Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan – Summary of issues raised in received Publicity representations
This document summarises the main comments received by the Council on the Submitted Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. The full representations are available on request.
Headline Results 16 responses in total, 2 asking for modifications, 6 objections, 1 no comments, 4 general comments, 2 support
Respondent Comment Summary AVDC Request minor modifications to improve the policy wording for interpretation & usability purposes to; T1, E3, HE1, HE2, B1, B2, B3 Anglian Water No comments relating to the content of the Draft Plan Network Rail Provide advise in relation to development planning applications and network rail infrastructure Thames Water General comments Environment Agency General Comments Alan Taylor Objects to the inclusion of Barley Close Field / ‘Green Area 5’ Historic England no record of having been consulted at the Regulation 14 Pre-Submission stage question the need for SEA Re-screening due to an increase in housing figure proposed on allocated site. concerned that the plan inadequately address heritage issues. propose modifications to strengthen historic protection DP Architects objects to the plan on the grounds that it fails to take into consideration the submission draft of the NPPF. Object to the proposed settlement boundary on the grounds that it constrains development. Objects to the 30% provision for affordable housing Objects to HE1 & HE2 based on a lack of justification. Andy Bateson Object to the lack of any housing allocation within the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. Object to H1, H2, H3, T1, T3 Broadly support policies E3, C1, C2, C3, HE1, HE2, B1, B2 and B3, Vocalism Object to the lack of any housing allocation within the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. Objects to H1, H2, H4 Barton Willmore Supports the plan Chris Webbley Support for plan and General Comments Buckinghamshire BA Rep 1: Policy Review Document and conformity with Strategic Planning Policy Advantage BA Rep 2: Paragraph 2.5 (pages 6 & 7) BA Rep 3: Policy H1: Weston Turville Settlement Boundaries BA Rep 4: Policy H4: Housing Mix & Tenure BA Rep 5: Transport Section (page 21) Buckinghamshire County Comments relate to education provision, archaeology & Highways Council Peter Chilman Supports the plan Raises concerns in relation to H1 & T1 Turley Objects to the lack of allocation Objects on the grounds that the development management policies do not always accord with the spatial strategy of the plan and therefore in some cases may not be achievable.
AYLESBURY VALE DISTRICT COUNCIL Planning Policy Please ask for: Stephanie Buller Direct Line: 01296 585461 Switchboard: 01296 585858 Textphone: 01296 585055 Email: [email protected] Our Ref: 03/04/NP/Weston Turville
14 March 2018
Sent vie email to: Steve Carnaby; Associate Director of Intelligent Plans and Examinations (IPE) Ltd at [email protected]
Cc: Sarah Copley; Weston Turville Parish Council Clerk [email protected]
Dear Mr Carnaby.
Submission of the Weston Turville Parish Neighbourhood Plan for Examination
I am pleased to submit to you the draft Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (WTNP) for examination. As requested, a paper copy of all the Regulation 16 representations and submission documents have now also been posted.
Aylesbury Vale District Council (AVDC) has worked closely with Weston Turville Parish Council (WTPC) during the nearly two years that the plan has been prepared. WTPC have also worked with consultants on specific parts of the evidence base. The AVDC commends WTPC on a comprehensive and well thought out plan.
The Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (WTNP) is the emerging development plan for the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Area (covering the same area as the parish council) for the period 2013-2033. On adoption it will form part of the Development Plan, which planning applications in that area will be assessed against. The WNP contains 18 policies designed to conserve and enhance the distinctive character of the three main settlements within the parish, whilst enabling small-scale sustainable development to take place to meet local needs. The plan focuses on delivering affordable housing for families and downsizers, whilst retaining the distinctive features of the parish and seeks to designate 7 local green spaces.
We commend the work the neighbourhood plan team put in to the plan through its final stages and their continued collaboration with AVDC. As a result AVDC believes that the requirements of the ‘basic conditions’ have been met in terms of: having appropriate regard to national policy, contributing to the achievement of sustainable development, being in general conformity with the strategic policies in the development plan, and being compatible with human rights requirements and EU obligations.
However AVDC does still have some outstanding concerns that we would wish to raise with the Independent Examiner to consider potential modifications to the plan. These outstanding concerns are detailed in Appendix A, table 1.
The Gateway Gatehouse Road Aylesbury Bucks HP19 8FF DX 4130 Aylesbury 1 www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk Further Comments
For some background context for Aylesbury Vale & Weston Turville Parish.
Adopted Aylesbury Vale District Local Plan (AVDLP) 2004
Aylesbury Vale’s planning policy framework used to be set out in the AVLDP. the direction from the Secretary of State setting out which AVDLP policies are saved are available from here https://www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/page_downloads/SOS-saved- policies-direction.pdf these form the adopted policies which the Neighbourhood Plan should have regard to.
Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
The Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) is the emerging plan for the district which aims to meet the need for over 27,000 new homes in the Vale by 2033, half of which are either already built or have planning permission.
The Submission VALP was recently been submitted to the planning inspectorate at the end of February. It is anticipated that hearing sessions for this will be held over the summer.
Major Planning applications in the parish awaiting determination
16/00424/AOP - Land Between Wendover Road And Aston Clinton Road, Weston Turville. Outline planning application (with all matters reserved) for a mixed-use sustainable urban extension comprising: up to 3,000 dwellings and a 60 bed care home/extra care facility; provision of land for a Park and Ride site; employment land; provision of two primary schools; a mixed use local centre with provision for a foodstore, further retail (including a pharmacy), restaurant and café units, a doctor's surgery, gym, public house with letting rooms, professional services, multi-functional community space and a day nursery, and live work units; multi-functional green infrastructure including parkland, sports pitches, sports pavilions, children's play areas, mixed use games areas, including a skate park/BMX facility, informal open space, allotments, community orchards, landscaping; extensions to domestic gardens at Tamarisk Way; strategic flood defences and surface water attenuation; vehicular access points from New Road, Marroway, A413 Wendover Road and A41 Aston Clinton Road; a dualled Southern Link Road between A413 Wendover Road and A41 Aston Clinton Road and a strategic link road between the Southern Link Road and Marroway; internal roads, streets, lanes, squares, footpaths and cycleways and upgrades to Public Rights Of Ways; and car parking related to the above land uses, buildings and facilities. Application received 05/02/2016. Approved subject to S106
16/03388/AOP - Land To The South Of Aston Clinton Road, Weston Turville. Outline application with access to be considered and all other matters reserved for the erection of 120 dwellings. Application Received 16.09.2016. Pending
18/00388/ADP - Land East Of New Road, Weston Turville. Application for reserve matters pursuant to outline planning permission 14/02072/AOP relating to access, appearance, landscaping, scale and layout for the erection of 64 dwellings, public open space and associated infrastructure. Application received 2/2/2018. Pending – reserved matters only, outline is approved so I would remove this
17/04819/AOP - Westonmead Farm Aston Clinton Road, Weston Turville. Outline application with all matters reserved except for principle means of vehicular access, for up to 177 dwellings, public open space, play area, vehicular access off Aston Clinton Road and associated infrastructure. Application received 08.12.2017 pending
16/01040/AOP - Aylesbury Woodland College Road North, Aston Clinton. Although this Application is in the Neighbouring Parish of Aston Clinton, approximately 1/3rd of it falls within the Weston Turville Parish. Outline application with means of access (in part) to be considered for up to 102,800 sq m employment (B1/B2/B8), up to 1,100 dwellings (C3), 60 residential extra care units (C2), mixed-use local centre of up to 4,000 sq m (A1/A2/A5/D1), up to 5,700 sq m hotel and Conference Centre (C1), up to 3,500 sq m Leisure facilities (A1/A3/A4), up to 16 ha for sports village and pitches, Athletes Accommodation (10 x 8 apartments), and up to 2 ha for a primary school (D1), with a strategic link road connecting with the ELR (N) and the A41 Aston Clinton Road, transport infrastructure, landscape, open space, flood mitigation and drainage. Application received 18.03.2016. Pending
In conclusion, the Local Planning Authority would reiterate its support for the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan, and the work undertaken to reach this stage. We hope the examination stage can be progressed as soon as possible and pending the outcome of the Examination that we can move to the referendum stage. We look forward to hearing from you in regards to the next stages, particularly for whether a hearing day will be necessary.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Charlotte Stevens Planning Policy Manager
Appendix A. Table 1; AVDC’s outstanding Concerns
Section Comment of the Plan
T1 1st AVDC would like to request the following policy amendment: Para “Development proposals should demonstrate that they can deliver appropriate site access and traffic mitigation through agreement with the Highways and Planning Authorities, in consultation with the Parish Council, to minimise adverse effects on the local traffic network.”
This is based on the grounds that policies should not require consultation with highways, planning and parishes as the requirement for permission and consultations are set out in legislation Map on To improve the plan we believe that the quality of the Local Green Spaces Map (Figure 8) on page 22, is insufficient to support decision Page 22 makers. The map appears to be distorted and out of proportion, the resolution is also poor. In addition the map needs to define the extent of each space i.e. a boundary for each area needs to be shown rather than just pointing to a green field. DM will need to know the exact area of a LGS in order to determine planning applications in the vicinity.
