Decision on Next Home store plan postponed

2:20pm Thursday 14th March 2013 in News By Simon Farr

Decision on Next Home store plan postponed Decision on Next Home store plan postponed

PLANS for a contentious Next Home store on the current Cressex park-and-ride scheme will be debated by council chiefs next month.

Wycombe District Council’s Planning Committee was expected to mull over the proposals at Wednesday’s meeting but it has been postponed until April’s meeting.

Next has submitted an application for a two-storey home and garden centre on the existing park-and-ride in Crest Road, High Wycombe.

The development would have 4,636 square meters of retail space and a cafe area. Next would also lay on a bus service into the town centre.

But any build could not go ahead until the park-and-ride has been relocated – which is expected to join the new Wycombe Sports Centre, a hotel and offices at Handy Cross.

Objections have been raised by the Eden shopping centre and House of Fraser, who fear the mooted store would keep shoppers away from the town centre.

The High Wycombe Society and Chiltern Society have raised concerns about transport and the store’s design in keeping with the rest of the area.

And National Grid is also against the proposals, as it believes Cressex is not suitable for retail development and the former gasworks site in Lily’s Walk – which it owns and plans to develop – would be a better location.

Next says the available land at the old gasworks is not large enough for its dedicated home branch and the retailer would not be able to retain its existing clothing outlet in Eden if it built a new store in Lily’s Walk.

Comments (5)

2:40pm Thu 14 Mar 13

BOOKERite says...

Protectionism once again by House of Fraser and Eden. Planners of High Wycombe listen to the taxpayers not the practically unused H of F and it's landlord. Was H of F lured into Eden by promises of absolutely no competition?
Protectionism once again by House of Fraser and Eden. Planners of High Wycombe listen to the taxpayers not the practically unused H of F and it's landlord. Was H of F lured into Eden by promises of absolutely no competition? BOOKERite

3:34pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Robert.M says...

For God`s sake WE DO NOT NEED another store in Cressex, surely it would be better to have the store in the town centre to try and regenerate that, instead of leaving it as the ghost town it is.
Apart from that we who live around here are sick to the back teeth of traffic jams and bad parking caused by the stores we already have here.
Come on councillers just for once think about the long term and try to get Next into our already dead town centre and try an liven that up, and think of the residents who live here, if next are serious about opening a store here then let them do it in an alredy built premises, there is enough empty ones in the town centre, and then use the park and ride land for much needed housing.
For God`s sake WE DO NOT NEED another store in Cressex, surely it would be better to have the store in the town centre to try and regenerate that, instead of leaving it as the ghost town it is. Apart from that we who live around here are sick to the back teeth of traffic jams and bad parking caused by the stores we already have here. Come on councillers just for once think about the long term and try to get Next into our already dead town centre and try an liven that up, and think of the residents who live here, if next are serious about opening a store here then let them do it in an alredy built premises, there is enough empty ones in the town centre, and then use the park and ride land for much needed housing. Robert.M

4:29pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Darren Hayday says...

This would be an ideal site for a development such as this apart from the 'white elephant' in the room = namely the TRAFFIC in the area..

With BCC looking to roll in many trucks to the Waste Transfer Station @ Booker Dump, the heavy build up of John Lewis sale traffic plus of course the normal hell like traffic in the area (especially rush hour traffic) - not so sure that they would be able to overcome this...without someone (BCC?) spending out a lot of money to improve the current traffic problem.
This would be an ideal site for a development such as this apart from the 'white elephant' in the room = namely the TRAFFIC in the area.. With BCC looking to roll in many trucks to the Waste Transfer Station @ Booker Dump, the heavy build up of John Lewis sale traffic plus of course the normal hell like traffic in the area (especially rush hour traffic) - not so sure that they would be able to overcome this...without someone (BCC?) spending out a lot of money to improve the current traffic problem. Darren Hayday

11:51am Fri 15 Mar 13

KTinBucks says...

As ever, the emphasis is on the planning application and not on the infrastructure, traffic or congestion, which barely gets lip service.

WDC continue to slope shoulders over this, arguing that BCC is the authority – true.

WDC rely on the adopted Southern Quadrant Transport Strategy (SQTS), but SQTS is merely a concept. There is no rigorous evidence of the viability of the strategy; modelling seems to be minimal, data cannot be provided. We just have to “trust” the experts!

WDC know that SQTS is inadequate & flawed, yet still make planning decisions which rely on it. Why pretend? If you know the emperor is naked, say so; if you know the strategy is flawed, stop deciding on developments until we can all be confident that they can be supported by the infrastructure. Anything else is irresponsible.

This is not anti-development; it is pro- sustainable development. And that means nil detriment, slight betterment, ie don’t make the current situation worse; give us some improvements!

The emperor has no clothes.
As ever, the emphasis is on the planning application and not on the infrastructure, traffic or congestion, which barely gets lip service. WDC continue to slope shoulders over this, arguing that BCC is the authority – true. WDC rely on the adopted Southern Quadrant Transport Strategy (SQTS), but SQTS is merely a concept. There is no rigorous evidence of the viability of the strategy; modelling seems to be minimal, data cannot be provided. We just have to “trust” the experts! WDC know that SQTS is inadequate & flawed, yet still make planning decisions which rely on it. Why pretend? If you know the emperor is naked, say so; if you know the strategy is flawed, stop deciding on developments until we can all be confident that they can be supported by the infrastructure. Anything else is irresponsible. This is not anti-development; it is pro- sustainable development. And that means nil detriment, slight betterment, ie don’t make the current situation worse; give us some improvements! The emperor has no clothes. KTinBucks

1:46pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Agniesca says...

4 Office blocks, a supermarket, a hotel, a park & ride, a coachway interchange, a sports centre, a waste centre, an enlarged John Lewis, a Next and 4 - 500 homes on the RAF Dawes Hill site with more to come when Abbey Barn South is developed. All this on roads that are virtually grid-locked for part of most normal week days. The traffic pollution will give local children asthma or other breathing problems and will cause most adults to walk as other means of travel will be impossible.
4 Office blocks, a supermarket, a hotel, a park & ride, a coachway interchange, a sports centre, a waste centre, an enlarged John Lewis, a Next and 4 - 500 homes on the RAF Dawes Hill site with more to come when Abbey Barn South is developed. All this on roads that are virtually grid-locked for part of most normal week days. The traffic pollution will give local children asthma or other breathing problems and will cause most adults to walk as other means of travel will be impossible. Agniesca

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree