Vision 2031 public inquiry - second afternoon
Thursday, 6th February 2014.
The final session of the public inquiry into Vision 2031, the document which guide development in Haverhill over the next 20 years, dealt with jobs and economy.
Carisbrooke Investments had asked that land east of Bumpstead Road and north of the Culina access road be re-allocated for housing.
It is currently part of Haverhill Business Park, but Paul Sutton, acting for Carisbrooke, claimed there was a surplus of employment land in the Haverhill area.
Initially Carisbrooke had relied on a surplus of employment land in the borough of St Edmundsbury as a whole, but in their response St Edmundsbury planning officers had pointed to this surplus being around Bury St Edmunds only.
Carisbrooke's agents Cheffins had carried out more work to establish a surplus in the Haverhill area alone and presented the Government inspector examining Vision 2031 with a list of available land.
The inspector, Roger Clews, was unhappy at receiving the document so late, but accepted it and asked for a response from the borough within a week or so.
Borough planning officer Chris Rand said the only thing the site had going for it as a residential prospect was good access to the bypass,and they did not see it as suitable.
Robert Shrimplin, representing Howard Haverhill, and Julian Stephenson, representing Montague Evans, both urged the inspector to remove a requirement for an impact study with planning applications for any retail development over 1,000 square metres on either of the town's two retail park sites.
This condition was aimed at protecting the town centre shops from large outside competition at a fragile time, the borough's Ian Poole explained.
Mr Stephenson, in relation to the Park Road site, where an appeal against refusal of planning permission is currently going on, and Mr Shrimplin, in reference to the Hamlet Green site (formerly Project), where there is an extant permission for over 5,000 square metres of retail, both wanted Vision 2031 to be in line with the National Planning Policy Framework, which sets the threshold for an impact study at 2,500 square metres.
Mr Shrimplin pointed out this would be the case under Vision 2031 for retail development anywhere else, including the town centre, and suggested it should be consistent.
Carisbrooke Investments had asked that land east of Bumpstead Road and north of the Culina access road be re-allocated for housing.
It is currently part of Haverhill Business Park, but Paul Sutton, acting for Carisbrooke, claimed there was a surplus of employment land in the Haverhill area.
Initially Carisbrooke had relied on a surplus of employment land in the borough of St Edmundsbury as a whole, but in their response St Edmundsbury planning officers had pointed to this surplus being around Bury St Edmunds only.
Carisbrooke's agents Cheffins had carried out more work to establish a surplus in the Haverhill area alone and presented the Government inspector examining Vision 2031 with a list of available land.
The inspector, Roger Clews, was unhappy at receiving the document so late, but accepted it and asked for a response from the borough within a week or so.
Borough planning officer Chris Rand said the only thing the site had going for it as a residential prospect was good access to the bypass,and they did not see it as suitable.
Robert Shrimplin, representing Howard Haverhill, and Julian Stephenson, representing Montague Evans, both urged the inspector to remove a requirement for an impact study with planning applications for any retail development over 1,000 square metres on either of the town's two retail park sites.
This condition was aimed at protecting the town centre shops from large outside competition at a fragile time, the borough's Ian Poole explained.
Mr Stephenson, in relation to the Park Road site, where an appeal against refusal of planning permission is currently going on, and Mr Shrimplin, in reference to the Hamlet Green site (formerly Project), where there is an extant permission for over 5,000 square metres of retail, both wanted Vision 2031 to be in line with the National Planning Policy Framework, which sets the threshold for an impact study at 2,500 square metres.
Mr Shrimplin pointed out this would be the case under Vision 2031 for retail development anywhere else, including the town centre, and suggested it should be consistent.
Comment on this story
[board listing] [login] [register]
You must be logged in to post messages. (login now)