Royal London applies to build new permanent car park

Royal London continues to "creep" its demands to destroy the Green Belt within its supposed safe-keeping.
The so called temporary car park referred to in this article, is on Green Belt. RL was granted temporary permission to use the land for car parking, was required to return it to Green Belt during 2011. It completely ignored this requirement, continued to allow its use. Only when the planners had been alerted and inspected the site did this "honourable" company, the one that claims to be part of the community (my a--e!) and takes its communal role "seriously" (talk is cheap & from such organisations is totally meaningless) did it apply for retrospective planning permission.
I suspect this application is nothing more than a foot in the green belt door in its greedy desire to build a large office complex, high rise hotel - both without any business plans - and the sop of 75 houses. All in and on the Green Belt.
Here is an example of glaring corporate greed and uncaring attitude to wards its neighbours.
Planning permission on its Green Belt will give the company a massive asset boost and it may well consider selling up and pocketing the increased sale value of planning permission land.

Planning permission on the green belt is something largely to be avoided. However, the parking problems in Wilmslow are such that this is a trade off that may be worth making. Do we really want to push more cars on to local streets? Yes, more needs to be done by CEC to tackle parking, but denying an employer the opportunity to build more parking space may not be wise.

The obvious caveat is that this should be accompanied by conditions that allow use of the space only for car parking, and not for future development on the proposed site.

Hi Gary, I agree that we shouldn’t do things to exacerbate the parking problems we already have in Wilmslow but it doesn’t take much to overturn restrictions at a later date andonce a field is concrete, we’ll never get the grass back!

An example of this is one of the planning applications we considered on Monday evening where the building (on greenbelt) originally received planning permission on the basis that it could only house agriculture workers but had that caveat removed at a later date, the owners have since expanded the footprint and are now trying to expand and develop the site further.

I am not anti-Royal London and may be doing them a disservice (they may have initiatives in place and still need more parking spaces) but there are other ways. I have just taken the following from the intranet of a company I am doing some work for at the moment. They are serious about reducing the parking issues on their site and have implemented the following initiatives:

"The front rows of current car parks X and X will be allocated for car sharing by end of January 2015 (Car Sharing Bays will be available up to 9:00 am everyday)

As part of our sustainability and green initiatives on site the following incentives will be available:

- All miles covered by the following means of transport will be collated and at the end of each quarter we will make a donation to Charity (Charities will be nominated in the New Year )

- Cycling to site – Complimentary Costa Coffee/Drink (From Refectory) every day that you ride in

- Walking in to site - Complimentary Costa Coffee/Drink (From Refectory) every day that you walk in

- Car Sharing – Complimentary Costa Coffee/Drink (From Refectory) for driver and passengers every day you car share, plus parking in allocated bays

- Rail Travel – Discount on Rail Travel plus Complimentary Costa Coffee/ Drink (From Refectory)

- For all participants in the green initiative travel plan there will be Hi viz Jackets, Umbrellas, Cycle Lights, Drinking Bottles and Back Packs you will be able to register on the internal Travel Hub, week Commencing 5th January . All this and more, every month you will be entered into a draw to win a prize like an IPad Mini"

Royal London has enough employees to negotiate discounts with the rail and bus companies (buses stop outside their site!). I think they need to be a bit more imaginative instead of preparing their site for sale as development land!

Costa coffee would not get me to do anything - ugh!!
And don't encourage any more cyclists around Wilmslow - nightmare already!!
Seriously though we must object to object to Royal London covering up any Green Belt grass! Thin end of the wedge!

At least Royal London are doing something about parking instead of clogging up all the local streets like the rest of the offices in Wilmslow. I'm sure fire engines or ambulances would struggle to get down roads like Bourne Street as commuters don't care where or how they park their cars - since when has a footpath been an acceptable place to park a car. Royal London have a car sharing & cycle to work scheme and their own mini bus which takes staff to and from the train station. How on earth can this have anything to do selling the land for development.