We therefore request a map revision, and a modification to include the site area in hectares in brackets, next to the name of each local green space either on the map or in the policy. We believe this would greatly improve implementation and usability of the plan. E3 AVDC would firstly like to apologise to WTPC for the conflicting advise on this policy, owing to a change in policy stance of our own to be more flexible as we are still working on determining what the most suitable metric is for measuring net gain. We originally advised the PC to include the use of the Biodiversity Impact Calculator, however this can potentially take up too much of the S106 monies that you would want to be spent on other things. We therefore ask the examiner to consider the following modification;
“Development proposals are expected to provide net gains to biodiversity. Net gain will be determined by applying the Biodiversity Impact Calculator an appropriate recognised mechanism to achieve no net loss and a net gain”
The supporting text in 6.22 would then need to be subsequently modified to reflect this and could refer to AVDC’s proposed Biodiversity SPD referenced in Para 9.17 of VALP Proposed Submission. This will be informed by on further guidance anticipated last this year from natural England HE1 Presently, we cannot require contributions under the CIL Regulations for development of less than 10 dwellings unless it exceeds more than 1,000sqm floorspace. Based on further discussions we believe that this policy wording could be strengthened for the purposes of decision making were it to be modified to the following;
Developer contributions will be sought in relation to residential development in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy regulation 2010 (as amended) to fund improvements to service capacity for health facilities where the CCG has demonstrated that the development will create pressure on service provision and a requirement can be justified. HE2 Presently, we cannot require contributions under the CIL Regulations for development of less than 10 dwellings unless it exceeds more than 1,000sqm floorspace. Based on further discussions we believe that this policy wording could be strengthened for the purposes of decision making were it to be modified to the following;
Developer contributions will be sought in relation to residential development in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy regulation 2010 (as amended) towards the funding of new school places to expand the capacity at existing schools or provision of new education facilities. B1 We believe the policy would be strengthened with the following amendment
Proposals for change of use from the current retail use for properties located in The Parade, Main Street will be resisted unless there is demonstrable evidence to show that its continued use is no longer viable this will require evidence that the property has been actively marketed, commensurate with its use, at an open market value for a period of at least 12 months and the proposal accords with Policy C2. B2 We believe the policy would be strengthened with the following amendment
Proposals that result in the loss of an existing employment use will be resisted, unless it can be demonstrated that its continued use is no longer viable, which will include evidence that the property has been marketed on reasonable terms at open market value commensurate with its use for a period of at least 18 12 months and will conform to Policy C2. B3 The Aylesbury Vale Broadband Company has since been dissolved. We would therefore request the following modification to update this policy;
the developer should explore all reasonableness identifying delivery partners that are currently operating in the area such as BDUK/Aylesbury Vale Broadband Company and the LPA through a new homes bonus
From: Patience Stewart [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 31 January 2018 09:58 To: Planning Policy Subject: FW: Consultee Notification - Re.16 Submission Consultation: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan Submission consultation. The following comments are submitted on behalf of Anglian Water.
I would be grateful if you could confirm that you have received this response.
It would appear that Weston Turville Parish is located outside of our area of responsibility. We serve part of Aylesbury Vale District but not Weston Turville Parish. Therefore we have no comments relating to the content of the Draft Plan.
Should you have any queries relating to this response please let me know
Regards, Stewart Patience Spatial Planning Manager
Anglian Water Services Limited Mobile: 07764989051 Thorpe Wood House, Thorpe Wood, Peterborough, PE3 6WT www.anglianwater.co.uk
--*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*---*----*--- The information contained in this message is likely to be confidential and may be legally privileged. The dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure of this message, or its contents, is strictly prohibited unless authorised by Anglian Water. It is intended only for the person named as addressee. Anglian Water cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message, and does not authorise any contract to be made using the Internet. If you have received this message in error, please immediately return it to the sender at the above address and delete it from your computer. Anglian Water Services Limited Registered Office: Lancaster House, Lancaster Way, Ermine Business Park, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE29 6XU Registered in England No 2366656 Please consider the environment before printing this email.
From: TownPlanning LNW [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 01 February 2018 14:56 To: Planning Policy Subject: AVDC - Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan
FAO Stephanie Buller
AVDC - Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan until 2033
As you are aware Network Rail is a statutory consultee for any planning applications within 10 metres of relevant railway land (as the Rail Infrastructure Managers for the railway, set out in Article 16 of the Development Management Procedure Order) and for any development likely to result in a material increase in the volume or a material change in the character of traffic using a level crossing over a railway (as the Rail Network Operators, set out in Schedule 4 (J) of the Development Management Procedure Order); in addition you are required to consult the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).
Although the proposal area is not adjacent to the railway boundary the council and neignbourhood body are advised of the following:
(1) Within Transport Assessments there is a review of local needs regarding public transport; this usually focuses on buses. However, Transport Assessments should also take into account their impact upon footfall at railway stations. Developers are encouraged to consider including within Transport Assessments trip generation data at Railway Stations. Location of proposals, accessibility and density of developments should be considered in relation to railway stations, in this case, Stoke Mandeville Railway Station. Where proposals are likely to increase footfall at railway stations developer contributions should be considered (either via CIL, S106 or unilateral undertaking) to provide full funding for enhancements at stations as a result of increased numbers of customers.
