Statutory Consultation Responses Masterplan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONSULTATION SUMMARY – STATUTORY CONSULTATION RESPONSES MASTERPLAN – SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS Topic Respondent Comments Council Response Traffic Hampshire County Council (FC/STAT/2) Concern about possible adverse impact on Noted. Outside of scope of SPD. Discussions North Hampshire. Seeking meeting to to take place as appropriate. discuss possible mitigation measures. (Arborfield) See also Infrastructure SPD. Sport England (FC/STAT/27) Welcomes attention paid to sport and Noted. Sport recreation in the SPDs. Council studies form foundation for effective strategy for sport, open space and recreation. (General) Para 1c(v). Should be clarified to include as Up to date standards will apply up to date standards as possible. (General) Playing field land should not be lost to Noted. SANG. (North Wokingham) Theatres Trust (FC/STAT/26) Not particularly relevant to Trust’s work. Noted. Performance space may be a Theatre Provision (General) requirement in proposed Community building. Reading Borough Council (FC/STAT/3) Support strategic planning in this way. Noted. Strategic Planning Assume archaeology constraints will be Noted and confirmed. addressed through Managing Delivery DPD. Bracknell Forest Council (FC/STAT/24) Little consideration appears to have been The highway measures for the SDLs were Traffic given to cross boundary traffic impacts. discussed at the Examination in Public and (N/S Wokingham) found to be sound. Park and Ride – implications for that Outside of scope of SPD. Discussions to take planned at Jennetts Park not considered. place as appropriate. Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis of issues raised will be always based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of respondents made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or where outside the scope of the SPD will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. For the avoidance of doubt the SPD does not introduce new policies. Any policies of the Core Strategy not specifically mentioned will be applied to development within the SDL. 1 CONSULTATION SUMMARY – STATUTORY CONSULTATION RESPONSES MASTERPLAN – SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS Topic Respondent Comments Council Response (N Wokingham) Bracknell Forest Council (FC/STAT/24) SANG location – will safeguard gap with Noted. Cross reference with SANG location SANG location Wokingham/Binfield (N Wokingham/S comments on South Wokingham (see Wokingham). Acknowledges importance of FC/SW/23 etc) provision. Bracknell Forest Council (FC/STAT/24) Education – has impact on Bracknell school Education provision was considered at the Education children been considered? (N Core Strategy EIP which was found to be Wokingham/S Wokingham) sound. Bracknell Forest Council (FC/STAT/24) Pedestrian/cycle links to Coppid Beech. Subject to detailed consideration. Pedestrian/Cycle Unclear how they will be linked to Bracknell links Forest. (N Wokingham) Bracknell Forest Council (FC/STAT/24) Flood risk. Have cross boundary risks been Consultation with Environment Agency has Flood risk considered? (South Wokingham) taken place. St Nicholas Hurst Parish Council Not mentioned in Core Strategy or policy Section A7.41 of Core Strategy applies. North Wokingham – (FC/STAT/19) CP10 to CP20. Therefore provision is not Ashridge policy. Not justified since its purpose is Interchange served by Northern Relief Road. Questions deliverability of a suitable Detailed matter outside scope of SPD. This will design. need to be considered St Nicholas Hurst Parish Council Technical note is limited in its assessment All commitments have been allowed for. North Wokingham: (FC/STAT/19) of implications. No allowance for Technical note development of Sandford Farm, Woodley Sandford Farm considered a commitment in appears to have been made (approved on Core Strategy figures. appeal). Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis of issues raised will be always based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of respondents made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or where outside the scope of the SPD will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. For the avoidance of doubt the SPD does not introduce new policies. Any policies of the Core Strategy not specifically mentioned will be applied to development within the SDL. 2 CONSULTATION SUMMARY – STATUTORY CONSULTATION RESPONSES MASTERPLAN – SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS Topic Respondent Comments Council Response Questions accuracy of data. Noted. St Nicholas Hurst Parish Council Preliminary proposals by Consortium at Consortium proposals are not subject of this Northern Relief (FC/STAT/19) open day 15th Feb show a route but its SPD. Consortium proposals will be expected Road (NRR) nature would discharge traffic onwards to to follow SPD guidance. Coppid Beech and would not act as a NRR. The highway measures were discussed at the Core Strategy EIP and found to be sound. St Nicholas Hurst Parish Council Concern about impact on rivers and Policy CP4 of Core Strategy. Section Flooding (FC/STAT/19) streams. A7.53(f)(1) applies. South of M4 Eastern Earley Town Council (FC/STAT/30) Concerned this will encourage more traffic Infrastructure measures are aimed at achieving Relief Road onto Lower Earley Way, particularly London ‘nil detriment’. bound. The highway measures were discussed at the Core Strategy EIP and found to be sound. General Berkshire Archaeology (FC/STAT/25) Assume general archaeology Noted and confirmed. View also expressed by considerations will be addressed through Reading Borough Council. Managing Delivery DPD. ALL SDLs NHS Berkshire Shared Services Most comments are infrastructure SPD related. (FC/GEN/43L) Some are town centre related. ARBORFIELD NHS Berkshire Shared Services Should support its own GP surgery. An Provision of new GP surgery is a requirement GARRISON SDL (FC/GEN/43L) attractive solution would be provision over under para A7.13 of the CS. the proposed supermarket. NORTH NHS Berkshire Shared Services There appears to be limited scope for a GP Provision of primary health care facilities are a WOKINGHAM SDL (FC/GEN/43L) surgery within SDL. Cantley Park may be requirement under para A7.37 of the CS. an option. An extension to Norreys may be an option Note: This is a summary of the key issues. Analysis of issues raised will be always based on the original correspondence which is available for inspection at Shute End during normal office hours. The reference number (FC/**/**) allows cross referencing with the original letter. A number of respondents made specific points about matters of detail which will either be incorporated into amendments or where outside the scope of the SPD will be dealt with through subsequent planning applications which will be subject of further consultation. Unless otherwise clarified it has been assumed that non-site specific comments will apply to all SDLs. For the avoidance of doubt the SPD does not introduce new policies. Any policies of the Core Strategy not specifically mentioned will be applied to development within the SDL. 3 CONSULTATION SUMMARY – STATUTORY CONSULTATION RESPONSES MASTERPLAN – SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS Topic Respondent Comments Council Response but this is in private hands. SOUTH NHS Berkshire Shared Services South Wokingham is worth pursuing but Provision of primary health care facilities are a WOKINGHAM SDL (FC/GEN/43L) there is concern about site availability. requirement under para A7.49 of the CS. NHS Berkshire Shared Services Overall suggest pursuing Section 106 Provision of primary health care facilities are a (FC/GEN/43L) contributions in a Borough-wide endorsed requirement under para A7.49 of the CS. formula. ARBORFIELD Eversley Parish Council (FC/GEN/38) The A327 through Eversley is already at See comments by Hampshire County Council GARRISON/SOUTH capacity and cannot take more traffic regarding impact on Eversley to be considered. OF M4 SDLs generated by Arborfield Garrison/South of M4 SDLs The highway measures were discussed at the Core Strategy EIP and found to be sound. NORTH The SPD can only address SDL development WOKINGHAM SDL related issues. Flooding Wokingham Town Council What provision will be made outside the Discussions are taking place with the (FC/STAT/11) scope of developer contributions? Environment Agency. Emmbrook School Wokingham Town Council No firm commitment on possible closure of A separate consultation will take place on the school. closure of the school. SOUTH WOKINGHAM SDL Levels crossings Wokingham Town Council Clarification of position regarding The highway measures were discussed at the Easthampstead crossing. Does traffic Core Strategy EIP and found to be sound. modelling take account of options? Implications of Barkham Road closure for Length of time due to Airtrak matters being station crossing? Is a bridge possible? considered via Wokingham Town