PINEWOOD THE CASE FOR EXPANSION - Pinewood Studios

32 | PINEWOOD – THE CASE FOR EXPANSION 04 PINEWOOD’S PRODUCTIONS 2000-2012 04 PINEWOOD’S PRODUCTIONS 2000-2012PINEWOOD – THE CASE FOR EXPANSION | 33Project Pinewood 2006-20104.17 Project Pinewood followed approval of the 2006 masterplan on the workingassumption that production requirements were met for the short tomedium term.4.18 The scheme was conceived in mid 2007 as a living and working community forthe creative industries. This was a new and innovative concept which sought towiden the Pinewood role to a genuinely sustainable, creative live-work community.4.19 The scheme was submitted in June 2009 and comprised:• up to 1,400 residential units• film set streetscapes (x15)• up to 8,000 sq m (86,114 sq ft) of creative industries floorspace• up to 1,000 sq m (10,764 sq ft) of ancillary film space (primarily B1)• a Screen Crafts Academy• up to 4,000 sq m (43,057 sq ft) of community facilities(including primary school)• up to 2,000 sq m (21,528 sq ft) of retail• an open air theatre• an energy centre• a water treatment facility• open space (25.7 ha)• up to 2,200 car parking spacesThe scheme masterplan is shown on Fig. 6.4.20 The principal planning issues were Green Belt, development plan policy andthe degree to which the scheme’s overall benefits could outweigh harm arisingfrom a presumption against development. The scheme was ‘called-in’ by theSecretary of State for his own determination post a public inquiry.4.21 The inquiry Inspector was not persuaded of the overall ‘integrity’ of the projectas a single justified concept. In particular the housing, Screen Academy,general employment space and ‘living streetscape’ concept (ie. residential)was not concluded to outweigh the harm. Some of the elements of the conceptwere concluded to be capable of being accommodated elsewhere outside of theGreen Belt. The Inspector raised concerns over development plan conflict, theeconomic justification for the concept and the sustainability of the location forthe development proposed. Material to the decision was the Inspector’s viewthat the future of Pinewood Studios would not be adversely affected by a refusalof planning permission.4.22 The Secretary of State agreed that the very special circumstances to justify theform of proposed development in the Green Belt were not sufficient to grantplanning permission.4.23 It is material to note that if the Green Belt case were made out the Inspectorand Secretary of State accepted that ecological, transport and site relatedissues would not be sufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission.There were no other technical objections to justify a refusal.4.24 The current Pinewood Studios Development Framework application is anentirely different concept to Project Pinewood and has been developed in fullcognisance of the findings of the decision on that project. An entirely freshassessment is required in deciding the application.Fig. 6: Project Pinewood Masterplan