Wycombe - Chapter 9

Back to Top

Safeguarded Land

9.05 It is Government policy that Green Belts are permanent and that their boundaries mark the long-term extent of development of the towns they surround. PPG2 states that local planning authorities ‘should satisfy themselves that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be altered at the end of the plan period. In some cases this will mean safeguarding land between the urban area and the Green Belt which may be required to meet longer term development needs’.

9.06 In accordance with the County Structure Plan, no major alterations to the Green Belt boundaries within Wycombe District are proposed during the Plan period. Equally, the District Council is aware that a variety of land use requirements, as yet unquantifiable, may need to be satisfied in the long term, if its social and economic objectives for the District are to be met. In the context of Government policy and local aspirations, therefore, this Local Plan rolls forward the principle of and policy for Safeguarded Land (formerly known as Areas of Special Restraint, or ASRs), which were first established in the adopted High Wycombe Area Local Plan 1989, and continued in the adopted Wycombe District Local Plan (July 1995). Under the Safeguarded Land policy, non-Green Belt sites at the edge of High Wycombe and adjacent settlements are identified to function as a long- term land bank which may be required to meet longer term development needs. They are not allocated for any specific purpose, but could, if released, be used for a wide variety of developments including housing, leisure and commerce depending on which needs become evident through monitoring and other studies and subject to site-specific environmental constraints and requirements, and infrastructure requirements.

9.07 One of the ASRs designated in the 1995 Local Plan is being put forward for development in the Local Plan period to 2011. Terriers Farm is designated for development in Policy H2. The remaining ASRs are not needed for development during this period, and are to be retained as Safeguarded Land to allow for any identified future development needs to be met.

9.08 The areas of Safeguarded Land designated in this Local Plan are shown on the Proposals Map, and listed below:

Grange Farm (within AONB)
Abbey Barn North
Gomm Valley
Lane End Road (within AONB)
Slate Meadow
Abbey Barn South

9.09 They have all been thoroughly reviewed, and, whilst under current circumstances some present obstacles to development in the short term (primarily as a result of the degree to which development would conflict with the aims of the Council’s transport strategy), the Council is satisfied that all are capable of development in the long term. The Council acknowledges that the development of those areas of Safeguarded Land within the AONB can only be justified where such development is in the national interest, and there are no alternative sites.

9.10 Any future release of this land, or review of its designation, would be made through a review or alteration to this Local Plan subject to normal statutory procedures, and within the context of Structure Plan policy, which is itself subject to the emerging regional policy framework.

POLICY GB1

UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THOSE AREAS DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP AS SAFEGUARDED LAND MAY BE ALLOCATED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN A REVIEW OF, OR ALTERATION TO THIS PLAN, THERE WILL BE A PRESUMPTION AGAINST ANY FORMS OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD PREJUDICE THE FUTURE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE AREAS. WHERE DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PERMITTED, IT MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE CRITERIA OF POLICY GB2, AND RETAIN THE OPEN CHARACTER AND AMENITIES OF THE GREEN BELT.

Back to Top

Development in the Green Belt

9.11 As stated in paragraph 9.02 above, there is a general presumption against inappropriate development in the Green Belt. There is therefore little scope for new building in the Green Belt. Only certain essential or appropriate uses may be permitted, unless very special circumstances can be demonstrated where the harm to the Green Belt is clearly outweighed by other considerations. The fact that development would not be particularly noticeable is not a justification for permitting inappropriate development as the cumulative effects of incremental development can alter the open character of the Green Belt.

