Loss of employment space in homes plan ‘crying shame’

PLANS to build 57 homes on the site of a pump manufacturer and business park in Henley have been recommended for refusal.

At a meeting of the council’s planning committee last week, councillors reviewed plans submitted by the Green Regeneration Property Company to transform the site of Stuart Turner, one of the town’s largest employers, into housing.

The London-based developer purchased the site, Empstead Works, off Greys Road, from Henley Enterprise Park in January and has applied for planning permission to build 46 houses, 10 with two bedrooms, 18 with three bedrooms and 18 with four bedrooms and 11 two-bedroom maisonettes.

Henley Enterprise Park is also home to around 15 businesses in a range of commercial units and offices including two garages.

The site has been home to Stuart Turner since 1917 and the company was founded in the town in 1906.

The application, which involves the demolition of all existing buildings on the site has changed since it was first presented to the council in October 2024. The initial design allocated 2,150 sq m of non-residential uses including for commercial and retail use. This has now been removed however a 1,016 sq m has been allocated for play and 2,247 sq m as public open space.

The developer says that the proposed redevelopment will transform an “underutilised brownfield site” into a “thriving, sustainable and well-connected new neighbourhood”.

Councillors opposed the scheme as they said it would lead to a loss of business space and a lack of privacy for neighbouring properties.

They also raised concerns about the lack of affordable housing in the plans, which stands at 11 per cent rather than the 40 per cent the district council’s policy requires.

Speaking at the meeting, David Bray, who runs a garage in Henley Enterprise Park, said that the plans would displace businesses like his.

He said: “There are, at present, 15 units and offices on the old Empstead Works site that are employing local residents. Another further 80 employees at Stuart Turner and you must agree this is a major blow to employment in this area.”

Architect Simon Mack said that, if the current plans were to go ahead, the development would have “a detrimental effect on the town”. He criticised the high level of housing density and landscaping proposals and said the scheme had a “flawed idea of utility and efficiency”.

Mr Mack said: “It is more akin to inner city terraced developments, where overcrowding will drain the soul and damage the physical and mental health of its inhabitants.

“There’s a landscaping proposal that shows minimal planting with most of the trees being in plots neighbouring the site. The plans are trying to green the site through association.

“I find it rather ironic that the application is under the title ‘The Green Regeneration Property Company Limited’.”

Mr Mack said the amount of affordable housing on the site was not something to be negotiated, and in his view, the site was a “prime location” for affordable housing. He also criticised the lack of parking spaces on the plans —
41 spaces for 57 new homes — as “frankly delusional”.

Rose Hilder, who lives in Greys Road, said that the development would see houses built next to her property and a large building overlooking her garden. She said: “While I am not against the development completely, I am in its current form. In my view, the application does not consider neighbouring properties.”

Councillor Laurence Plant said he was unhappy with how the plans had evolved.

He said: “The initial plan looked like one that we could do work alongside and have some positives from but this has gone so far from that — probably driven by greed. It’s such a crying shame that the employment space is being lost.”

Councillor Ian Reissmann described it as a “missed opportunity” for the site, criticising the small affordable housing provision.

He said: “[I am tired] of hearing developer after developer complain that they can’t afford to build affordable housing in Henley.”

The final decision is due to be made by the district council, the planning authority, by Tuesday, January 6.