My first reaction was that this might just be a re-hash of Royal London's assault on their Green Belt around the back of the site. Having looked at the submitted plans, it seems not to be the case. It is situated between the two entrance lodges on Alderley Road but is partially screened by trees (OK, it will be visible from the road, by the main entrance). The lighting looks to have been sensitively designed on low columns and uses LED technology. I'm actually quite impressed by the care that seems to have gone into the design and the thing is- it is almost directly behind my house, across the field and Alderley Road, so I'm not being a NIMBY, for once!
Of course, rumour persists that their proposed assault on the Green Belt fields has not completely gone away.

Unlike Manuel Golding I don't hold a vendetta against Royal London.
This precious green belt is irrelevant to 99% of the local populace - they can't see it, they can't enter it. It is prime territory for being put to good use, as per the local plan.

This article has been updated to include a comment received from Royal London today.

@ Barry Buxton- this is not in green belt, it is on the frontage with Alderley Road, between the two lodges, some of it is already a car-park, the rest a sloping lawn.

See the map:

http://bit.ly/1JNQcPw

Pete Taylor, Unfortunately I cannot get your web link to open, however, I think you will find that the whole of the Royal London site is within the green belt. Current buildings are designated "permitted development within the green belt". The proposed car park is, therefore, still in the green belt. A ground level car park development to meet Royal London's needs is not the only solution. A multi-story development above one of the current car parks to the south & east of the site would be a discrete and better alternative, such as the low profile steel constructions which have been used to good effect at Stepping Hill & Macclesfield Hospitals (the latter within the planning control of CEC). Cost should not be too great an issue to Royal London; they spent a small fortune on the temporary car park only last year! Come on Royal London & CEC ... use more imagination to find the right solution.

Barry Buxton, you completely miss the point on green belt. It is not a matter of who sees green belt but a consideration of the many purposes & values of green belt. In the Wilmslow Vision Consultation more than 75% of the respondents did not want to see the land at Royal London, which is still used for active farming, removed from the green belt. It is also part of the Southern Gateway to Wilmslow enjoyed daily by many rail travellers who can easily see the site. Anyone wanting to visit the site can also do so by appointment ... with me! Manuel Golding is not being a "nimby" nor conducting a vendetta, he is fighting to look after the heritage from which you and I benefit today. Give me evidence to support your claim that "This precious green belt is irrelevant to 99% of the local populace". By the way, how long have you been living in Wilmslow? And how long do you expect to be living here in future?

Mr Kinsey: I have been living in Wilmslow (near Royal London) for 32 years and have no plans to move. Unlike you I don't live in the past nor do I think that the view for train passengers outweighs the importance of well-balanced economic development.

@ Stuart Kinsey, It appears that my understanding of "major developed site within the green belt" (as this site is designated on the CEC definitive map), may be wide of the mark, aplogies.

I've sent Lisa a copy of the proposed site plan, hopefully she will be able to post it here.

Of course, this application may simply the first move in a planning chess game.

Link to an interesting document with some actual facts about Green Belt.

http://bit.ly/156DyvF

"Actual facts" from the Adam Smith Institute? That would be a first.

What do you know about the Adam Smith Institute Pete Taylor? I assume it's more than you know about Green Belt?

The document is interesting. Its clearly written to justify a particular political viewpoint althought written to look like acdemic research.

For example is states the population density in the UK (265 p/sq km). Saying "Neither is the UK especially densely populated." It ignores the density for England which at 419 p/sq km is the highest in Europe.

Also in examining if green belt policy has met it aims, the paper brings in other arguments, many not related to green belts at all. It seems difficult to justify the logic it tries to argue - that lack of co-ordinatation between adjacent councils is a result of the existence of green belt.

I wonder if Alistair Yates is the same Alistair Yates from Axis Developments who is currently involved with Croghan Peat in their attempts to build 14 houses in the green belt?

Wilmslow Town Council's Planning Committee will be considering this application at their meeting on Monday, 9th February, starting at 7.30pm at Wilmslow Parish Hall.

Full details are in our events calendar.