Handy Cross planning application made (From Bucks Free Press)

Good - 150 bedroomed hotel will mean we don't need to put anything like this on the airpark - Although I am sure the argument will be with all the hotels springing up in Wycombe that we will need a training hotel!....Keep the green belt green

gungun wrote:
Good - 150 bedroomed hotel will mean we don't need to put anything like this on the airpark - Although I am sure the argument will be with all the hotels springing up in Wycombe that we will need a training hotel!....Keep the green belt green

"Although I am sure the argument will be with all the hotels springing up in Wycombe that we will need a training hotel"


Why do we need so many hotels????

To be quite honest, why do we need a coachway???

There has never ever been one anywhere, the amount of coaches passing through and stopping is very minimal, a couple of National Express coaches, thats it.

I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Fortunately it's not an either/or choice. There's plenty of land available in the area that is suitable for building on and which isn't in Green Belt.

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Your grandchildren may disagree.

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Ah right, take a look at a map of High Wycombe from 50 years ago, then look at a map toda. Huge amounts of development and what do you know? We're in one of the worst recessions since World War 2.

The conflict of having continual growth dictating the success of an economy, is that it relies on an infinate amount of resource, resources which we haven't got.

gpn01 wrote:

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Fortunately it's not an either/or choice. There's plenty of land available in the area that is suitable for building on and which isn't in Green Belt.

Quite agree.

gotanybiscuits? wrote:

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Your grandchildren may disagree.

Or your partner,..or even your children,..probably your neighbours too?

miccles wrote:

gungun wrote:
Good - 150 bedroomed hotel will mean we don't need to put anything like this on the airpark - Although I am sure the argument will be with all the hotels springing up in Wycombe that we will need a training hotel!....Keep the green belt green

"Although I am sure the argument will be with all the hotels springing up in Wycombe that we will need a training hotel"


Why do we need so many hotels????

To be quite honest, why do we need a coachway???

There has never ever been one anywhere, the amount of coaches passing through and stopping is very minimal, a couple of National Express coaches, thats it.

The Oxford Tube doesn't stop at High Wycombe and would be a useful addition to the connectivity and flexibility of commuting to/from High Wycombe.
...
Hoping that there will be provision for bicycles near these new facilities (Sport Centre and coachway)
...

wayneo wrote:

Gazzetta wrote:
I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Ah right, take a look at a map of High Wycombe from 50 years ago, then look at a map toda. Huge amounts of development and what do you know? We're in one of the worst recessions since World War 2.

The conflict of having continual growth dictating the success of an economy, is that it relies on an infinate amount of resource, resources which we haven't got.

I agree Wayneo. Growth for growth sake is self-defeating.
...
Useful when we needed more warriors to defeat the tribe over the next hill, but we don't live in that kind of society any-more.
...
Let's look after what we have and re-develop and/or re-invigorate the brownfield sites sensibly, sustainably and with a view to maintain/reduce costs.

TheHorsesMouth wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Gazzetta wrote: I would much prefer new jobs, prosperity, and economic growth over green belt.

Ah right, take a look at a map of High Wycombe from 50 years ago, then look at a map toda. Huge amounts of development and what do you know? We're in one of the worst recessions since World War 2. The conflict of having continual growth dictating the success of an economy, is that it relies on an infinate amount of resource, resources which we haven't got.

I agree Wayneo. Growth for growth sake is self-defeating. ... Useful when we needed more warriors to defeat the tribe over the next hill, but we don't live in that kind of society any-more. ... Let's look after what we have and re-develop and/or re-invigorate the brownfield sites sensibly, sustainably and with a view to maintain/reduce costs.

Yep, like Handy-X and Hugenden, regeneration of what we've got, quality rather than mere quantity.

Where's the Lesley Clarke conference hall?

geoffW wrote:
Where's the Lesley Clarke conference hall?

Probably on the same planet as DannyDiv's residing.

I find the term food store particularly amusing. I mean, it's clearly not a poxy corner shop as they wouldn't mention that in the context of the overall plan. It must be then, wait for it, a supermarket :-)
Who got the biggest envelope into Alex, Tesco or Sainsbury?

The big issue is here is the additional vehicles that will use the facility, bringing even more congestion to an already-impossible situation. Marlow Hill & M40-J4 will grind to a halt - even quicker than now. We need to see credible (funded and scheduled) proposals to alleviate this before any application can be approved.

The really big issue is how the project wil be funded. To quote the feasability study: "Given the current funding market, timescales and need to
get best value, and after consideration of various options, the recommendation
is that funding will come from internal resources, pending receipts from land
sales/transactions".

.
There's no clear identification of what land & assets are going to be sold to raise £30M though.

KTinBucks wrote:
The big issue is here is the additional vehicles that will use the facility, bringing even more congestion to an already-impossible situation. Marlow Hill & M40-J4 will grind to a halt - even quicker than now. We need to see credible (funded and scheduled) proposals to alleviate this before any application can be approved.

Especially when the fly over has gone, and all the traffic has to come down Marlow Hill, and along Suffield Road, and into Desborough, this is a nightmare waiting to happen.

It's not just the Abbey Way flyover going - which WDC already acknowledge will worsen both morning and afternoon queuing on Marlow Hill. Add in the 550 homes to be built on RAF Daws Hill, the potential of even more at Abbey Barn South, the High Heavens development, John Lewis expansion....... you get the idea! These are all ingredients to turn Marlow Hill into a car park, since they all generate more vehicle movements. Where are the crucial road improvements to even cope with the current congestion, let alone the chaos promised. And these need to be real-world proposals; remember the railway station junction improvement, which would have no traffic impact? We now have gridlock on the A40, Marlow Hill, Abbey Way and beyond several times a day - because this junction blocks the A404 flow and the road capacity is inadequate.
I actually like the proposal of the Sports Centre development & all the associated initiatives. But get the traffic infrastructure right first! Or live without the developments, because the consequent nightmare is unacceptable.

Customers will not visit congested facilities or shopping centres even if they offer good value for money

Agniesca wrote:
Customers will not visit congested facilities or shopping centres even if they offer good value for money

For want of a better word,they won't visit cr@pholes either, so we either remain stationary or we at least make what we have attractive and pleasant for those that live here and those that want to come into town.

Portsmouth did it with Gunwharf, Reading did it, I believe that Wycombe could do it too.

Oh and lowering costs for parking (which is what puts a considerable number of people off towen centres), might be a good start.

Some outlets offer parking cost rebates, but nothing for those who travel by public transport. This generates more traffic,how about eg M & S offering a coffee to shoppers who spend more than £40. Those offering cheap or discounted parking could alsofollow suit

Agniesca wrote:
Some outlets offer parking cost rebates, but nothing for those who travel by public transport. This generates more traffic,how about eg M & S offering a coffee to shoppers who spend more than £40. Those offering cheap or discounted parking could alsofollow suit

Sainsbury's offered one hour's free parking at the new Marlow store and you wouldn't believe how much trouble that caused....;-)

Sainsbury's in High Wycombe reimburse your bus fare if you sepnd over £15

I walk into town!!

Wait for the coming wave of energy crises - everything will change again. A lot.
.
Planners / politicians are unable to look beyond their own horizons , not helped by their limited intelligence , foresight and common sense.
.
That's why it's chaos now - never mind the future.