9.12 The categories of development which are appropriate to a Green Belt are specified in PPG2 (some of these categories are outside the scope of this Plan, and are dealt with elsewhere: mineral extraction, for example, is addressed instead in the County Council’s Minerals Local Plan). The construction of essential new buildings for the purposes of agriculture and forestry is normally appropriate development within Green Belts. Limited infilling within identified built-up areas is acceptable where it meets the criteria of Policy GB2. Limited affordable housing for local community needs may be permissible where the criteria of Policy H14 are met. It is recognised that the countryside provides opportunities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation and essential facilities for these and other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt, such as cemeteries, may be acceptable (outdoor sport and recreation facilities are also addressed in Policy RT5). In the particular circumstances specified in PPG2 (as revised in March 2001) Park and Ride schemes may be acceptable in the Green Belt and any proposals would also be tested against Policy T15.

9.13 Other appropriate development may include the limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings, as set out in Policies GB5 and GB6, or the limited infilling and redevelopment of existing major developed sites, as addressed in Policies GB9 to GB10.

9.14 Policy GB2 sets out the broad types of development which are appropriate in the Green Belt. The fact that a proposal may be acceptable in principle in the Green Belt does not necessarily mean that it will be acceptable in terms of the other policies in this plan, particularly those aiming to protect landscape character. Any development permitted within the Green Belt, whether appropriate, or inappropriate but justified by very special circumstances, must respect the openness of the Green Belt, and be seen to further the land use objectives of Green Belt, as set out in PPG2, as far as possible.

POLICY GB2

1. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GREEN BELT ARE DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP.

2. WITHIN THE GREEN BELT DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED, UNLESS THERE ARE VERY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN:

a. AGRICULTURE OR FORESTRY;

b. ESSENTIAL FACILITIES FOR OUTDOOR SPORT AND OUTDOOR RECREATION;

c. IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES, LIMITED AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LOCAL COMMUNITY NEEDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY H14;

d. CEMETERIES;

e. DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES GB4 TO GB10 OF THIS LOCAL PLAN; OR (f) PARK AND RIDE SCHEMES MEETING THE TESTS SET OUT IN PPG2 (AS REVISED IN MARCH 2001).

3. IN ALL CASES DEVELOPMENT IS SUBJECT TO OTHER APPROPRIATE POLICIES IN THIS LOCAL PLAN AND MUST RETAIN THE OPEN CHARACTER AND RURAL AMENITIES OF THE GREEN BELT AND RESPECT ITS VISUAL AMENITIES.

Back to Top

~~Development Adjoining the Green Belt~~

9.15 It is not just development within the Green Belt that needs to be controlled. Visual amenity is an important quality of Green Belts, and can be adversely affected by development within or visible from the Green Belt which is inappropriately sited or designed, or is constructed of inappropriate materials. The District Council will seek to ensure that the visual amenity of the Green Belt within the District is protected.

POLICY GB3

DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS OUTSIDE THE GREEN BELT, BUT CONSPICUOUS FROM WITHIN IT, WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WHERE THE VISUAL AMENITIES OF THE GREEN BELT WOULD BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.

Back to Top

Built-up Areas Within the Green Belt

9.16 The ‘built-up areas within the Green Belt’ comprise the substantially built-up cores of the following rural settlements within and ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt:

Beacons Bottom/Studley Green
Bledlow Ridge
Bovingdon Green
Claymoor/Clayhill
Cryers Hill
Hughenden Valley
Lacey Green/Loosley Row
Little Marlow
Piddington
Speen
West Wycombe

The density of some of these settlements decreases towards the edges; in such cases the boundary of the built-up area in the Green Belt excludes areas of land which are in residential use but are less tightly knit in character.

9.17 Within these built-up areas strictly limited types or amounts of development can normally be accommodated without harming the overall character of the Green Belt. Very limited infilling by residential development or buildings for services for the local community, such as a doctor’s surgery or local shop, is considered appropriate under Policy GB4. Changes of use of existing buildings which would not have an adverse effect on the open character or rural amenities of the Green Belt are acceptable subject to compliance with other policies in this Local Plan.

