BE2 2c.

Lutterworth enjoys high employment, and observation suggests that lutterworth already supports many workers from outside of the Town, including most employees of Magna Park. Therefore, any increase in employment is likely to mainly increase commuting into Town rather than employing significantly more residents. Just even more traffic! But there is another point: how sure can we be that the warehouses will be fully staffed by humans? Already some companies are equipping their warehouses with robots to do the "picking", so there exists the possibility that the potential employment figures could be rather less than quoted, if not immediately then some time in the future. But robots will not affect the number of lorries.

There is little unemployement in the area currently. A lot of the current workforce commute into the area adding to the chaos on the A5 and other local roads. Warehouse work does not appeal to many of the younger generation who have degrees and feel they should be working in the field of expertise.

The addition of 10000 extra low skill jobs in the area will cause massive increases in commuter traffic particularly through local villages as up to 60 % of existing workers already live outside the Harborough area. The employment rate in the area is already very high and the implication that this will create high skilled jobs through training and apprenticships is a fallacy. The A5 trunk road is inadequate for the projected traffic increase.

The allocation is contrary to Key Objective 3 as it will not provide employment 'for Harborough's higher skilled residents'.

The allocation is contrary to Objective 2 (p17) and Policy BE2.2.c as it will not 'create new jobs that meet local employment needs' or 'increase employment opportunities for local residents'. This is because in the whole of Harborough District there were only 1200 people registered unemployment from April 2016 - March 2017 (https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157143/report.aspx#tabempunemp) a rate of 2.6%, well below 4.2% for the East Midlands and 4.7% nationally.

No Evidence of the need in Lutterworth for this type of employment so will add to the in commuting on already inadequate road infrastructure.

While there would be employment opportunities for local residents if the proposal to double the size of Magna Park were to go ahead, take-up would be very limited, as unemployment in the Lutterworth area is very low and in the district it is the 2nd lowest in the county (see HEDNA final report, January 2017). It would not significantly reduce out-commuting of people holding skilled jobs as there are relatively few such jobs in warehousing. Uptake of jobs would be largely by people commuting longer distances to Magna Park from areas with higher unemployment and lower house prices (see HEDNA report above), but as unemployment continues to fall, recruitment of warehousing staff may be a problem. Anecdotally, employment agencies locally tell us it already is. Jobs should be created, as far as possible, where the unemployed are, rather than encourage large numbers to commute (overwhelmingly by private car as public transport is so inadequate) with resulting congestion and pollution. This part of the plan too fails the test of soundness as the strategy is not the most effective strategy to achieve the council's aim to reduce out-commuting

Key Issue 3 asserts that the local plan should:
"Reducing dependence of Harborough's residents on commuting and increasing wage rates by providing a breadth of employment alternatives, including more opportunities for Harborough's higher skilled residents"

Given we have virtually full employment in and around the Lutterworth area would this development, should it go ahead, not take potential employment away from other areas that need it more?

There is virtually full employment for anyone who wants it in the district and in Lutterworth in particular, and demand for employees will only be increased when the aforementioned developments at DIRFT and East Midlands come on stream.

Increasing the size of Magna Park would only increase the number of low skilled low paid jobs on offer to local people should they want them. We do not see this proposal in anyway providing a breadth of employment alternatives for higher skilled residents. Quite the opposite, the creation of 10,000 warehouse operative jobs will not stop residents commuting elsewhere in search of higher quality, wage work opportunities.

The Lutterworth area has a dearth of good quality office locations. If effort was put into this type of development, then local opportunities would be created for higher skilled local people and attract and maintain higher value jobs and businesses. We need to be attracting Hi Tech, innovative business to the region not low skill, low wage organisations. They are the type of job that disappear in any economic downturn.

Key Issue 3 asserts that the local plan should:
"Reducing dependence of Harborough's residents on commuting and increasing wage rates by providing a breadth of employment alternatives, including more opportunities for Harborough's higher skilled residents"

Given we have virtually full employment in and around the Lutterworth area would this development, should it go ahead, not take potential employment away from other areas that need it more?

There is virtually full employment for anyone who wants it in the district and in Lutterworth in particular, and demand for employees will only be increased when the aforementioned developments at DIRFT and East Midlands come on stream.

Increasing the size of Magna Park would only increase the number of low skilled low paid jobs on offer to local people should they want them. We do not see this proposal in anyway providing a breadth of employment alternatives for higher skilled residents. Quite the opposite, the creation of 10,000 warehouse operative jobs will not stop residents commuting elsewhere in search of higher quality, wage work opportunities.

