|
 |
|
|
|
|
Thames Valley Chamber Response to Berkshire Draft Structure Plan
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
The Thames Valley Chamber has offices in Bracknell, Reading. Slough, Wokingham and Newbury. The main focus of the Chambers response is to ensure that the economic prosperity of Berkshire is protected and enhanced through the delivery of the structure plan. Our main areas of comment focus on development, employment and transport. We also comment in particular on the environment and housing.
We support a balanced approach to the development of Berkshire and recognise the role of the structure plan in attempting to mediate between a range of sometimes conflicting views.
Overall we are concerned that the plan appears to adopt an unrealistic approach to transport management. The focus appears heavily biased towards alternative forms of transport and does not adequately address the requirement to improve the road and rail network. The Chamber does not believe that this issue will go away and needs to be clearly reflected in the plan.
DEVELOPMENT
Sustainable development is recognised throughout the plan as the most appropriate option for Berkshire. The Chamber supports the concept of sustainability but requires that full appreciation be given to the employment and job creation aspects of the policy. We are concerned that the focus on public transport as a prerequisite for development takes a simplistic view of the issue. Private car transport will remain the predominant form of transport and it cannot be wished away.
Policy DP1 We support current settlement areas as main development locations
Policy DP3 We are keen to see that any identification of green belt includes provision for low quality green belt. The green belt should be a means to an end not an end in itself.
Policy DP8 We support the development of the rural community. This will require land and planning to diversify. It may also generate increased transport. This circle needs to be recognised and squared.
ENVIRONMENT
HOUSING
Policy H1 We recognise the plan figure of 40,740 new dwellings We are concerned about the Berkshires economies ability to grow and compete should the labour market be constrained via lack of housing provision.
Policy H2 The Chamber has no strong view over the technical distribution of homes throughout Berkshire. Our concern is simply that sufficient homes are available for the projected population and that travel to work patterns are realistic. We also wish to be assured that unrealistic transport projections (as noted over public transport usage) will not constraint development
Policy H3 We generally support the use of previously developed urban land as a first choice.
Policy H4 We are unsure if the approach set out in the plan will release sufficient land and we expect the plan to be flexible enough to accommodate development in other areas should the need be proven.
Policy H5 We support the need for local housing needs assessments and the requirement of LA’s, especially Reading, West Berks and Wokingham to work together to tackle housing issues.
EMPLOYMENT
Employment opportunities are the life blood of the Berkshire economy. We expect LA’s to produce strategies to overcome congestion and land shortages were they are constraining economic growth. We are concerned about employment development being controlled / constrained through inadequate public transport. Economic development takes many forms and people need to access their workplace by motor vehicle. This fact should be more adequately recognised in the plan.
Policy E1 We recognise the desire to locate office development in Bracknell, Maidenhead, Newbury, Reading, Slough, Windso and Wokingham
Policy E2 We recognise the conflict which exists between economic development, transport, housing and labour supply and suggest that a light and constructive touch is required from LA’s. A balance needs to be struck and we favour more rather than less economic development as the best way to deliver a high quality economic, social and environmental area.
Policy E3 We support provision for the development of SME’s via a variety of flexible accommodation. The plan recognises the importance of local home grown business being able to expand.
SHOPPING & LEISURE
Policy S1 Concentrates retail / leisure in town centres
Policy S2 Control out of town retail development
Policy S3 Control out of town leisure development
Schedule 1 Shopping Centres
Bracknell Requires redevelopment and regeneration. The town has fallen behind competition and action is required to improve shopping.
Newbury Support ongoing development within market town environment. Business feels threatened by developments in Reading and elsewhere and town must maintain competitive nature.
Reading Major development over last few years has created a dynamic town centre. However, within areas of prosperity exist sectors of deprivation. The rail station area, Friar Street, Garrard Street and are prime examples for redevelopment.
Slough continues to face competition from London and requires on-going development. The Heart of Slough project offers the potential to regenerate the town centre area.
Wokingham Development and growth required to capitalise on market town status.
TRANSPORT
We recognise that final decisions on a transport strategy await the outcome of a range of independent studies. We welcome the recognition that this area has been underfunded over many years in particular the road network, bottlenecks at Didcot and Reading stations and difficulties with public transport bus services, including the evening economy. We support the comments about improving public transport and support the development of alternative methods of travel.
However, public transport must be vastly improved before measures are taken to curtail car travel. It is not acceptable to the Chamber that car travel, including parking, is restricted without adequate alternative provision. It concerns us that the economic wellbeing of the area could be put at a disadvantage by the inappropriate restriction of motor vehicles, especially in the absence of appropriate alternative forms of transport. The comment at para 9.38 on this approach is welcome. Key developments at Heathrow and the London International Freight Exchange demand that Berkshire transport is improved
We are concerned about the parking comments noted in the Minority Report. The restrictions recommended by Slough BC in particular are not acceptable to the Chamber. We realise that a balance must be struck but we refer you to RPG9 that highlights the necessity for appropriate public transport.
Policy T1 We support the promotion of alternative forms of transport but not at the expense of the motor vehicle (see above)
Policy T2 We support investment in public transport including the suggested East – West Rail Link to London and beyond; improved links to Heathrow and development of transport interchange at Reading
Policy T3 We support the concept of a Primary Route Network and agree with the routes identified (A34/M4 Jct 13; M25 widening at Jct12-15; M25 Heathrow T5 access; A33 South Reading / M4 Jct 11 improvements and A322 between A30 and A332)
Policy T4 We support the safeguarding of land for a cross Thames Bridge. We urge the structure plan to state the desirability of such a crossing.
Policy T6 We are concerned that restrictions are placed on parking without
alternative travel is available to business users. We do not support increased restriction on business premises parking. There is no justification for such measures given the current and foreseeable inadequate nature of public transport. We remain to be convinced that improvements will be forthcoming.
Policy T7 We support the provision of park and ride and highlight the fact that PPG9 amended by PPG13 enables sites to be developed within the Green belt. To often protection of the Green belt has been used as an excuse for much needed development.
MINERALS
No comment.
WASTE
No comment
Bill McCardle
Policy
Thames Valley Group of Chambers
Commerce House
Bath Road
Slough Berks SL1 3SB
Tel 01753 870582 or mobile 07768 660697
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
