DOCSLIB.ORG

Part a – Your Details

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Part a – Your Details Classification: OFFICIAL PORep1502 (REDACTED) PART A – YOUR DETAILS Are you: An Individual An Organisation Other (please specify) Personal Details* Agent’s Details (if applicable) **Title Mr **First Name Thomas **Last Name Hutchinson Job Title Head of Projects (if on behalf of an organisation) Organisation Land and Partners Ltd (if applicable) **Address Telephone Number **Email Address *if an agent is appointed, you may wish to complete only the title and name boxes and, if applicable, the organisation box but please complete the full contact details for the agent. **Name and either email or address required if you wish to be added to the consultation database (see below). Consultation Database (Mailing List) The Councils have a Consultation Database (mailing list) used to keep individuals and organisations informed about Planning Policy Documents across both Council areas. Documents include: the Local Plan, Supplementary Planning Documents and Neighbourhood Plans, (please note some plans may not be applicable to your area). Chiltern District Council and South Bucks District Council are the Data Controllers for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 1998. Individuals and organisations on the Planning Policy Consultation Database will only be contacted by the Councils in relation to the preparation and production of planning policy documents. The Councils will not publish the names of those individuals on the database but may publish names of statutory bodies and organisations at certain stages of the Local Plan process. Please indicate if you want to be added to the joint consultation database (tick box below). Please note: you do not need to tick this box if you received a letter or email notification from the Councils prior to the start of the consultation, as you are already registered. Page 1 of 45 Classification: OFFICIAL PORep1502 (REDACTED) PART B – RESPONSE Green Belt Options – Please Provide your Comments The Councils have concluded that land within the Green Belt will need to be released in order to contribute to meeting development needs to 2036. This is despite maximising opportunities on ‘brownfield land’ or sites within the built areas and on previously developed land in the Green Belt. The Councils have identified 15 preferred options for development in the Green Belt after taking account of views expressed in a consultation earlier this year and testing a full range of options. All of these preferred options if suitable for development will be needed to contribute to our development needs. They are ‘preferred’ options at this stage as work is on-going to test their suitability. Further testing following this consultation will establish what infrastructure (e.g. highway improvements, schools, medical facilities etc.) will be needed to support the options moving forward taking into account current pressures and circumstances. We are consulting on these 15 preferred options to: a) Seek views to help determine their suitability for development; b) Help understand views on what type of development should be sought if suitable and what type of requirements (other than infrastructure) should be secured as part of development; c) Enable comments on the draft technical work supporting the selection of the preferred options; and d) Provide the opportunity for alternative options to be put forward. Evidence and background documents are available here: www.chiltern.gov.uk/planning/localplan2014- 2036/evidence and www.southbucks.gov.uk/planning/localplan2014-2036/evidence. When commenting please clearly indicate which preferred option(s) you are commenting on. Please do not provide any personal information you do not want to be made publically available as these comments may be published at a later date. Please see attached representations and accompanying reports containing our comments on Fourells Paddock, Richings Park, Iver (Site Ref: 4.334). The reports comprise: Main representations document by Land & Partners Ltd Sustainable Transport Review by Mayer Brown, including Site Location Plan, Location Plan and Accessibility/Sustainability Plan. Assessment of Agricultural Use & Quality