(2) There are 3 Network Rail level crossings which could be impacted by proposals in the plan area:
Yew Tree Farm Stoke Mandeville FP No.2 Wendover FP No.4
Development proposals should be accompanied by a TS/TA which includes consideration of the impact of proposals upon level crossing(s) with mitigation implemented as required. Network Rail would encourage the council to adopt specific policy wording to ensure that a) The impact of proposed new development (including cumulative impact) on the risk at existing level crossings is assessed by the developer(s), and b) suitable mitigation incorporated within the development proposals and fully funded by the developer(s). TS/TAs should be undertaken in conjunction with the local highways authority with advice from Network Rail.
There is a duty to consult Network Rail as follows on the matter of level crossings: The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 SCHEDULE 4 Consultations before the grant of permission
Development which is likely to result in a material increase in the volume or material change in the character of traffic using a level crossing over a railway.
The operator of the network which includes or consists of the railway in question, and the Secretary of State for Transport.
The neighbourhood plan team are advised that ‘traffic’ over a level crossing can be vehicular, pedestrian, cyclists or horse-riders and that proposals do not have to be adjacent to a level crossing to potentially impact the crossing.
Councils are urged to take the view that level crossings can be impacted in a variety of ways by planning proposals: By a proposal being directly next to a level crossing By the cumulative effect of developments added over time in the vicinity of a level crossing By the type of level crossing involved e.g. where pedestrians only are allowed to use the level crossing, but a proposal involves allowing cyclists to use the route By the construction of large developments (commercial and residential) where road access to and from the site includes a level crossing or the level / type of use of a level crossing increases as a result of diverted traffic or of a new highway By developments that might impede pedestrians ability to hear approaching trains at a level crossing, e.g. new airports or new runways / highways / roads By proposals that may interfere with pedestrian and vehicle users’ ability to see level crossing warning signs By any developments for schools, colleges or nurseries where minors in numbers may be using the level crossing By any proposal that may cause blocking back across the level crossing By any proposal which may see a level crossing impacted by the introduction of cycling or walking routes
Regards
Diane Clarke AssocRTPI Town Planning Technician LNW Network Rail Floor 1 Square One 4 Travis Street Manchester, M1 2NY
*************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** **********
The content of this email (and any attachment) is confidential. It may also be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. This email should not be used by anyone who is not an original intended recipient, nor may it be copied or disclosed to anyone who is not an original intended recipient.
If you have received this email by mistake please notify us by emailing the sender, and then delete the email and any copies from your system.
Liability cannot be accepted for statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of Network Rail. Network Rail Infrastructure Limited registered in England and Wales No. 2904587, registered office Network Rail, 2nd Floor, One Eversholt Street, London, NW1 2DN
*************************************************************************** *************************************************************************** **********
[email protected] Sent by email: [email protected] 0118 9520 503
01 March 2018
Aylesbury Vale – Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan – Submission Version
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for consulting Thames Water on the above document. Thames Water is the statutory water and sewerage undertaker for the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan area and is hence a “specific consultation body” in accordance with the Town & Country Planning (Local Development) Regulations 2012.
Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
We note the Neighbourhood Forum’s comment on page 83 of the consultation statement regarding your discussion with Aylesbury Vale DC, and thus the decision not to include a policy on water and wastewater infrastructure in the Neighbourhood Plan. Whilst we accept it is a strategic issue, it is an important one, and we would encourage the Forum to reconsider not including any reference. Even f it were to reference the appropriate Local Plan Policy at paragraph 2.3 where you list relevant adopted policies.
General Comments
For information, the way water and wastewater infrastructure will be delivered is changing. From the 1st April 2018 all off site water and wastewater network reinforcement works necessary as a result of new development will be delivered by the relevant statutory undertaker. Local reinforcement works will be funded by the Infrastructure Charge which is a fixed charge for water and wastewater for each new property connected. Strategic water and wastewater infrastructure requirements will be funded through water companies’ investment programmes which are based on a 5 year cycle known as the Asset Management Plan process.
As such we would again like to encourage the Neighbourhood Forum to encourage developers to speak with Thames at an early stage so that their requirements can be discussed.
We hope this is of assistance.
Yours sincerely
Richard Hill Head of Property
Registered address: Thames Water Utilities Limited, Clearwater Court, Vastern Road, Reading RG1 8DB Company number 02366661 Thames Water Utilities Limited is part of the Thames Water Plc group. VAT registration no GB 537-4569-15
Stephanie Buller Our ref: WA/2006/000227/OR- Aylesbury Vale District Council 42/PO1-L01 Department of Planning Property and Your ref: Construction Services The Gateway Date: 28 February 2018 Gatehouse Road Aylesbury Buckinghamshire HP19 8FF
Dear Stephanie Buller
Reg.16 Submission Consultation: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan.
