Hi Sal...
Hi Leon :)
...I suspect that Harman won't be advertising any future plans widely. ...
Simon Galley has answered my questions to a considerably greater extent, both on APUG and in private communications, than one might expect. Certainly more than any other corporation ever has. Nonetheless, he remains mute about the specific planning application appeal / revised plans inquiry this thread addresses.
...There is one issue that really worries me about this and that is their main coating machine - their 2nd machine being much smaller and only used for R and D. They discussed it with us with pride with respect to its bespoke nature and uniqueness. It was certainly mentioned at least once that it would not be moveable, without drastic changes to that nature and quality of the products they produce on it, and would result in undoing many years of consistency and reliability from their products....
I understand that, and worried about it from the start as well. However, looking at the now-rejected plan's three phases here
http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567816.pdf (http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567816.pdf)
http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567817.pdf (http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567817.pdf)
http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567818.pdf (http://doc.cheshireeast.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/07567818.pdf)
reveals that HARMAN was indeed going to move its main coating line, a process that would have been paid for by the developer.
...So, whilst the Mobberly site is HUGE, and clearly underused, a move to smaller and cheaper premises might not be as positive as it sounds...
My main concern was not a lack of output consistency if the coating line were moved, since I'm confident that HARMAN could work out the bugs after a transition period. Rather, I worried that existing products' characteristics would change in undesirable ways, much as Kodak's films did in the 1990s when it relocated manufacture of them to Bldg. 38 in Rochester.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Should the status quo become entrenched, i.e. no development permitted, I'll definitely be filling a freezer with Ilford film as the end of HARMAN's site lease approaches a decade from now.
...There could be nothing better for the long-term future of HARMAN than a "right-sized" facility. Also, with the development plan apparently calling for HARMAN's landlord (LPC Living, the developer) to underwrite the cost involved with relocating equipment, odds of a HARMAN site lease extension beyond its current expiration -- approximately ten years from now -- would be greatly improved. Here's wishing LPC Living great success with the appeal!
I've been digging around the Internet again and discovered that the appeal is moving along
http://planning.cheshireeast.gov.uk/applicationdetails.aspx?pr=15/5407M&query=96b7bdca-89c2-46d3-91e8-3cff712a9117 (http://planning.cheshireeast.gov.uk/applicationdetails.aspx?pr=15/5407M&query=96b7bdca-89c2-46d3-91e8-3cff712a9117)
with a decision by Cheshire East Council targeted for the 26th of this month. My best wishes to HARMAN's landlord for getting approval of the revised plan!