by Land Research Associates. Page 2 of 45 Classification: OFFICIAL PORep1502 (REDACTED) Representations by Land and Partners Ltd re: Site 4.334, Fourells Paddock, Richings Park, Iver South Bucks and Chesham Green Belt Preferred Options Consultation - December 2016 Representations by Land & Partners Ltd with regard to Fourells Paddock, Richings Park, Iver (Site Ref: 4.334). This document contains the main representations. It should be read in association with two accompanying technical reports: • Sustainable Transport Review by Mayer Brown, including Site Location Plan, Location Plan and Accessibility/Sustainability Plan. • Assessment of Agricultural Use & Quality by Land Research Associates. South Bucks and Chesham Green Belt Preferred Options Consultation December 2016 1 Page 3 of 45 Classification: OFFICIAL PORep1502 (REDACTED) Representations by Land and Partners Ltd re: Site 4.334, Fourells Paddock, Richings Park, Iver 1.0 THE PROMOTED SITE 1.1 Our promoted site is Fourells Paddock, Richings Park at Iver (Green Belt Study Part 2 Ref: 4.334). The site was nominated by way of a Call for Site submission/Regulation 18 consultation (Ref: 667 in the Council’s Summary of Responses – Volume 2 p365). Land and Partners Ltd are now the planning agent for the site. Appendix A contains an oblique aerial photograph. 1.2 The site overlaps with a wider parcel of land in the Green Belt Part 2 Assessment Ref: 1.30 (Area South of Richings Park (Along Richings Way). In the Buckinghamshire Green Belt Assessment Part 1 this wider parcel was identified as a Recommended Sub Area Ref: RSA-31 and the report contains some very strong wording by Arup on how little this RSA contributes to the Green Belt purposes. It specifically states that the RSA is ‘effectively enveloped within the non-Green Belt settlement of Richings Park’. The analysis describes its ‘strong relationship with the settlement edge’ and its ‘severance from the wider countryside’. 1.3 Site 4.334 is a rectangular strip of land in single ownership that covers 3.14 ha. The site is primarily in commercial/hobby use, with a cluster of buildings and hardstanding at the site entrance onto Richings Way and a group of stables on the eastern boundary. Most of the site comprises a number of small paddocks for grazing associated with the stables. The overall appearance and character of the site is ‘urban fringe’. A third of the site non- agricultural and the remaining two-thirds has potential for agriculture but has not been used to grow crops for some considerable time, if at all. 1.4 The site lies in a highly accessible location, close to Iver Rail Station. The station is currently served by local services operated by Great Western Railway and provides direct services to Reading (up 4 an hour) and London Paddington (up to 4 an hour). From December 2019 passengers will be able to travel right through central London on Elizabeth Line services without having to change trains. Overhead electric wires will be installed on the line in preparation for new, electric trains and extensive track and signaling work will improve reliability and increase capacity. 1.5 The station itself will benefit from a number of improvements in preparation for Elizabeth Line services, including a new information system, security systems and lifts. Therefore, it is in precisely the kind of location around a transport node into London that the forthcoming Housing White Paper is expected to favour for potential Green Belt release (as reference in various speeches and interviews by Communities Secretary Sajid Javid over the autumn period). South Bucks and Chesham Green Belt Preferred Options Consultation December 2016 2 Page 4 of 45 Classification: OFFICIAL PORep1502 (REDACTED) Representations by Land and Partners Ltd re: Site 4.334, Fourells Paddock, Richings Park, Iver 2.0 SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATION 2.1 The representation has three related aspects: 1. The emerging Plan strategy to displace significant amounts of growth out of the District to Aylesbury Vale; 2. A Green Belt assessment process that appears to have been devised to justify this displacement of strategic growth out of the District; and 3. The particular assessment of the promoted Green Belt Site 4.334 which does not fairly and accurately assess its development potential. 