Thank you for consulting the Environment Agency on the submission draft of the Neighbourhood Plan for Weston Turville. We aim to reduce flood risk, while protecting and enhancing the water environment.
Flood Risk
We are pleased to see that the proposed site allocations have been directed to the areas at the lowest probability of flooding and that they are all located within Flood Zone 1.
However there are some local green spaces that have been allocated within your neighbourhood area. Two of these sites, sites 3 and 3 lie within Flood Zone 3. We assume that these areas are not going to be developed but just designated as green spaces for conservation purposes. Please make sure there is no ground level raising within these sites.
Some of your neighbourhood area lies within Flood Zone 3. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) para 100-102, the sequential test will need to be applied to development within these areas to ensure development is directed to the areas of lowest flood risk.
The Sequential Test should be informed by the Local Planning Authorities Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA).
You must also follow NPPF paragraph 103 and Aylesbury Vale District Council local plan policy on flood risk.
Cont/d.. Watercourses
The Wendover Brook, West End Ditch and the Bear Brook Broughton Stream run through your neighbourhood plan area. Developments within or adjacent to these watercourses should not cause further deterioration in water quality and should seek to improve the water quality based on the recommendations of the Thames River Basin Management Plan. An assessment of the potential impacts of the neighbourhood plan on these watercourses under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) should be included within any SEA/SA appraisal.
Final Comments
Once again, thank you for contacting us. Our comments are based on our available records and the information as submitted to us.
Please quote our reference number in any future correspondence.
If you have any queries please contact me.
Yours sincerely
Ms Michelle Kidd Planning Advisor
Direct dial 02030259712 E-mail [email protected]
End 2
To: Dept. of Planning Policy, AVDC with reference to Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan 2018.
I own the field known as Barley Close Field in the centre of Weston Turville, which is more precisely described as Title No BM394391 , Ordinance Survey ref SP8510NE in HM Land Registry Title Plan and which measures approximately 2.16 acres.
I have owned the land since 1984 and my daughter has used it hitherto for her horses, for in excess of 10 years. Stables were erected on the land over 10 years ago and the land was cleared, ploughed, grass-seeded and fenced and a water supply with horse troughs was installed.
The land has been included in the Proposed Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan as part of Green Area 5. This is a large area of land in the centre of the village amounting to 6.35 hectares. My land comprises 0.875 hectares of this total .
In the plan documentation, it is stated that that the four owners of the land comprising Area 5 were written to and that no reply was obtained from one owner. The non- responder was me since I did not receive any correspondence from Weston Turville Parish Council regarding their proposals and, therefore, could not reply.
There have, apparently, been a number of local consultation occasions within Weston Turville but, as I was at the time living in Stoke Mandeville and subsequently in Wendover, the first indication of the Green Area proposal was a letter dated 6th November 2017 and which arrived significantly later than the date of the letter.
On receipt of the letter from Weston Turville P.C. , I immediately advised them that I OBJECTED to the inclusion of my land within the Plan and was invited to a meeting with the chair of Weston Turville Neighbourhood Steering Group, which I attended and was advised that the Plan was finalised and was to be submitted to AVDC without the possibility of further amendments.
I OBJECT to my land being included in the Plan for the following reasons:-
1) The NPPF guidance is that the Green Area should not be an extensive tract of land. Area 5 is 6.22 hectares which I consider an extensive tract of land in the context of the village and other proposed Green Areas. It is probably equal in size to the village centre itself. Whilst the overall area designated as Weston Turville is considerably
larger, those living in the greater area of Weston Turville will never have reason or occasion to advantage themselves of Area 5.
2) Proper process was not followed in the preparation of the Plan since I was not notified of the proposal until the last minute and was then advised that the Plan could not be amended.
3) I have now retired and my daughter now has other interests and does not have time to keep horses. Therefore, I could decide to sell the land between now and 2031. The designation of the Green Area is likely to inhibit my chances of a sale and is, therefore, an unjustified fetter on my rights as a landowner to deal with my land.
4) The proposal appears to be an invitation to local villagers to enjoy my land without cost, but with the cost and liability associated with the land remaining with me. It is not surprising that, of those responding to the consultations, “ 97% supported the protection of the land known as the Glebe Fields and Manor Farm from development and therefore we intend to keep all these fields, including your land, in the neighbourhood plan as a potential local green space” (letter from Weston Turville PC 20/12/2017)
5) It is possible that, if the village populace backed me on a proposal to erect a dwelling in the southern section of my land in the vicinity of my existing stables, then I would be prepared to dedicate a portion of the northern part of my land to the village for leisure purposes. This would give me a way of utilising or disposing of my land and avoids the possibility of an open-market sale of the land, as it exists, with the potential purchase by travelling people. A precedent exists within the village for such purchase and I have already been approached by ‘travellers’ seeking to rent my field under the guise of continuing its use as a pony paddock.
This would conform with Paragraph 184 of the NPPF allowing control over development.