9.18 Within the built-up areas in the Green Belt, proposals for extensions to dwellings and replacement dwellings are not as strictly controlled as those in the remainder of the Green Belt, due to the ability of these areas to accommodate some infilling. Although the impact on the Green Belt’s openness and visual amenity will still be carefully assessed, proposals for residential extensions within the built-up areas will be considered against Policy H17 rather than GB6, whilst proposals for replacement dwellings will be considered against the other relevant policies of this Plan.

9.19 Other rural settlements are not defined as built- up areas in the Green Belt because they are small, loose-knit or do not dominate their rural surroundings. Within these settlements, and within those parts of the settlements listed above which are not defined as built-up areas within the Green Belt, development will be controlled in the same manner as in the rest of the Green Belt, as infilling or other inappropriate development is liable to be detrimental to the open character and rural amenities of the Green Belt, particularly when its cumulative impact is taken into account.

POLICY GB4

1. THE BUILT-UP AREAS WITHIN THE GREEN BELT ARE IDENTIFIED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP. WITHIN THESE AREAS, SUBJECT TO OTHER APPROPRIATE POLICIES IN THIS PLAN, PERMISSION WILL ONLY BE GIVEN FOR THE FOLLOWING:

a. DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATE IN THE GREEN BELT;

b. CHANGES OF USE OF EXISTING BUILDINGS WHICH WOULD HAVE NO ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE OPEN CHARACTER OR RURAL AMENITIES OF THE GREEN BELT AND THE BUILT UP AREA IN WHICH IT IS LOCATED;

c. VERY LIMITED INFILLING, WHERE INFILLING IS DEFINED AS BUILDING ON UNDEVELOPED LAND WITHIN THE BUILT-UP AREA AND REPRESENTS THE CLOSING OF AN EXISTING SMALL GAP IN AN OTHERWISE BUILT-UP FRONTAGE. INFILL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE OF A SCALE AND FORM COMPARABLE TO THE ADJOINING DEVELOPMENT AND MUST NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA;

d. EXTENSIONS TO DWELLINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY H17 OF THIS LOCAL PLAN, PROVIDED THAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD NOT HARM THE OPEN CHARACTER OF THE GREEN BELT; AND

e. REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH OTHER POLICIES OF THIS PLAN, PROVIDED THAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD NOT HARM THE OPEN CHARACTER OF THE GREEN BELT.

Back to Top

Replacement Dwellings in the Green Belt

9.20 The replacement of dwellings within the Green Belt is not inappropriate development as long as the new dwelling is not materially larger than the dwelling it replaces. Permission will therefore only be granted for replacement dwellings where the floor area of the proposal is not greater than 150% of that of the original dwelling or is not greater than that of the present floor area in cases where the original building has already been extended by 50% or more. Exceptions to this approach will apply in the case of very small or very large dwellings, where minimum and maximum sizes, respectively, will be applied.

9.21 The only other exceptions are likely to be within ribbons of development which create substantially built-up frontages, where, because the existing dwelling is relatively small in comparison with adjoining dwellings, its replacement by a new dwelling of more than 150% may be permitted. However, in such areas it is not remarkable to find buildings of radically different styles and sizes within the same frontage and this policy will not be applied so as to permit all buildings in such frontages to be replaced up to the size of the largest, as that could seriously undermine the function and purpose of Green Belts.

9.22 The District Council expects good quality in the design of any sort of development, but in addition expects development in sensitive areas to take due account of its surroundings. Consequently, replacement dwellings which are so designed that they would appear disproportionately large when compared to the original dwelling will not be permitted even if they would otherwise comply with Policy GB5 on the basis of floorspace.