2.2 With regard to the assessment of the potential of the site for development, there are three main problems with the Council’s assessment, as set out in the Green Belt Preferred Options Consultation and draft technical work. Accessibility 2.3 Firstly, the accessibility of the site to a rail station has not been given sufficient weight. Option J of the Issues and Options consultation considered sustainable growth options in the Green Belt close to rail stations. However, the limitation in the Green Belt Review of just 400m radius around rail stations is grossly inadequate. The Council’s own Sustainability Appraisal quotes a distance of 1km. Within the assessment Sustainability Appraisal objective 9 it states the following: “For the purpose of this assessment, in line with Barton (Barton et al,2010), 400m is the recommended distance for travelling to a bus stop, and 1km is used for train stations. 800m is recommended the distance given by Barton for trams and it is assumed that people would travel further for a train station. 2.4 It is assumed that bus stops correspond with low magnitude as impact is likely to be short term, and at a local scale. Train stations are assumed to correspond with medium magnitude as impact is likely to be long term, and at a regional scale.” 2.5 We have commissioned a Sustainable Transport Review of the form of Technical Note by the multi-disciplinary consultants Mayer Brown. The 650m walking distance from the site to Iver rail station is considered to be in the acceptable category and very close to desirable. This demonstrates a fundamental weakness in the Council’s draft technical work; the areas of search based on rail stations has not been sufficient.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sustainability Appraisal for Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils
    Sustainability Appraisal for Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils Regulation 18 Green Belt Preferred Options September 2017 Sustainability Appraisal for Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils Regulation 18 – Green Belt Preferred Options LC-330 Document Control Box Client Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils Sustainability Appraisal of the Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan Report Title (Regulation 18) Green Belt Preferred Options Status Final Filename LC-330_SBucks_&_Chilterns_GB_SA_18_290917DS Date September 2017 Author DS Reviewed JE Approved ND Cover Photo: Looking East across option ‘National Epilepsy Centre, Chalfont St Peter’ © Lepus Consulting for Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils Chiltern and South Bucks SA Green Belt Preferred Options September 2017 LC-330_SBucks_&_Chilterns_GB_SA_18_290917DS.docx Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Purpose of this report ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 About the Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan 2014-2036 ............................................... 4 1.4 The Regulation 18 Consultation .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OFFICIAL Porep2372 (REDACTED) 7Th December 2016 Bc
    Classification: OFFICIAL PORep2372 (REDACTED) 7th December 2016 bc Planning Policy Team South Bucks District Council Neil Rowley Capswood E: Oxford Road DL: + Denham UB9 4LH Dear Sir or Madam, Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan - Green Belt Preferred Options Consultation Representation on behalf of Thorney Lane LLP for Land at Thorney Lane, Iver We write on behalf of our client, Thorney Lane LLP, the current landowner of the site at Thorney Lane, Iver. This site is Preferred Option 13 (‘Area North of Iver Station’). In short we support the proposed removal of Preferred Option 13 from the Green Belt. Please find enclosed: Completed comments form Transport Representations by JMP Masterplan by Savills Urban Design Studio Site Description The proposed site comprises the Thorney Business Park, and open land to the east and west. Thorney Business Park comprises a variety of business units, including larger scale industrial and waste processing uses. The entire site is located to the south of Iver and is approximately 52 ha in size. It is bound by the Grand Union Canal Slough Arm to the north, Thorney Lane and the M25 to the east, and the railway line to the south. To the west is an area of open farmland designated for waste management purposes and Mansion Lane Caravan Site. The immediately surrounding area is mixed in character, with farmland to the north west and south west, and Iver Golf Club to the west. Immediately to the north of the site is Ridgeway Trading Estate, and the residential area of Iver Village to the north of that.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 06/03/2019
    Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham, Buckinghamshire, UB9 4LH 01895 837236 [email protected] www.southbucks.gov.uk Planning Committee Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 4.15 pm Council Chamber, Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham A G E N D A Item 1. Evacuation Procedure 2. Apologies for Absence 3. Minutes (Pages 5 - 8) To approve the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 6 February 2019. 4. Declarations of Interest 5. Applications and Plans The files for each application are available for public inspection at the Council Offices. A. Committee decision required following a site visit and/or public speaking PL/18/3175/FA: 34 Syke Cluan, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9EH (Pages 9 - 20) 18/00426/FUL: 19 & 21 Bathurst Walk, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9AS (Pages 21 - 44) Chief Executive: Bob Smith Director of Resources: Jim Burness Director of Services: Steve Bambrick B. Committee decision required without a site visit or public speaking None. C. Committee observations required on applications to other Authorities None. D. To receive a list of applications already determined under delegated powers by the Head of Planning and Economic Development (Pages 45 - 82) For information 6. Planning Appeals and Schedule of Outstanding Matters (Pages 83 - 86) For information Note: All reports will be updated orally at the meeting if appropriate and may be supplemented by additional reports at the Chairman’s discretion. Membership: Planning Committee Councillors: R Bagge (Chairman) J Jordan (Vice-Chairman) D Anthony M Bezzant T Egleton B Gibbs
    [Show full text]
  • AP2 ES Report
    HIGH SPEED RAIL ȍǧ Ȏ Supplementary Environmental Statement and ͮ ͱ| Technical appendices ơǦ ͮͬͭͱ ͮͯǤͱǤͮ ͮȂͱ www.gov.uk/hs2 HIGH SPEED RAIL ȍǧ Ȏ Supplementary Environmental Statement and ͮ ͱ| Technical appendices ơǦ ͮͬͭͱ ͮͯǤͱǤͮ ȋ ͮȌ ȋȌ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ ȋ ͮȌǣ ȋ ͮȌǡ ǡ ͭͰͱ ͮǤ ǣͬͮͬͳ͵ͰͰͰ͵ͬʹ ǣ ̻͚ͮǤǤ ǣǤǤȀ͚ ̽ ȋ ͮȌǡͮͬͭͱǡ Ǥ ȋ ͮȌ Ǥ ͮǤ Ǥ ȋ ͮȌǤ ͳͱά ƤǤ Index Thistableshowsthetopicscoveredbythetechnicalappendicesinthisvolume,andthereference codesforthem. CFAnameandnumber Topic Code HeathrowExpressLangley Agriculture,forestryand HEXǦAGǦ001 soils Airquality HEXǦAQǦ001 CrossTopic HEXǦCTǦ001 Community HEXǦCMǦ001 Culturalheritage HEXǦCHǦ001 HEXǦCHǦ002 HEXǦCHǦ003 Ecology HEXǦECǦ001 LandQuality HEXǦLQǦ001 Landscapeandvisual HEXǦLVǦ001 assessment Sound,noiseandvibration HEXǦSVǦ001 HEXǦSVǦ002 HEXǦSVǦ003 SES and AP2 ES Appendix HEX-AG-001 Environmental topic: Agriculture, forestry AG and soils Appendix name: Data appendix 001 Community forum area: Heathrow Express HEx Depot, Langley i SES and AP2 ES Appendix HEX-AG-001 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Soils and agricultural land classification surveys 1 2.1 Background 1 2.2 Soils and land resources 2 2.3 Soil and land use interactions 2 3 Forestry 6 4 Assessment of effects on holdings 6 5 References 8 List of tables Table 1: Local agro-climatic conditions 3 Table 2: Area of woodland within a 2km study area of the proposed HEx depot 6 Table 3 : Summary of assessment of effected holding 6 List of figures Figure 1: ALC grade according to soil wetness (MAFF, 1988) 5 ii SES and AP2 ES Appendix HEX-AG-001 1 Introduction 1.1.1 The agriculture, forestry and soils appendix for the Supplementary Environmental Statement (SES) and the Additional Provision 2 Environmental Statement (AP2) Volume 4: off route effects comprises: soils and Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) surveys (Section 2); forestry (Section 3); and the assessment of effects on holdings (Section 4).