6) One of the arguments cited in the designation of the ‘Glebe Lands’ as part of the Conservation Area was the maintenance of a medieval furlongs and strips with characteristic ploughing patterns. Any such pattern has long since disappeared in my land due to its preparation for use as a horse/pony paddock.
7) AVDC has not demonstrated compliance with Government planning targets and recent Government directives indicate that further legislation will be forthcoming to enforce planning targets, such that a large area of land such as proposed in Area 5 will not be sacrosanct.
I trust that this proposal can be reviewed and reconsidered.
Alan R Taylor MBBS, FRCS(Eng), FRCS(Edin).
Planning Policy Our ref: HD/P5132/ Aylesbury Vale District Council Your ref: The Gateway Gatehouse Road Telephone 01483 252040 Aylesbury, HP19 8FF. Fax
12th March 2018
Dear Sir or Madam,
Publication of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan
Thank you for your e-mail of 12th January advising Historic England of the consultation on the Publication version of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. Historic England is the Government’s advisor on planning for the historic environment, including the conservation of heritage assets and the championing of good design in historic areas. As such, we have limited our comments to those areas of the plan that relate to our interests.
Unfortunately we have no record of having been consulted at the Regulation 14 Pre- Submission stage. However, we are pleased to make the following general and detailed comments at this stage.
The nature of the locally-led neighbourhood plan process is that the community itself should determine its own agenda based on the issues about which it is concerned. At the same time, as a national organisation able increasingly to draw upon our experiences of neighbourhood planning exercises across the country, our input can help communities reflect upon the special (heritage) qualities which define their area to best achieve aims and objectives for the historic environment. To this end information on our website might be of assistance – the appendix to this letter contains links to this website and to a range of potentially useful other websites.
We welcome the description of the historical development and current historic environment of the parish and village in paragraphs 3.2 – 3.5. However, it would be helpful to mention the conservation area and explain when it was designated, whether or not there has been a review of the designation, what its special interest (the reason for designation) is and whether or not there is a character appraisal and/or a management plan for the area (or at least to include this in paragraph 6.8).
Is there a list of locally-important buildings and features ? Non-designated heritage assets, such as locally important buildings, can make an important contribution to creating a sense of place and local identity. Have the Buckinghamshire Historic Environment Record and Buckinghamshire Historic Landscape Character Assessment been consulted, the former for non-scheduled archaeological sites ?
- 2 -
The National Planning Practice Guidance states “… where it is relevant, neighbourhood plans need to include enough information about local heritage to guide decisions and put broader strategic heritage policies from the local plan into action at a neighbourhood scale. … In addition, and where relevant, neighbourhood plans need to include enough information about local non-designated heritage assets including sites of archaeological interest to guide decisions”.
We are disappointed that the vision for the parish does not include the conservation and enhancement of the heritage assets within the parish, nor is there an objective to conserve and enhance the historic environment or even the special interest, character and appearance of the conservation area. The vision could be simply amended to address this by the addition of “and heritage assets” at the end and we suggest an additional objective: “To conserve and enhance the significance of the heritage assets in the parish and their settings, including the special interest, character and appearance of the conservation area”.
Although none of the heritage assets in the parish are currently on the Historic England Heritage at Risk Register the Register does not include grade II listed secular buildings outside London. Has a survey of the condition of grade II buildings in the Plan area been undertaken ?
Has there been any or is there any ongoing loss of character, particularly within the Conservation Area, through inappropriate development, inappropriate alterations to properties under permitted development rights, loss of vegetation, insensitive streetworks etc ?
In paragraph 5.4, the fact that the Plan meets the requirement for sustainable development is not a reason why the Plan does not need to be subject to Strategic Environmental Assessment. All neighbourhood plans should contribute to sustainable development as one of the basic conditions a neighbourhood plan should satisfy and the SEA is a process for establishing whether that would actually be the case in circumstances where a plan is considered likely to have significant environmental effects (positive or negative). However, we have previously expressed our view that the Plan does not need to be subject to SEA because it is unlikely to have significant effects on the historic environment.
Policy H1 allows for the development of to 12 houses within the defined settlement boundaries of Weston Turville. We are not sure what the justification for this maximum is, but a development of that size could have a significant impact on the significance of heritage assets in the village, including the conservation area.
In our response to the Council’s draft SEA Screening Opinion we noted that the draft Plan had a maximum of six dwellings. If this allowance has now been doubled, it does raise the question of whether or not the Plan, as now drafted, should be subject to SEA, as well as whether or not Policy H1 provides sufficient protection to the heritage assets in the parish, particularly those within the settlement boundaries but also those outside.
- 3 -
We note that development within the settlement boundaries will be supported “provided the proposals meet the other policies of this Neighbourhood Plan and Aylesbury Vale Local Plan” and that development outside the settlement boundaries will not be permitted unless, inter alia, “they are consistent with development plan policies relating to the historic environment, heritage assets, landscape character and protecting the natural environment.
