the provision of additional sites. 

     

27     An interim apportionment figure for each time period is shown in the middle columns in table 6 and 7 below. These are heavily influenced by the existing supply of sites. The total for each time period does not match the total requirement for the PUSH area for that time period.

 

28     The next step is resolve those disparities by apportioning the additional allocations amongst the individual time periods, at the same time addressing as far as is possible, the surpluses of supply over requirement in the early years. It is proposed that this task should be undertaken initially by each authority individually, reporting back on their conclusions later this year so that PUSH can finalise the apportionment work across all authorities. This is explained in more detail in the ‘Way Ahead’ section below.

 

29     It is proposed that Leaders should confirm these interim/provisional figures in order to provide some guidance to PUSH authorities in drawing up their LDD documents notably their Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation document.

 

South West Sub-area

 

30        The interim position in this sub-area is set out in Table 6 below. A key feature of the office supply position is the bringing forward of the ‘possible sites’ in Southampton  These sites envisage very substantial development in the city centre at West Quay Road and Central Station i.e. a proposed new office quarter. Broadly the supply of office floorspace in the sub-area as a  whole matches the requirement. There is a small “surplus” of manufacturing space and a rather larger deficit of warehousing space. Altering the position in any use class for the period up to 2011 is constrained by the short timeframe which remains. This means that little if anything can be done in such a limited period for the deficit remaining in warehousing. It is also of note that since achieving rates of development equivalent to the requirements will mean a faster rate than has been seen in the recent past, the nominal “surplus” of manufacturing space may not come to fruition. A solution considered appropriate in this sub-area is to consider switching some of the B2 manufacturing “surpluses” to B8 warehousing, to help reduce the deficits there. However, even after such transfers there is a need for new warehousing allocations post 2016, possibly in Eastleigh or Southampton.

 

31        PUSH should take this opportunity to urge all its member authorities to investigate whether they have any B2 manufacturing sites that could suitably be transferred to B8 warehousing. More generally there is also a challenge for all PUSH authorities to explore opportunities for new warehousing sites post 2016 subject to these fitting with the PUSH vision and strategy.

 

32        The scale of some of the sites and their deliverability, considering the capacity of the construction sector and the timescales involved, also remains an issue that has been incorporated into the interim position. Sites such as the Strategic Employment Zone in Eastleigh, where a very substantial amount of floorspace was originally phased to be completed in a single five year period, are considered to be more realistically deliverable if phased over a longer period. Doing so can contribute to meeting the requirements for floorspace by more evenly distributing the supply as well as  providing for expected completion rates more akin to those of past years. There could also be a role for the HEP Investment, Land and Property Group in validating the phasing assumptions and practical deliverability of all the strategic employment sites.

        

Table 6: Interim apportionment for authorities in the South West Sub-area (square metres of floorspace)

 

Interim apportionment by time period

Provisional total requirement

 

Difference

2006 to 2011

2011 to 2016

2016 to 2026

Total

B1 Offices

 

 

 

 

 

 

Southampton

101,000

61,500

180,000

342,000

267,500

+74,500

Eastleigh

28,500

64,500

65,000

158,000

215,000

-57,000

N/NE Hedge End SDA

0

0

46,000

46,000

46,000

0

New Forest

7,500

12,000

5,000

24,500

24,000

+1,000

Test Valley

72,000

37,500

19,000

128,500

128,000

+500

Total

209,000

175,500

315,000

699,000

680,000

+19,000

Requirement

204,000

170,000

306,000

680,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or shortfall(-)

+5,000

+5,500

+9,000

+19,000

 

 

B2 Manufacturing

 

 

 

 

 

 

Southampton

14,000

49,500

0

63,500

16,000

+47,500

Eastleigh

11,000

46,000

46,000

103,000

50,000

+53,000

N/NE Hedge End SDA

0

0

8,000

8,000

8,000

0

New Forest

13,000

0

0

13,000

11,500

+1,500

Test Valley

0

0

7,500

7,500

7,500

0

Total

38,000

95,500

61,500

195,000

93,000

102,000

Requirement

28,000

23,000

42,000

93,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or shortfall(-)

+10,000

+72,500

+19,500

+102,000

 

 

Transfer to Warehousing

-10,000

-50,000

-10,000

-70,000

 

 

Net Surplus(+) or

shortfall (-)

0

+22,500

+9,500

+32,000

 

 

B8 Warehousing

 

 

 

 

 

 