    [Show full text]
  • Transforming Rail Access to Heathrow Airport an Innovative, Privately Financed New Railway Expanding Train Connections Across London and Southern England
    HEATHROW SOUTHERN Investor and Partner RAILWAY Transforming Rail Access to Heathrow Airport An innovative, privately financed new railway expanding train connections across London and southern England RAIL NETWORK CONNECTS POSITIVE EFFECT ON MODAL SHIFT BENEFITS COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT TO RAIL A new orbital route from Fast, frequent trains from Reduces emissions by Transfers 3 million road Hampshire and Surrey to Surrey, Hampshire and 8,600 tonnes of CO2 and journeys per year to rail Old Oak Common and South West London to 2 tons of NOx per year London Paddington Heathrow Airport GLOBAL GROWTH AND DELIVERABLE AFFORDABLE AND COMPETITIVENESS REGENERATION 10 km of new railway VALUE FOR MONEY Linking the region’s Enabling people to reach mainly in tunnel, filling a User funded, privately businesses to inward the jobs at Heathrow by missing link in the existing financed at no cost to investment and export public transport network taxpayers, from 2028 opportunities About the project Improving access to Heathrow Airport by train is an important environmental objective. Far too many passengers have no alternative but to use car, contributing to congestion and poor, illegal air quality in the area. Currently Heathrow is not linked at all by train to Surrey, Hampshire or South and South Proposed route Map Key West London. We aim to change that with Our proposed route starts at Heathrow’s Terminal 5 our innovative scheme which would serve the station and is intended to run mainly in tunnel and Heathrow Southern Railway Proposed Rail Infrastructure following major markets: be electrified to minimise environmental impact. Existing Rail Infrastructure ■ Fast, frequent direct trains from Surrey and It rises to the surface to connect to the existing Hampshire to Heathrow.
    [Show full text]
  • Maidenhead Bridge Proposed Work
    W01-W05.Maidenhead 25/8/04 5:19 PM Page 1 W1.1 Maidenhead Bridge Proposed Work The Maidenhead Bridge over the River Thames at Maidenhead is a Grade II* listed structure. Installation of overhead electrification on top of the structure would be required. The design is being undertaken in conjunction with heritage specialists to help ensure that the impact on the structure is acceptable. Once installed, the gantries are likely to be visible on the bridge from viewpoints along the river and nearby. As an example, electrification for the Heathrow Express involved the provision of overhead electrification over Wharncliffe Viaduct in Ealing. Wharncliffe Viaduct Example of similar overhead electrification installations. Maidenhead Bridge www.crossrail.co.uk Helpdesk 0845 602 3813 Crossing the Capital Connecting the UK W01-W05.Maidenhead 25/8/04 5:19 PM Page 2 W2.1 Maidenhead Maidenhead Stabling & Turnback It is proposed that a stabling facility be provided for up I Operational noise from the use of the sidings to 6 Crossrail trains in the former goods yard to the I Dust impact on nearby buildings during west of Maidenhead station, immediately beyond the construction. Appropriate dust mitigation junction of the Bourne End Branch. techniques would be incorporated within the The proposals are to modify the track layout and train Crossrail Construction Code in order to reduce sidings at Maidenhead to enable Crossrail trains to be the risk of a dust nuisance being caused. The reversed with a new siding to be developed within the Construction Code would require the establishment existing Network Rail sidings.
    [Show full text]
  • Building-Infrastructure