We are not sure why it is considered necessary or appropriate to specifically identify policies (and thus limit the policies that will apply) for development outside the settlement boundaries, but are pleased to see the inclusion of policies relating to the historic environment and heritage assets. Development, whether within or outside the settlement boundaries is therefore required by Policy H1 to be consistent with the policies of the Neighbourhood Plan and Aylesbury Vale Local Plan relating to the historic environment and heritage assets.
However, as recognised by their omission from the list in paragraph 2.3 of the Plan, the policies of the Local Plan relating to listed buildings were not saved in 2007 and therefore no longer apply. The Neighbourhood Plan does not contain a policy specifically for the conservation and enhancement of the significance of listed buildings. There are, therefore, no specific policies in either the adopted local plan or the Submission Neighbourhood Plan to provide protection for listed buildings from development allowed by Policy H1, either within the settlement policy boundaries or outside.
However, we do note that Policy H2 states that proposals for development in the neighbourhood area will be supported provided that, inter alia “It preserves and enhances the setting of any heritage asset”. It is a recognised principle that plans should be read as a whole, with all relevant policies being considered when determining development proposals, but Policy H1 makes it clear that, for development proposals within the settlement boundaries, this criterion is a prerequisite for those proposals to be supported.
However, Policy H2 is a design policy, not, or at least, not clearly, a policy “relating to the historic environment, heritage assets, landscape character and protecting the natural environment”, with which development proposals outside the settlement boundaries must be consistent in order to gain support from Policy H1. It is not clear, therefore, what status Policy H2 has as regards development proposals outside settlement boundaries.
Currently, therefore, there is a “policy gap” relating to listed buildings and, in our view, even between them, as currently drafted, Policies H1 and H2 do not provide sufficient protection for listed buildings from the development proposals that may be permitted by Policy H1. Accordingly, we consider that they do not promote sustainable development nor are consistent with national planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, two of the basic tests that neighbourhood plans should satisfy.
- 4 -
To rectify this situation, we consider that the list of specific policy subjects in criterion III of Policy H1 should either be replaced with “provided the proposals meet the other policies of this Neighbourhood Plan and the adopted Local Plan” or the list is expanded to include development plan policies relating to the design of new development. In addition, the fifth bullet point of Policy H2 should be reworded: “It conserves and enhances the significance of any heritage asset and/or the special interest, character and appearance of the conservation area and their settings”.
In our view, this strengthening of these policies and the protection they afford to heritage assets would also ensure that there would be no significant effects on the historic environment and therefore confirm that the Plan does not need to be subject to SEA. Another alternative would be to add a specific policy to the Plan for the conservation and enhancement of heritage assets in the parish, not just the conservation area, which, whilst not essential, we would welcome.
The comment above apart, we consider that Policy H2 could be considered to satisfy the requirement of paragraph 58 of the National Planning Policy Framework that “…neighbourhood plans should develop robust and comprehensive policies that set out the quality of development that will be expected for the area. Such policies should be based on stated objectives for the future of the area and an understanding and evaluation of its defining characteristics.”
Historic England also considers that Neighbourhood Development Plans should be underpinned by a thorough understanding of the character and special qualities of the area covered by the Plan. Characterisation studies can also help inform locations and detailed design of proposed new development, identify possible townscape improvements and establish a baseline against which to measure change.
Has there been any character appraisal of the conservation area or the Plan area as a whole to provide the required “understanding and evaluation of its defining characteristics ” ? Is there, for example, a Village Design Statement ? Without such evidence to underpin Policy H2, there has to be a question as to whether Policy H2 is consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework. The appendix to this letter contains links to characterisation toolkits, and we would be pleased to advise further on this subject.
We welcome and support Policy H3 in principle. However, the special interest, character and appearance of the Conservation Area could be adversely affected by development outside the Area but within its setting. This should be recognised within Policy H3. If there is a Character Appraisal and/or Management Plan for the Conservation Area, this should identify any important views into or out of the Area, or other features of its setting that contribute to or enhance its special interest, character or appearance.
We note that one of the main issues raised during the consultation process was “the level of traffic congestion and the need for traffic calming measures linked with improvements to pedestrian safety”. As you may be aware, Historic England provided the Council with a capacity-building grant for a traffic-calming scheme in Turweston on
- 5 -
the basis that this would be an exemplar for traffic-calming schemes in other historic villages.
Finally, the preparation of the Neighbourhood Plan offers the opportunity to harness a community’s interest in the historic environment by getting the community to help add to the evidence base, perhaps by inputting to the preparation or review of a conservation area appraisal, the characterisation of the Plan area, the preparation of a comprehensive list of locally important buildings and features, or a survey of grade II listed buildings to see if any are at risk from neglect, decay or other threats.