9.23 For the purposes of this policy and Policy GB6, the ‘original dwelling’ is defined as the building which existed on the site on 1 July 1948, or, if the site was not developed at the time, the first building to be built on the site after this date, even if that building has since been replaced, or was not in residential use at that time. In assessing the amount by which the existing building has been extended, any extension which has been added to the original building shall be taken as comprising increased floorspace, irrespective of whether it was constructed with the benefit of planning permission, or did not require it. Garages and other ‘outbuildings’ which are attached to the dwelling will also be included in floorspace calculations. Where habitable floorspace has been previously created in the roofspace, either through the grant of planning permission or as permitted development, or such accommodation is proposed to be created, the floorspace will be included in the floorspace calculations only where it is lit by dormer windows or where other alterations were or will be made to change the shape or volume of the roof.

9.24 Further guidance on appropriate residential development in the Green Belt is contained in Appendix 1.

POLICY GB5

1. IN THE GREEN BELT REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WHERE THEY WOULD BE:

a. GREATER IN SIZE THAN THE GROSS FLOORSPACE OF THE ORIGINAL DWELLING PLUS EITHER 50%, OR 120 SQUARE METRES, WHICHEVER IS THE SMALLER; OR

b. GREATER THAN THE GROSS FLOORSPACE OF THE DWELLING WHICH IS BEING REPLACED, WHERE THE EXISTING BUILDING HAS ALREADY BEEN EXTENDED BY 50% OR MORE.

2. PROPOSALS FOR REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS WHICH EXCEED THE LIMITS SET OUT ABOVE MAY BE PERMITTED WHERE:

a. THE DWELLING IS IN A RIBBON OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES A SUBSTANTIALLY BUILT UP FRONTAGE AND THE RESULTANT DWELLING WOULD OTHERWISE BE RELATIVELY SMALL COMPARED TO OTHER DWELLINGS IN THE FRONTAGE; OR

b. ADDITIONAL FLOORSPACE IS PROVIDED WITHIN THE ROOFSPACE OF A REPLACEMENT DWELLING WHICH CONTAINS NO DORMER WINDOWS, AND IS NO LARGER THAN NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A SATISFACTORILY DESIGNED ROOF TO THAT DWELLING.

c. THE FLOORSPACE OF THE RESULTANT BUILDING IS LESS THAN 120 SQUARE METRES.

3. WHERE A REPLACEMENT DWELLING IS PERMITTED, IT MUST RESPECT THE OPEN CHARACTER OF THE GREEN BELT, AND SHOULD THEREFORE NOT APPEAR TO BE DISPROPORTIONATELY LARGE IN RELATION TO THE ORIGINAL DWELLING.

Back to Top

Extensions to Dwellings in the Green Belt

9.25 PPG2 states that limited extensions to dwellings in the Green Belt are not inappropriate, provided that they do not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building. The Council has therefore adopted a floorspace threshold of 50% to be used in determining whether or not a proposed extension is disproportionate in size. However, this is not the only test, and extensions which, because of their scale, bulk or design, are considered disproportionately large in relation to the original dwelling will be opposed, even if they do not exceed this 50% limit. Exceptions to this approach will apply in the case of very small or very large dwellings, where minimum and maximum sizes, respectively, will be applied.

9.26 The only other exceptions to the 50% limit are likely to be within ribbons of development which create a substantially built-up frontage, outside the built-up areas defined in Policy GB4, where, because the existing dwelling is relatively small in comparison with adjoining dwellings, the impact of an extension greater than 50% will be unlikely to harm the open character of the Green Belt. Notwithstanding this potential exception to the application of the 50% limit, Policy GB6 will not be applied so as to permit all buildings in such frontages to be extended up to the size of the largest, for the reasons set out in paragraph 9.21, above.

9.27 In all cases, the District Council will expect extensions in the Green Belt to respect its character and openness, and proposals that appear inappropriately large in relationship to the original dwelling, and thereby harm the Green Belt, will not be permitted.

9.28 In addition to the definitions and floorspace guidelines set out in paragraph 9.23, above, proposals for extensions which involve the demolition of part of the existing building will be credited with the demolished floorspace.