    Consultation Point: Building-Infrastructure Person ID 1214611 Full Name Mrs Frances Reynolds ID 891 Order 233 Number 11.1 Title Building-Infrastructure Organisation Details Consultee Type - Please Individual/Resident select the type of consultee: Date Received - Date 2016-12-10 Received: Duty to Cooperate Body - Is No this organisation a Duty to Cooperate Body? Agent on behalf of - Consultee is an agent on behalf of: Person ID Full Name Organisation Details Plan-Level: Legally Compliant - Do you consider the Local Plan to be legally compliant/non-compliant. Legally compliant a - Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is/is not legally compliant, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Legally compliant b - Are you proposing a modification to make the Local Plan legally compliant and/or to strengthen its compliance? Legally compliant c - Please set out your suggested modification(s) below:You will need to say why this modification(s) will make the Local Plan legally compliant/strengthen its legal compliance. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Plan-Level: Soundness - Do you believe this plan meets the tests of Soundness? Soundness mods - Please give details of why you consider this Local Plan is/is not sound, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as 9 precise and succinct as possible. Soundness mods - Are you proposing any modifications to strengthen the Plan's ability meet the test of soundness? Policy 1a - Please specify how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail-And-Tube-Map.Pdf
    towards To Milton Keynes, towards Aylesbury Chesham Northampton, St Albans Abbey Rugby, Coventry towards and Birmingham Princes Risborough and Aylesbury Watford Amersham Junction Cockfosters Chalfont & Latimer 724 to London Oakwood Chorleywood Saunderton Rickmansworth Southgate Arnos Grove to London ycombe Bounds Green Wood Green High W Beaconsfield Turnpike Lane Manor House Gerrards Cross to London Seer Green & Jordans Denham Finsbury Park towards towards towards Denham Golf Club Arsenal 724 Ruislip Greenford Rayners Lane Ealing Broadway W Holloway Road Uxbridge est Ealing HarlingtonHayes & Caledonian Road Heathrow’s Rail Links Langley DraytonW Southall Hanwell MainlineActon est London Iver King’s Cross St Pancras Slough Paddington Burnham Russell Square Maidenhead T aplow UNDER Holborn towards 724 South Ealing CONSTRUCTION Stratford Boston Manor Northfields Ealing Common Covent Garden or Canary Hounslow HounslowCentral East A10 Leicester Square Wharf T Hounslow W wyford Osterley Piccadilly Circus Green Park Hatton Cross T HammersmithBaronsEarl’ CourtGloucesterSouth RoadKnightsbridgeKensingtonHyde Park Cnr. Acton urnham Green* s Court Reading est Town towards Bristol, Brentford Leamington Spa, Kew Bridge The Cotswolds Syon Lane RA1 RA1 Chiswick and South Wales Isleworth London Barnes Bridge V Waterloo LHR Hounslow auxhall Reading West Queenstown Road Windsor & Eton Clapham Junction RA2 285 St MargaretsRichmondNorth SheenMortlake Barnes Putney W Datchet andsworth Riverside 490 T Sunnymedesraysbury wickenham Earley W Whitton towards Newbury,
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Access: Heathrow Airport Hub Station Option FINAL for CONSULTATION AIRPORTS COMMISSION
    Appraisal Framework Module 4. Surface Access: Heathrow Airport Hub Station Option FINAL FOR CONSULTATION AIRPORTS COMMISSION 28th October 2014 Appraisal Framework Module 4. Surface Access: Heathrow Airport Hub Station Option Document Control Sheet Project: Appraisal Framework Module 4. Client: Airports Commission Document title: Surface Access: Heathrow Airport Hub Station Option Project No: B1988000 Originated by Checked by Reviewed by NAME NAME NAME ORIGINAL Richard Hibbert Stephen Rutherford Stephen Rutherford Rajat Bose NAME As Project Manager I confirm that the above INITIALS document(s) have been subjected to Jacobs’ Approved by Check and Review procedure and that I approve Stephen Rutherford them for issue DATE July 2014 Document status: DRAFT Originated by Checked by Reviewed by NAME NAME NAME Revision 1 Jon Hale Stephen Rutherford Stephen Rutherford NAME As Project Manager I confirm that the above INITIALS document(s) have been subjected to Jacobs’ Approved by Check and Review procedure and that I approve Stephen Rutherford them for issue DATE October 2014 Document status : FINAL Jacobs U.K. Limited This document has been prepared by a division, subsidiary or affiliate of Jacobs U.K. Limited (“Jacobs”) in its professional capacity as consultants in accordance with the terms and conditions of Jacobs’ contract with the commissioning party (the “Client”). Regard should be had to those terms and conditions when considering and/or placing any reliance on this document. No part of this document may be copied or reproduced by any means without prior written permission from Jacobs. If you have received this document in error, please destroy all copies in your possession or control and notify Jacobs.
