You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.
Representations on VALP Proposed Submission - E1 Protection of key employment sites
OBJECT Wycombe District Council (Charlotte Morris)
In light of this Policy E1 part c identifies that main town centre uses will not be supported on
key employment sites, except as ancillary facilities to service a key employment site. The
NPPF includes 'offices' as a main town centre use therefore this policy should be amended
to take this into consideration.
OBJECT Aylesbury Vale Estates LLP represented by Savills Reading (Mrs Rebecca McAllister)
In its current form this policy is insufficiently flexible to respond to changes in the market or specific circumstances of sites. Therefore, we strongly object to this restrictive policy and we would recommend seeking its amendment.
SUPPORT The Hampden Fields Consortium represented by Barton Willmore (Mr Mark Owen)
will also provide 6.90 hectares of employment land which will boost job opportunities within the area
and complement the employment opportunities within the Aria/Woodlands Enterprise Zone,
identified as a key employment site under Draft Policy El. Furthermore, the proposals will open up
considerable swathes of public open space for the enjoyment of residents, with approximately 50%
of the site provided as publicly accessible green infrastructure including strategic open spaces, paly
areas, sports fields, allotments and community growing spaces.
SUPPORT Wendover Parish Council (Jane Ellis)
The WPC supports this strategy and would encourage further development within our area of sites suitable for expansion of the creative/high tech industries.
OBJECT High Barrow Holdings (Mr. Ikram Haq) represented by Ingleton Wood LLP (Rebecca Howard)
VALP seeks to protect key employment sites (policy E1), protect existing employment uses outside of allocated employment sites (Policy E2), and seeks to control alternative uses on allocated employment land. The Local Plan does not however, provide opportunities for new employment outside of the allocated areas. The NPPF seeks to encourage and promote development of local services in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity. This aim is not evident within the policies in the Local Plan.
OBJECT FI Real Estate Management represented by DPP Planning (Richard Purser)
The site of Verney House has been erroneously allocated as an 'Existing Employment Site' and within the 'Gatehouse Industrial Area'. This does not reflect the present planning status of the site which, as of September 2017, benefits from prior approval consent for residential development. Given the approved land use and that the owner of the site intends to bring the site forward as such the site should be reallocated for residential development.
OBJECT Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Conservation Board (Dr Lucy Murfett)
E1 gives blanket support to B1 (light industrial), B2 (general industrial), B8 (storage and distribution) applications at key employment sites. Since the list of key employment sites includes sites which are visible from the escarpment of the Chilterns AONB (e.g. Arla/ Woodlands, Pitstone Green Business Park and Triangle Business Park) a restriction 'subject to meeting other policies in the plan' could usefully be added. This would help safeguard from adverse impacts on the AONB (eg visual impacts or increases in traffic generation through the AONB), and require careful design (e.g. green roofs, reductions in height and bulk of individual buildings).
OBJECT MEPC Silverstone GP Limited represented by Terence O'Rourke Ltd (Mr Neil Trollope)
Silverstone Park is included as a strategic employment site (policy E1), which is welcomed by MEPC.
The plan includes a separate policy entitled Silverstone Circuit (policy E10). This makes reference to
the 'business and technology park', but it fails to clearly distinguish between Silverstone Park (MEPC)
and Silverstone Circuit (BRDC). Two landowners with distinct planning objectives control these two
sites. Therefore, the plan is not effective in this regard.
The policy wording in E10 should clearly distinguish between Silverstone Park and Silverstone Circuit.
The planning objectives and the existing/proposed land uses relevant to each site should be clearly
SUPPORT Peter Brett Associates LLP (Mr Tim Coleby)
* Support reference to the Enterprise Zone and AW in policy E1 on pages 182-4
SUPPORT Laxton Properties (Mr Ed Whetham)
The owners of Halton Brook Business Park are in favour of the designation of their land as a key employment site. However they note that the location of Halton Brook Business Park is incorrectly identified on the Proposals Map for Halton, whereas its correct location is in Aston Clinton (as shown on the attached plan).