9.29 Further guidance on appropriate residential development in the Green Belt is contained in Appendix 1.

POLICY GB6

1. IN THE GREEN BELT, EXTENSIONS TO DWELLINGS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WHERE THEY WOULD:

a. RESULT IN THE GROSS FLOORSPACE OF THE ORIGINAL DWELLING BEING INCREASED BY MORE THAN 50% UNLESS THE FLOORSPACE OF THE RESULTANT BUILDING IS LESS THAN 120 SQUARE METRES;

b. RESULT IN THE TOTAL FLOORSPACE OF ALL EXTENSIONS TO THE ORIGINAL DWELLING HAVING A GROSS FLOORSPACE OF MORE THAN 120 SQUARE METRES; OR

c. BE TANTAMOUNT TO THE CREATION OF A NEW DWELLING; OR

d. BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.

2. PROPOSALS TO EXTEND DWELLINGS WHICH EXCEED THE LIMIT SET OUT IN CRITERIA (a) AND (b) ABOVE MAY BE PERMITTED WHERE:

a. THE DWELLING IS IN A RIBBON OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES A SUBSTANTIALLY BUILT UP FRONTAGE AND THE RESULTANT DWELLING WOULD OTHERWISE BE RELATIVELY SMALL COMPARED TO OTHER DWELLINGS IN THE FRONTAGE; OR

b. THE ADDITIONAL FLOORSPACE IS PROVIDED SOLELY WITHIN THE EXISTING ROOFSPACE OF THE DWELLING AND NO ALTERATION TO THE ROOFSLOPES (INCLUDING DORMER WINDOWS OR RAISING OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROOF) IS PROPOSED, OTHER THAN THE INSERTION OF ROOFLIGHTS; OR

c. ADDITIONAL FLOORSPACE IS PROVIDED WITHIN THE ROOFSPACE OF AN EXTENSION WHICH CONTAINS NO DORMER WINDOWS, AND IS NO LARGER THAN NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A SATISFACTORILY DESIGNED ROOF TO THAT EXTENSION.

3. WHERE AN EXTENSION IS PERMITTED, IT MUST RESPECT THE OPEN CHARACTER OF THE GREEN BELT, AND SHOULD THEREFORE NOT APPEAR TO BE DISPROPORTIONATELY LARGE IN RELATION TO THE ORIGINAL DWELLING.

Back to Top

Detached Outbuildings

9.30 Ancillary buildings and structures such as garages, swimming pool enclosures, tennis court fences and stables can have similar adverse effects on the Green Belt to those of large house extensions, especially where their effects are considered cumulatively. The District Council therefore wishes to guard against proposals for new or extended ancillary buildings which are liable to result in a more built-up character and appearance in the Green Belt. Proposals should generally be of a scale subordinate to the main dwelling. Since the construction of detached outbuildings to dwellings can have a significant impact on the Green Belt, they should be considered in addition to the dwellings themselves. This policy should be read in conjunction with Policy H17.

POLICY GB7

1. DEVELOPMENT WITHIN RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGES IN THE GREEN BELT WHICH WOULD CONSTITUTE AN INTRUSION INTO THE OPEN CHARACTER OR RURAL AMENITIES OF THE AREA, BY VIRTUE OF ITS SCALE OR DESIGN, WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.

2. PERMISSION WILL NOT BE GRANTED WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE SIZE OF THE ORIGINAL DWELLING, HAVING REGARD TO ANY PREVIOUS EXTENSIONS TO THE DWELLING OR PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED OR EXTENDED OUTBUILDINGS.

Back to Top

~~Re-use and Adaptation of Buildings in the Green Belt~~

9.31 Policies C2, C7 and C8 set out the criteria for assessing proposals for the re-use and adaptation of buildings in the countryside, and these also apply to proposals in the Green Belt, with some additional considerations. These extra considerations are set out in Policy GB8, which should be read in conjunction with the countryside policies identified above.