    [Show full text]
  • Autumn/Winter 2018/19 MOVING YOUR EXPECTATIONS Expert Residential and Commercial Conveyancing
    INSPIREThe Oakwood Estates Property Magazine Autumn/Winter 2018/19 MOVING YOUR EXPECTATIONS Expert Residential and Commercial Conveyancing. Pure Property Law began in 2010 when the founders, Nadine Blacklock and Donna Spence, formed a partnership which is established on delivering an exceptional level of service with fees which are both What sets us apart: transparent and fair. The partners’ values permeate our business which has evolved, largely through repeat business and word-of-mouth • Online case tracking and phone app recommendations, into a thriving practice with offices in the heart of Ascot, Berkshire. • SMS updates at key stages • Use of the most up to date technology reducing Nadine & Donna are vastly experienced Solicitors who work closely with their attentive assistants, combining their resources of talent to provide transaction time their respective clients with an efficient and friendly service. Whether you have moved several times or are buying your first home, they will aim to • Our proven track record at delivering excellent make your experience with them a pleasurable one. Building lasting levels of service and client care since 2010 relationships with our clients is fundamental to our success, and the positive reviews we receive are testimony to our ability to meet or exceed • Our system of allocating you one dedicated expectations. Solicitor who will look after you throughout the Our dedicated teams of professionals cover all aspects of both Residential transaction and Commercial Conveyancing; from the purchase of a leasehold studio apartment to the sale of a Family Seat; from the sale of a small retail • Our experienced Solicitors and team members premises to the purchase of an industrial factory, our expertise is at your disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 05/12/2018 16:15
    Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham, Buckinghamshire, UB9 4LH 01895 837236 [email protected] www.southbucks.gov.uk Planning Committee Wednesday, 5 December 2018 at 4.15 pm Council Chamber, Capswood, Oxford Road, Denham A G E N D A Item 1. Evacuation Procedure 2. Apologies for Absence 3. Minutes (Pages 5 - 12) To approve the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 7 November 2018 4. Declarations of Interest 5. Applications and Plans The files for each application are available for public inspection at the Council Offices. A. Committee decision required following a site visit and/or public speaking 18/00426/FUL 19 & 21 Bathurst Walk, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9AS (Pages 13 - 28) PL/18/3057/FA Land To Rear Of 1 and 3 St James Walk, Iver, Buckinghamshire, SL0 9EN (Pages 29 - 40) Chief Executive: Bob Smith Director of Resources: Jim Burness Director of Services: Steve Bambrick B. Committee decision required without a site visit or public speaking None. C. Committee observations required on applications to other Authorities None. D. To receive a list of applications already determined under delegated powers by the Head of Planning and Economic Development (Pages 41 - 74) For information 6. Planning Appeals and Schedule of Outstanding Matters (Pages 75 - 78) For information Note: All reports will be updated orally at the meeting if appropriate and may be supplemented by additional reports at the Chairman’s discretion. Membership: Planning Committee Councillors: R Bagge (Chairman) J Jordan (Vice-Chairman) D Anthony M Bezzant T
    [Show full text]
  • Heathrow and High Speed Rail
    HEATHROW AND HIGH SPEED RAIL The Transportation Case Against Airport Expansion A study by Colin Elliff BSc CEng MICE 1/144 Author’s Foreword The impact of transport on the environment is huge. Aside from more local issues of noise and pollution, it is one of the principal contributors to global warming. Transport is responsible for over 25% of world CO2 production, whether emitted from jet engine flume, from vehicle exhaust pipe, or from power station chimney (in the case of electrified railways). Further emissions come from the kilns and furnaces that create the cement and steel necessary to build the infrastructure on which the planes, lorries, cars and trains will move. The link between global warming and the rising levels of atmospheric CO2 is now commonly accepted. Indeed, the catastrophic consequences of global warming are taken so seriously that Government has committed to an 80% cut in emissions by 2050, in the recent Climate Change Act. What is less well understood is the equally direct historic link between CO2 emissions, energy use and economic prosperity. The challenge of maintaining the standards of living that we all enjoy, whilst achieving the necessary reductions in CO2 emissions, is extreme and unprecedented. It will only be met through a radical re-examination of all aspects of the way in which we live, work – and travel. Yet the argument for the proposed third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow Airport is principally economic, paying little attention to environmental issues. It is based on the perceived threat posed to national prosperity by the severe congestion on the existing two runways; and expansion has been advanced as the only viable solution.
    [Show full text]