Contact: Antony Payne, ext 6766 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The following decision was made:

That the County Council responds to the South Hampshire Strategic Employment Zone Area Action Plan - Issues and Options consultation by:

(i) supporting the long-term vision and strategy that the Area Action Plan proposes for its area;

(ii) supporting an employment led strategy as set out in Option 1, though accepting the likely need for `enabling' uses within the proposals, as set out in Options 2 and 3 in order to expedite progress;

(iii) supporting a level of ambition and appropriate balance in the economic sectors and types of employment to be sought within the Zone to support the sub-regional strategy;

(iv) supporting joint working for the delivery of the Chickenhall Lane Link Road and the South Hampshire Strategic Employment Zone;

(v) supporting the raft of transport objectives contained in the Area Action Plan;

(vi) opposing Options 4 and 5 (which propose retail and leisure development within the Zone);

(vii) opposing Option 6 (which excludes the Chickenhall Lane Link Road);

(viii) requesting that the Borough Council includes provision for strategic waste management facilities, including Combined Heat and Power (CHP) within its preferred option; and

(ix) supporting a regeneration strategy for the sub-regionally important South Hampshire Strategic Employment Zone, with provision with ambitious high tech and advanced manufacturing development, and a delivery strategy which maximises opportunities to secure funding to bring forward infrastructure provision and development.

2. Reason

2.1 The options for development set out for the South Hampshire Strategic Employment Zone will aid the regeneration and future development of Eastleigh and improve its status as a secondary regional centre. The development of the Strategic Employment Zone will significantly contribute to the economic growth of South Hampshire and the delivery of the sub-regional strategy.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 To make no response to the consultation, which was rejected as the County Council is a key stakeholder and development partner, and would not wish to forgo the opportunity to influence the emerging area action plan.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or Other Executive Member Consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - None.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - None.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor T K Thornber CBE - Chairman

1371Decn/AP