Sponsored by
Eastern arc not the best option for employment and transportation
NOT surprisingly the outcome of the recent "Consultation" document is a recommendation for the Eastern Arc. We ask why?
There are significant concerns that the consultation documents and thus the option presented to our elected Cabinet Members by the civil servants are questionable with respect to both Employment and Transportation links.
As residents know well, Aylesbury Vale has suffered from poor performance in employment growth for the last decade or so.
Examination of the statistics shows that new jobs will best develop north of Aylesbury, basically in areas not being addressed by the growth plans!
Placing the main job growth area south east of Aylesbury is more likely to make the town a greater (and poorer) dormitory area of London.
The change in policy to include low employment density warehousing companies will result in more land being covered in large buildings if it succeeds as an approach.
The whole aspect of employment needs greater investigation – the growth engine in the District in the past has been north of Aylesbury.
If we now look at transportation issues – how should Cabinet Members ensure the Vale exploits plans for extension of Chiltern Rail to Bicester and the proposed new rail linkage via Winslow from Oxford to Cambridge?
The investment linked with the rail plans now seems to be ignored regarding the main housing growth in Aylesbury Vale.
The planned close economic linkage between Aylesbury Vale District and Milton Keynes seems also to be ignored with the majority of the expansion in the south of the Vale.
Whatever option, the building of the eastern link road from the A41 at Aston Clinton by-pass to the A418 action is essential for the future transportation and growth needs.
It is clear that the Cabinet Members decision on future growth must take these factors into account.
Also other factors (for residents to be aware of) and Cabinet Members to take into account, are as follows:
-Why was the Northern Arc excluded prior to the public consultation? The reasoning given in the Consultation document was not supported with solid evidence.
-There is a new solid proposition by Barwood Land and Estates Ltd. for 3000 homes with infrastructure and employment, in the Fleet Marston Area – adjoining the agreed Berryfields development. This is in the economic engine growth area. It will also have a station on the new rail extension and is a logical development site which should be supported as part of a sensible growth plan for the Vale.
- There is also a submitted planning application (with Partners of AVA / AVDC (Gladman)) for a development of 3300 approx homes and employment north of Winslow. The Winslow Green development will include a new station on the new East-West rail line. Hence an extremely logical development site which should also be seriously considered by AVDC.
- The Fleet Marsden and the Winslow proposed developments address the transport issues with the rail links and are therefore in line with the government's aims of reducing the carbon footprint.
- Even more housing growth for a potential 3300 site is being planned near Tring (Hertfordshire) just south of Aylesbury Town. This 100 hectare site is close to the top of Tring Hill near the A41 and Aston Clinton. The proposed site is between Icknield Way and the Grand Union Canal and is on the boundary with Aylesbury Vale District.
It should be noted that if the growth plans in Aylesbury Vale proceed towards Aston Clinton then the expanded Aylesbury town will be only 1.5 miles from the Dacorum Boundary! Aston Clinton will be squeezed between 2 new towns and surrounded by large employment areas (arguably providing employment in the wrong location).
The choice of a strategic plan for the growth of the Aylesbury Vale has been confused with a related plan for Aylesbury Town.
The two are and should be interlinked and a plan should indicate that approach. Employment trends across the Vale are key (with transportation) in this overall plan.
With regards to employment, the plan to build the Aston Clinton Road Business Park in Weston Turville floundered when the sole developer who had expressed interest dropped out.
The desire of successful business parks to build elsewhere in the District is being suppressed even when it can be demonstrated that their locations are under demand from employers seeking to populate the proposed sites.
Cabinet and Council should look hard at commercial propositions, which can compliment the agreed Berryfield development.
Logic dictates that for economic, environmental, employment, rail and road transportation and successful deliverability considerations this is the way forward.
The aim should also be to minimise the further growth of the dormitory town that Aylsebury (and its environs) is becoming and could become if common sense does not prevail.
Development focus should therefore include Fleet Marsden and Winslow in addition to Berryfield, let's not try to push water uphill and drown in the process.
Bob Evans, Beryl Hunter, Peter Howson,
On behalf of Concerned Vale Residents
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Aylesbury
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 24 C
Wind Speed: 21 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 20 mph
Wind direction: East
