VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses - Evidence Documents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses - Evidence Documents ID Respondent Name Comment VALP16-07-12-00204 Kate Wright Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment - The Draft Plan states that 'The site has only recently, in 2016, been granted temporary permission for 3 pitches. The inspector concluded that the development would have a significant adverse visual appearance and materially harm the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The site is not readily accessible to local amenities given its rural location.' It has been concluded that this will not be one of the sites which is considered for permanent occupation. This statement should be redrafted to include the following: This temporary site is planned for closure at the end of the existing term ie 09 Feb 2019, or earlier, when the new VALP is in place. VALP16-07-18-00209 Lynne Garton Housing and Econimc Land Availability Assessment - The sites identified are not in line with the Neighbourhood Plan and as such are not supported by the local community VALP16-07-22-00213 Geoff Pearman Gypsy and Traveller Site Assessment - I wish to be assured that the Gypsy Travellers site ( ref GT8 ) will continue to be designated as temporary and as such will be forced close after three years i.e. by early 2019. It is a far from ideal site and totally unsustainable for human habitation. Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 1 of 100 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses - Evidence Documents ID Respondent Name Comment VALP16-07-22-00216 Joanna Male (Gregory Housing and Econimc Land Availability Assessment - Gregory Gray Associates is instructed to write on behalf of Wyevale Gray Associates) Garden Centres Ltd. owners of Worlds End Garden Centre, Aylesbury Road, Wendover, HP22 6BD. The garden centre occupies a site which extends a total of 4.84ha and which is located to the north of the settlement of Wendover as shown on the attached site plan. A significant part of the site comprises previously developed land, and whilst it is located beyond any current settlement boundary, it is not subject to the Green Belt or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty designations that constrain nearby sites. The spatial vision for the Local Plan seeks to achieve an appropriate amount and distribution of sustainable growth based on an established settlement hierarchy. By concentrating the majority of new development at the most sustainable settlements, it is recognized that the need to travel can be minimized, and the delivery of facilities and services can be achieved efficiently. My client considers that this stated approach is entirely compliant with the principles for sustainable development as set out in the NPPF, however does not consider that the proposed housing allocations provide the most appropriate means of implementing this vision in light of two other key tenets of national policy, namely the effective use of previously developed land and the permanence of the Green Belt. Policy S2 Spatial Strategy for Growth indicates that strategic growth and investment will be concentrated in sustainable locations and that Wendover will be expected to accommodate housing growth of 25%. Table 1 indicates that such an increase on the existing housing stock in Wendover amounts to 834 dwellings, of which sites for 722 units still need to be identified as the HELAA failed to identify any suitable sites. However, Policy D4 confirms that the housing requirement for Wendover will potentially be met by a site for 800 homes subject to it being found suitable for release from the Green Belt. The site in question is known as RSA-2. It extends 45ha and comprises an undeveloped ‘green field’ site located within the Green Belt. The NPPF makes clear that, once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be amended in ‘exceptional circumstances’ (para. 83). The Aylesbury Vale Green Belt Assessment Part 2 concludes in relation to site RSA-2 that “Exceptional circumstances are likely to be justified if there is a large amount of outstanding housing need that cannot be met on land outside of the Green Belt” however it recognizes that the quantum of housing need has yet to be finalized and that “Consideration will need to be given to whether there are alternative sites outside of the Green Belt to meet this housing figure although the latest HELAA is showing this as being unlikely….”. Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 2 of 100 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses - Evidence Documents ID Respondent Name Comment VALP16-07-22-00216 Joanna Male (Gregory My client disputes the findings of the HELAA which rejects the garden centre site as being suitable for housing and considers that Gray Associates) their site provides a preferable alternative to site RSA-2 given its location outside of the Green Belt and status as previously developed land. One of the key strategic policies of the Draft Local Plan is Policy S8 which encourages the reuse of previously developed (brownfield) land consistent with para. 17 of the NPPF and which weighs significantly in favour of the future allocation of our client’s site for residential purposes when compared with greenfield alternatives. It is also noted that the assessment of site RSA-2 raises the issue of the capacity of the B4009 Tring Road to serve any future development. Use of the garden centre site to contribute towards meeting future development needs helps to alleviate highway concerns since any increase in traffic generation associated with the proposed residential development would be partially offset by the removal of the traffic associated with the existing commercial use. The garden centre site is located to the north of the settlement of Wendover and provides easy access to this strategic settlement and the facilties it provides. It is located within an existing enclave of development and given the scale, bulk and activity associated with the existing use, is capable of redevelopment for residential purposes with no additional impact upon the character and amenities of the area. By contrast, site RSA-2 is currently undeveloped and any future built form will have a significant additional impact upon the character and amenities of the area. It is considered that Worlds End Garden Centre provides a suitable site to accommodate future housing needs given its previously developed nature. As a result, it is considered erroneous to argue that there are ‘exceptional circumstances’ justifying the release of RSA-2 on grounds of housing need, until optimum use has been made of previously developed sites such as that belonging to our client in accordance with the Council’s own draft policy and the NPPF. Whilst it is recognized that Worlds End Garden Centre is not capable of meeting in full, the housing requirement for Wendover, it provides a sequentially preferable site of a scale which could provide adequate infrastructure and services to serve future residents and it is requested that the Draft Local Plan be amended in order to include it as a residential housing allocation capable of accommodating approximately 140 units. I would be grateful if you could take the foregoing comments into account in the finalisation of the Local Plan. Should you have any queries regarding the above or relating to any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 3 of 100 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses - Evidence Documents ID Respondent Name Comment VALP16-07-22-00218 Terry Benwell Settlement Hierarchy - I am resubmitting the Critique on the advice of Cllr. Carole Paternoster, with whom I had occasion to seek assistance in gaining acknowledgement of the issues raised in the Critique. I note that there has been little change in the July 2016 Hierarchy Assessment from the 2015 model, although some concessions have been afforded in Section 6.3 under Other Settlements, " some development could take place if deemed appropriate through the planning application process". However the main thrust of my Critique is directed at the flawed reasoning with reference to schooling, class B1 business units and the 2km limitation, this should be inclusive regardless of which settlement the B1 units are sited. I can understand that any re assessment on the classification of Rowsham will not impact on the development allocation, but I submit my evidence on the need for probity and rational application of the parameters set out in the Hierarchy Assessment. I am quite prepared to make myself available to debate these issues,^ Dear Sir, I append below two errors I have discovered to date in the above draft. 1. There is no record of Hulcott Village. 2. Buckland Village has been awarded a points score of 3, one point being for a Public House, The Rothschild Arms in the village closed a few years ago. Therefore the points allocation should be 2. Yours faithfully, Terry Benwell VALP16-07-29-00237 Sue Belgrove New Settlement Study - Stand alone development to East of Haddenham. Aston Sandford This is productive farm land within a superb landscape of small fields and hedgerows and it is completely outrageous that a new "garden village"should be built here for the following reasons: There is no infrastructure, No local facilities for such a population increase, Railway stations are already at capacity, Other local areas (Longwick, Princes Risborough , Haddenham and Thame) are having to have more housing resulting in a conurbation, The unspoilt countryside of Aylesbury Vale should not be sacrificed to meet the needs of neighbouring Authorities. VALP16-08-04-00250 P M Silver Green Belt Assessment - I have in the past written about this issue. I read in our local newspaper the Leighton Buzzard Observer it has been suggested that the area (valley farm) seeks Green Belt status.