RE: Wycombe district councillor Roger Colomb’s recent letter (‘green belt policy is in line with manifesto’) in response to a reader’s concerns over the proposals for a stadium at Wycombe Air Park.

ALTHOUGH the language of all party manifestos is no doubt deliberately framed so as to give room for interpretation and manoeuvre, it is unfortunate that the same imprecision crept into Cllr Colomb’s summary of national green belt planning policy (letter of April 22).

Although the Airpark is designated a ‘Major Developed Site Within the Green Belt’, only the (small) proportion covered by permanent structures is defined as previously-developed land.

If this proportion is increased by construction of new buildings for anything other than a very limited number of purposes (a stadium, hotels, and houses NOT being amongst these), it would constitute an incursion into the green belt, which is automatically deemed inappropriate development.

The policy test in PPG2 [planning policy guidelines for the green belt] is then whether very special circumstances exist whereby the harm by reason of this inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations – widely recognised as a very demanding test to pass. The Secretary of State will only be the arbiter if he opts to take the decision out of local control.

Michael Chadwick, Wycombe Planning Convenor, The Chiltern Society, White Hill Centre, White Hill, Chesham