The Lutterworth area has a dearth of good quality office locations. If effort was put into this type of development, then local opportunities would be created for higher skilled local people and attract and maintain higher value jobs and businesses. We need to be attracting Hi Tech, innovative business to the region not low skill, low wage organisations. They are the type of job that disappear in any economic downturn.

Employment in the area is some of the highest in the country, indeed already over 60% of the Magna Park workforce already commute in from outside the HDC area. The current proposals predict an increase in workforce of over 6,000 largely low skilled jobs. I object strongly to the expansion of Magna Park by 700,00 sq mts as it would not improve local employment and would have a serious impact on the local transport system, particularly the A5 which we understand is not scheduled for improvement until 2030 at least. .

Harborough district has virtually full employment .Unemployment rate is approx 1.0% - one of the lowest in the. UK.

Consequently such development merely attracts workers from out of district up to 40 miles away substantially increasing traffic along major and local roads

Further expansion of Magna Park would not help employment within the area as unemployment is at an all time low. The vast majority of employees would be from outlying areas which would result in increased traffic flow and pollution.

As a professional recently looking for work there was no high skilled, high paid jobs advertised within Magna Park most of the jobs where low skilled, low paid and temporary with gaps to fill these positions. Increasing the amount of capacity would only increase the amount of low skilled, low paid and temporary jobs and not increase the employment opportunities creating a greater gap and need to recruit from outside of the community

This cannot increase employment opportunities for local residents as:
1. there is very low unemployment in the area (less than 1%)
2. about 75% of storage and distribution jobs offered will continue to be lower-skilled low-paid, on insecure contracts with limited conditions
3. over 53% of local residents are already high-skilled and qualified, or in the process of achieving higher skills.
Exanded site employment of 19,200 will be wrong sort of jobs to recruit local residents and will only result in pulling in more commuting workers from a wider area..Already, most workers commute 10 km+ to work at Magna Park.

Harborough and surrounding districts do not have an unemployment problem. Therefore employees would travel in from further afield, therefore exacerbating the traffic problems on an already congested infrastructure.

700,000 square metres of additional warehousing and distribution on land adjoining Magna Park would certainly create more jobs, but it is open to question how many of these jobs would go to people in the district, where unemployment is very low (see HEDNA report, 2017) The majority of employees come to the existing Magna Park from outside the district, creating a large volume of additional traffic as over 90% travel by private vehicle. Employees from within the district also use private vehicles to get to work as suitable public transport fails adequately to serve 24/7 shift working, despite recent route changes.

Employers may develop transport plans but these are purely advisory and unenforceable. They may exhort staff not to use minor roads through villages to get to work, but if such travel saves time and avoids bottlenecks at major junctions on the approaches to Magna Park, drivers will tend to use whatever is most convenient to them. Magna Park is essentially in a rural location, with all the associated travel disadvantages .

Housing in Harborough District is the most expensive in Leicestershire (HEDNA report) and therefore is unlikely to be accessible to the majority of Magna Park staff who are on low wages. The nature of warehousing and logistics work is such that many jobs are on zero hours contracts, putting mortgages beyond reach.

People living in Harborough District tend to occupy more skilled jobs (HEDNA report) and these are in limited supply in warehousing and logistics. If out-commuting is to be reduced, what the area needs is skilled work, such as is available at Semelab, situated on the A4303, opposite Magna Park.

Not justified - if the Local Plan's aim is to enhance the skilled worker based within HDC, Magna Park is not necessarily going to achieve this based on the profile of logisitics workers alone. Less than 20% are managerial, and 74% are "essential / basic" jobs (National Skills Survey referenced in IDI Gazeley 15/01531/OUT ADDITIONAL INFO -UPDATE TO ES CH5 - SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS 731431). This does not align with the profile of employment in Leicestershire, with 53% of employment at managerial or professional level (LLEP SDSS 2016).

The unemployment rate is currently very low in Lutterworth, Magna Park currently struggle to recruit staff. Lutterworth is an area with too much low skill and low age jobs available.

There is almost full employment in the area, therefore any newly created jobs will need to be filled for outside the area. In addition the jobs by nature will be low-skilled with very little opportunity for apprenticeships of the right type to encourage higher paid, higher skilled employment.

Employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding villages will be limited as the positions available will be primarily be low skilled leading to further congestion on the roads by those having to commute into Magna Park.

The Lutterworth/Harborough area already has full employment and the majority of current magna park employees are resident outside the Lutterworth/Harborough district.

It's far more intelligent to build warehouses nearer to those people who would actually take up the new jobs being created.

The area around Magna Park has extremely low unemployment - rates of < 0.4%.

The thousands of new jobs being promised by the Magna Park expansion plans would therefore have to be filled by people who live well outside of the area, forcing them to having lengthy commutes into the Lutterworth area; generating even more traffic congestion & pollution around Magna Park.

These needlessly lengthy commutes can only add to the dreadful air quality in and around Lutterworth.

The plans to substantially expand Magna Park would NOT increase employment opportunities for local residents.

Unemployment levels in and around the Lutterworth area are extremely low, less than 0.4%.

The wage rates for most of the promised new jobs will be relatively low.

Those who would, in actuality, take up these promised new jobs would live elsewhere condemning them to lengthy commutes.

Why not build the warehouses nearer to areas of higher unemployment where the locals would welcome them?

Surely, that's only common sense!

The local area will not support Magna Park expansion as the local population is technically fully employed
The industry generally support low level warehouse or admin jobs with a high lever of agency worker. This type of further employment adds no value to the local area.
Workers increasingly come from further afield increasing traffic congestion further

No evidence for a high percentage of low skilled distribution jobs within HDC

Clearly an allocation of this size would lead to a vast number of employment opportunities. However, unemployment in the area is very low, the majority of the workforce required for an allocation of this size would have to be recruited from outside the district. Supporting documents for the IDI Gazeley application, 15/01531/OUT, state that 74% of the employment opportunities will be for 'essential/basic jobs'. Key Issue 3 of the Local Plan highlights that there is a requirement for more opportunities for 'higher skilled residents' in the district. Objective 2 of the Local Plan states: 'Contribute to reducing the need for out-commuting and thereby help to increase the sustainability and self-containment of communities, while encouraging the development of a vibrant, diverse and sustainable business community'. Out-commuting of people within the district holding skilled jobs would not be significantly reduced as, previously highlighted, 74% of the opportunities are for essential/basic jobs, the people filling these roles will commute from areas where unemployment is higher and house prices are lower.

An allocation of this size would lead to a vast number of employment opportunities. However, unemployment in the area is very low, the majority of the workforce required for an allocation of this size would have to be recruited from outside the district. Supporting documents for the IDI Gazeley application, 15/01531/OUT, state that 74% of the employment opportunities will be for 'essential/basic jobs'. Key Issue 3 of the Local Plan highlights that there is a requirement for more opportunities for 'higher skilled residents' in the district. Objective 2 of the Local Plan states: 'Contribute to reducing the need for out-commuting and thereby help to increase the sustainability and self-containment of communities, while encouraging the development of a vibrant, diverse and sustainable business community'. Out-commuting of people within the district holding skilled jobs would not be significantly reduced as, previously highlighted, 74% of the opportunities are for essential/basic jobs, the people filling these roles will commute from areas where unemployment is higher and house prices are lower.

There is a large SFRI site a few miles southbound along the A5, DIRFT. There is no evidence provided that demonstrates the Magna Park allocation will not have an adverse impact on further SRFIs, particularly DIRFT. One of the outstanding applications, 15/01531/OUT (IDI Gazeley), has been objected to by Prologis III at DIRFT on grounds of market saturation risk. It should also be noted that the National Policy Statement for National Networks (NPS) strongly supports SRFIs. There are no rail freight assets at Magna Park, there is a large SFRI very close by and a new one planned around the M69/A5 junction, therefore, the proposed policy conflicts with
paragraph 31 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

An allocation of this size would lead to a vast number of employment opportunities. However, unemployment in the area is very low, the majority of the workforce required for an allocation of this size would have to be recruited from outside the district. Supporting documents for the IDI
Gazeley application, 15/01531/OUT, state that 74% of the employment opportunities will be for 'essential/basic jobs'. Key Issue 3 of the Local Plan highlights that there is a requirement for more opportunities for 'higher skilled residents' in the district. Objective 2 of the Local Plan states: 'Contribute to reducing the need for out-commuting and thereby help to increase the sustainability and self-containment of communities, while encouraging the development of a vibrant, diverse and sustainable business community'. Out-commuting of people within the district holding skilled jobs would not be significantly reduced as, previously highlighted, 74% of the opportunities are for essential/basic jobs, the people filling these roles will commute from areas where unemployment is higher and house prices are lower.