Southampton

24,500

0

0

24,500

70,000

-45,500

Eastleigh

0

24,000

23,000

47,000

136,000

-89,000

N/NE Hedge End SDA

0

0

20,000

20,000

20,000

0

New Forest

27,000

0

0

27,000

37,000

-10,000

Test Valley

1,000

5,000

25,000

31,000

31,000

0

Total

52,500

29,000

68,000

149,500

294,000

-144,500

Requirement

88,000

73,500

132,500

294,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or shortfall(-)

-35,500

-44,500

-64,500

-144,500

 

 

Transfer from Manufacturing

+10,000

+50,000

+10,000

+70,000

 

 

Net Surplus(+) or

shortfall (-)

-25,500

+5,500

-54,500

-74,500

 

 

 

 

 

33     What has not been dealt with, even after the potential switching of ‘surplus’ floorspace from B2 manufacturing to B8 warehousing, are the significant deficits in B8 warehousing pre 2011 and post 2016. The economic gateways of Southampton Port, Portsmouth Port and Southampton Airport, represent an integral part of the long term PUSH strategy. Additionally to the expected regional wide increase in demand for warehousing, these gateways create employment growth rates in their immediate vicinity that tend to be double that of surrounding areas. They also generate much higher requirements for B8 warehousing space and jobs, that are not necessarily high productivity or high value added, satisfying their own demand but not likely to drive up GVA . Consequently, new, large allocations may be required to meet the deficit, but this is a matter for PUSH to urge the constituent Local Authorities to be responsible for as part of the background to all forthcoming LDFs.

 

34     The scale of some of the sites and their deliverability considering the capacity of the construction sector and the timescales involved, also remains an issue that has been incorporated into the interim position. Sites such as the Strategic Employment Zone in Eastleigh, where a vast amount of floorspace was originally phased to be completed in a single 5 year period, are considered to be more realistically deliverable if phased over a longer period. Doing so can contribute to meeting the requirements for floorspace by more evenly distributing the supply and providing for expected completion rates more akin to those of past years.

 

South East Sub-area

 

35     The interim position in this sub-area is set out in Table 7.  A key feature is the surplus of floorspace supply in the first five years in all employment types and also in B1 offices and B2 manufacturing in the 2011-2016 period. As explained in paragraph 23 above, achieving a rate of development equivalent to the requirements would mean a faster rate of development than in the recent past and in itself represents a considerable challenge; an even higher rate is highly improbable. Whilst a small surplus is desirable in order to provide developers with a range and choice of sites, substantial surpluses are likely to lead to developers cherry picking the easier/more readily marketable sites which may not be PUSH ’s top priorities.  Substantial surpluses could also make it more difficult to defend employment sites against speculative proposals for alternative uses notably housing.

 

36     On the other hand, each authority can provide sound reasons why its own sites should proceed to development as currently planned, and decisions to defer development will be difficult.  The room for manoeuvre in the immediate future is also constrained by the bulk of the 2006-2011 supply already having planning permission placing the spotlight on the few which are only Local Plan allocations.  Nevertheless, either the PUSH authorities must make these difficult choices or the market will do it for them in the ways described earlier in the previous paragraph.  The ‘plan led’ system also points to the authorities addressing the matter. PUSH should therefore urge constituent authorities to not allocate any new sites for development before 2011 and to investigate whether any actions can be taken to reduce the surpluses.

 

37   In that regard, it is now nearly 2008 – two years into the 2006-2011 period - so there is a risk that expectations of site development during this 5 year period may be optimistic. The PUSH Economic Development Group is addressing the short term supply of sites and any actions needed to be ensure they are available and ready for development.

 

Table 7:  Interim apportionment for authorities in the South East Sub-area (square metres of floorspace)

 

Interim apportionment by time period

Provisional total requirement

 

Diffrnce

2006 to 2011

2011 to 2016

2016 to 2026

Total

B1 Offices

 

 

 

 

 

 

Portsmouth

37,000

86,500

60,000

183,500

135,500

+48,000

Fareham

5,500

10,000

0

15,500

22,500

-7,000

N Fareham SDA

0

0

72,000

72,000

72,000

0

Gosport

40,000

26,500

0

66,500

66,500

0

Havant

30,000

21,000

23,500

74,500

74,500

0

Winchester

98,500

31,000

17,000

146,500

159,500

-12,500

East Hampshire

5,000

0

0

5,000

5,000

0

Total

216,000

175,000

172,500

563,500

535,000

+28,000

Requirement

160,500

134,000

241,000

535,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or

shortfall(-)