9.32 Although development in the Green Belt is strictly controlled, the appropriate re-use of buildings should not prejudice its openness, since the buildings are already there. New building associated with the re-used building will not normally be permitted. Extensions to re-used buildings, and any associated use of land, will be strictly controlled in order to preserve the character and openness of the Green Belt.

POLICY GB8

1. PROPOSALS FOR THE RE-USE AND ADAPTATION OF BUILDINGS IN THE GREEN BELT WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED WHERE THE PROPOSAL COMPLIES WITH THE CRITERIA IN POLICIES C7 AND C8, AND DOES NOT HAVE A MATERIALLY GREATER IMPACT THAN THE PRESENT USE ON THE OPENNESS OF THE GREEN BELT.

2. PROPOSALS FOR EXTENSIONS MUST COMPLY WITH THE APPROPRIATE CRITERIA OF POLICY C8 AND ALL OTHER APPROPRIATE POLICIES IN THIS LOCAL PLAN.

3. EXTENSIONS TO RE-USED BUILDINGS AND ANY ASSOCIATED USES OF LAND WILL BE STRICTLY CONTROLLED AND WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE CHARACTER AND OPENNESS OF THE GREEN BELT REMAINS UNCOMPROMISED AND FULLY PROTECTED.

Back to Top

Major Developed Sites within the Green Belt

9.33 National Green Belt policy, as set out in PPG2, recognises the existence of major developed sites within the Green Belt, both redundant and in continuing use, and makes provision for their appropriate management in the interests of environmental improvement or economic benefit. Although such sites remain subject to the general Green Belt policies of restraint, PPG2 permits some infilling or redevelopment.

9.34 Limited infilling at those major developed sites in continuing use can support a valuable economic activity without requiring any further intrusion into or impact on the Green Belt. To achieve this, the development permitted must be of an appropriate scale, and be located carefully within the developed part of the site, in order to avoid compromising the purposes of Green Belt designation.

9.35 The complete or partial redevelopment of major developed sites, whether redundant or in continuing use, may provide an opportunity to enhance the site, through the removal or relocation of buildings, and the better integration of the new development with its surroundings.

9.36 Proposals for redevelopment should ideally reduce the impact of the site on the openness of the Green Belt, and certainly not increase it. The redevelopment should not occupy a larger area of the site than the existing buildings, unless this would achieve a reduction in height which would benefit visual amenity. Opportunities to improve landscapes, nature conservation interests and access to the site should be maximised, and the proposals considered within the context of the whole site, in order to ensure that the redevelopment scheme is comprehensive and sensitive to its surroundings. Proposals for the redevelopment of employment sites should ensure that the site remains in employment use (as defined in the Employment Chapter), in accordance with the employment policies of this plan.

9.37 The major developed sites identified in Wycombe District, and to which Policy GB9 applies, are set out below:

Molins, Saunderton
Janssen - Cilag, Saunderton
Wycliffe Centre, Horsleys Green
RAF High Wycombe, Walter’s Ash
Little Marlow Sewage Works
Wycombe Air Park
Wycombe West School, Downley
Uplands Conference Centre, Four Ashes
Pipers Corner School, Great Kingshill
Binders Yard, Cryers Hill
Amersham & Wycombe College, Flackwell Heath

The sites are identified on the Proposals Map.

POLICY GB9

1. WITHIN THE MAJOR DEVELOPED SITES IDENTIFIED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, PLANNING PERMISSION FOR INFILLING (WHERE INFILL IS DEFINED AS THE FILLING OF SMALL GAPS BETWEEN BUILT DEVELOPMENT) OR COMPLETE OR PARTIAL REDEVELOPMENT WILL ONLY BE GRANTED WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:

a. HAS NO GREATER IMPACT ON THE OPENNESS AND RURAL AMENITY OF THE GREEN BELT THAN THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT;

b. RESPECTS THE CHARACTER AND SCALE OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, WHERE THIS IS TO BE RETAINED IN WHOLE OR IN PART;

c. DOES NOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING BUILDINGS; AND

d. IN THE CASE OF INFILL PROPOSALS, DOES NOT LEAD TO A MAJOR INCREASE IN THE DEVELOPED PROPORTION OF THE SITE.

2. IN ADDITION, PROPOSALS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF MAJOR DEVELOPED SITES SHOULD:

a. BE PUT FORWARD IN THE CONTEXT OF COMPREHENSIVE, LONG-TERM PLANS FOR THE SITE AS A WHOLE;

b. ENSURE THAT THE CHARACTER AND LAYOUT OF THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT RESPECTS THE EXISTING CHARACTER AND SETTING OF THE SITE;

c. IMPROVES THE VISUAL AMENITY OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING GREEN BELT;

d. DOES NOT CAUSE UNACCEPTABLE TRAFFIC GENERATION;

e. DOES NOT OCCUPY A LARGER AREA OF THE SITE THAN THE EXISTING BUILDINGS, UNLESS THIS WOULD ACHIEVE A REDUCTION IN HEIGHT WHICH WOULD BENEFIT VISUAL AMENITY; AND

f. WHERE THE SITE’S CURRENT OR LAST USE WAS EMPLOYMENT, IT MUST REMAIN IN EMPLOYMENT USE IF REDEVELOPED.

Back to Top

Wycombe Air Park

9.38 Wycombe Air Park is identified by the District Council as a major developed site within the Green Belt to which Policy GB9 applies. Due to the unique circumstances and requirements of the site, however, it is also subject to an additional policy, GB10, which is specific to the Air Park.

9.39 Wycombe Air Park has been used for flying since the war, originally as a military airfield. Under the terms agreed at the time military use ceased, the Air Park is to be used as a civil aerodrome (defined as a place available for the landing and take-off of non-military aircraft), together with such other recreational pursuits as are compatible with its use. Flying activity on the site is limited to gliders and light aircraft, the latter being aeroplanes suitable for general aviation, including pilot training and recreational flying. The Air Park is subject to normal planning legislation and any new development requires planning permission. However, the Air Park use itself is currently lawful.

9.40 For the avoidance of doubt, Policy GB2 also applies to the Air Park and any development which is acceptable in principle will be limited to the existing developed area in order to protect the open character of the Green Belt. Because of physical restrictions there is little scope to increase activity at the Air Park, although the redevelopment of existing buildings may occur in order to provide more suitable premises for occupiers of the Air Park. In planning terms the existing lawful use will continue but there should not be any development or uses that are not connected with the primary use of the Air Park as a civil aerodrome and airfield. Any development for commercial purposes should be so linked to the Air Park use that location on the Air Park is essential rather than simply beneficial or desirable. Other development which would improve conditions for existing users of the Air Park, but which would not intensify its use, will in principle be acceptable.

POLICY GB10

1. DEVELOPMENT AT WYCOMBE AIR PARK SHALL:

a. BE CLOSELY RELATED TO THE USE OF THE AIR PARK FOR A CIVIL AERODROME FOR THE PRIVATE OR CLUB FLYING OF LIGHT AIRCRAFT OR GLIDERS;

b. IN THE CASE OF ANCILLARY BUSINESSES, DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY MUST OF NECESSITY BE LOCATED AT THE AIR PARK. IN SUCH CASES DEVELOPMENT MAY ALSO BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO A CONDITION RESTRICTING THE USE OF THE LAND OR BUILDINGS TO OCCUPIERS WHOSE BUSINESS REQUIRES A LOCATION AT THE AIR PARK. DEVELOPMENT FOR WHICH A LOCATION ON THE AIR PARK IS NOT ESSENTIAL WILL NOT BE PERMITTED;

c. BE WITHIN THE EXISTING DEVELOPED AREA OF THE AIR PARK AS SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP; AND (d) NOT GIVE RISE TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED FLYING ACTIVITIES.