+55,500

+41,000

-68,500

+28,000

 

 

B2 Manufacturing

 

 

 

 

 

 

Portsmouth

39,500

5,500

0

45,000

37,500

+7,500

Fareham

6,500

5,000

0

11,500

6,000

+5,500

N Fareham SDA

0

0

16,500

16,500

16,500

0

Gosport

500

3,000

5,500

9,000

8,500

+500

Havant

10,000

18,000

21,500

49,500

46,500

+3,000

Winchester

29,500

21,000

17,000

67,500

5,500

+62,000

East Hampshire

1,000

0

0

1,000

2,500

-1,500

Total

87,000

52,500

60,500

200,000

123,000

+77,000

Requirement

37,000

30,500

55,500

123,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or

shortfall(-)

+50,000

+22,000

+5,000

+77,000

 

 

B8 Warehousing

 

 

 

 

 

 

Portsmouth

50,500

1,000

0

51,500

55,500

-4,000

Fareham

2,500

0

0

2,500

12,000

-9,500

N Fareham SDA

0

0

32,500

32,500

32,500

0

Gosport

7,000

6,500

0

13,500

60,500

-47,000

Havant

12,000

9,000

11,500

32,500

39,500

-7,000

Winchester

15,500

15,500

8,000

39,000

39,500

-500

East Hampshire

500

0

0

500

500

0

Total

88,000

32,000

52,000

172,000

240,000

-68,000

Requirement

72,000

60,000

108,000

240,000

 

 

Surplus(+) or

shortfall(-)

+16,000

-28,000

-56,000

-68,000

 

 

 

38     The other main feature of Table 7 is the shortage of supply in the South East Sub-area for B8 warehousing development from 2011 onwards and a substantial shortfall in B1 offices space after 2016.  Those shortfalls might in part be addressed by undeveloped sites being carried forward from the earlier years of surplus (assuming that proposals for alternative uses such as housing have been successfully resisted), but there will also be a need for the identification of wholly new sites which fit with the PUSH locational strategy. For example Portsmouth City Council should consider whether there is scope for additional office floorspace post 2016, creating a new office quarter for example, like that just announced by Southampton City Council.  Fareham Borough Council should do the same on a more modest scale, bearing in mind that the SDA will provide B1 offices space in the Borough from around 2016. All authorities need to explore opportunities for new sites for all types of employment development post-2016 and for warehousing from 2011 subject to these sites fitting with the PUSH vision and strategy.

 

Next Steps

 

39     If Leaders endorse the approach and interim/provisional figures set out in this report, then PUSH authorities will be able to use them to inform the preparation of draft Local Development Documents ( LDDs ).  In parallel, they will be asked to investigate the matters set out in the Sub-area sections above and to report back to PUSH on their investigations by 30 November 2007, so that PUSH can complete the apportionment of the South East Plan's employment floorspace totals. That may require a revisiting of the ‘provisional total requirement’ figures in the final column of the two tables above. The final figures would then be formulated and presented to the Joint Committee in early 2008 via the PUSH Planning and Sustainability Panel. This would enable the final figures to be used in the next stages of LDD preparation.

 

40     Of the three types of employment development, the largest requirement for the allocation of new sites is for B8 warehousing use. Although this development will not be a major driver of GVA growth in South Hampshire, adequate provision for future storage and distribution is crucial nonetheless: it is required in association with the expansion of South Hampshire's two international sea ports and to service the consumer spending growth which will flow from the sub-region's increased economic wealth.  Over the last 12-18 months increasing demand has been identified for storage land and other uses related to the Port of Southampton.  There is little capacity, particularly in relation to open storage, in the way of supply.  The two largest areas at Marchwood and Totton are near to capacity.  (This is despite the port freeing up land within its estate through the removal of non-port related uses and the use of the area around the dry dock for storage.)  However, insufficient is known about the nature and the locational requirements of this growth in storage and distribution; a point echoed at regional level by the EiP Panel (Para. 6.89 of their Report). So it is proposed to commission specialist consultants to undertake a study of warehousing storage and distribution requirements in South Hampshire and the suitability of existing sites. This study would be carried out over the next few months in order that the findings can be fed into the preparation next year of the final apportionment figures.

 

 

Background Papers:  Draft South East Plan, SEERA 2006. South Hampshire Economic Drivers and Growth,

DTZ 2005

 

 

 

 

 

 

| Borough of Havant - Home | What's New | Site Map | Search | Help | Complaints | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Web Accessibility | Skip Nav |