We hope you find these comments helpful. Should you wish to discuss any points within this letter, or if there are particular issues with the historic environment in Weston Turville, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Thank you again for consulting Historic England.
Yours faithfully,
Martin Small Principal Adviser, Historic Environment Planning (Bucks, Oxon, Berks, Hampshire, IoW, South Downs National Park and Chichester)
E-mail: [email protected]
Appendix: Sources of Information
The National Heritage List for England: a full list with descriptions of England's listed buildings: http://list.historicengland.org.uk
Heritage Gateway: includes local records of historic buildings and features www.heritagegateway.org.uk
Heritage Counts: facts and figures on the historic environment http://hc.historicengland.org.uk http://www.historicengland.org.uk/advice/planning/plan-making/improve-your-neighbourhood/ has information on neighbourhood planning and the historic environment .
HELM (Historic Environment Local Management) provides accessible information, training and guidance to decision makers whose actions affect the historic environment. www.helm.org.uk or www.helm.org.uk/communityplanning
Heritage at Risk programme provides a picture of the health of England’s built heritage alongside advice on how best to save those sites most at risk of being lost forever. http://risk.historicengland.org.uk/register.aspx
Placecheck provides a method of taking the first steps in deciding how to improve an area. http://www.placecheck.info/
The Building in Context Toolkit grew out of the publication 'Building in Context' published by EH and CABE in 2001. The purpose of the publication is to stimulate a high standard of design when development takes place in historically sensitive contexts. The founding principle is that all successful design solutions depend on allowing time for a thorough site analysis and character appraisal of context. http://building-in-context.org/toolkit.html
Knowing Your Place deals with the incorporation of local heritage within plans that rural communities are producing, http://www.historicengland.org.uk/publications/knowing-your-place/
Planning for the Environment at the Neighbourhood Level produced jointly by English Heritage, Natural England, the Environment Agency and the Forestry Commission gives ideas on how to improve the local environment and sources of information. http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/PDF/GEHO0212BWAZ-E-E.pdf
Good Practice Guide for Local Heritage Listing produced by Historic England, uses good practice to support the creation and management of local heritage lists. http://www.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/good-practice-local-heritage- listing/
Understanding Place series describes current approaches to and applications of historic characterisation in planning together with a series of case studies http://www.helm.org.uk/server/show/nav.19604
Oxford Character Assessment Toolkit can be uses to record the features that give a settlement or part of a settlement its sense of place http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decP/CharacterAppraisalToolkit.htm
From: andy andy [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 March 2018 12:12 To: Planning Policy Cc: [email protected]; Subject: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan Submission Version Representations Importance: High
Dear Sir or Madam,
This representation concerning the Submission Version of the draft Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan is made on behalf of Sir Richard Lapthorne, CBE, the owner of Mill Barn, in Mill Lane, Weston Turville and adjoining land areas to the west and north, either side of Mill Lane.
Previous representations have been submitted in respect to both earlier draft versions of the Neighbourhood Plan and with respect to consultations on the emerging draft Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP). These latest representations should therefore be read in conjunction with those earlier representations, which provide the background context to these further comments.
For reasons explained in greater detail below and in our previous representations, we object to the lack of any housing allocation within the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. To simply rely on past developments to satisfy current and emerging housing needs in the village fails to satisfy such housing needs. The Submission Draft Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan identifies Weston Turville as one of nineteen 'Medium-sized villages', after the nineteen other either 'Strategic' or Larger Village' settlements. It is therefore deemed a sustainable location at which to accommodate some development. In terms of is close accessibility to the strategic settlements of Aylesbury, as well as Wendover and Haddenham, Weston Turville is sustainably better placed to services and facilities than many of the larger or other medium- sized villages, which are more remotely located across the District and have less frequent bus service connections to the main towns and service centres. The large-scale development allocations within the perimeters of Weston Turville parish are proposed as urban extensions of Aylesbury town, intended to meet its housing needs, not those of Weston Turville village. For the Plan to suggest that development needs in the village could be satisfied through an application of draft Policy H1 is unrealistic because settlement boundaries have been drawn tightly around existing built areas, conservation area designation affects much of the village and now the Parish Council is proposing large areas of Local Green Space designations, which will further constrain development opportunities in the village. For the plan to sustainable and for Weston Turville to have any realistic prospect of accommodating its own objectively assessed local housing needs, space needs to be given and allocation(s) made to meet such needs. The area of land identified below at 'Warings Meadow', is considered by us to be the most sustainable location for such development in the village and should be allocated as such. The Submission Draft Local Plan VALP proposes a five-pitch expansion of the existing Gypsy/Travellers site at Marroway to help meet those specific housing needs and, for consistency, more traditional housing needs arising in the village ought to be similarly provided for with a Neighbourhood Plan housing allocation(s).
With respect to draft Policy H1: Weston Turville Settlement Boundaries, my client is pleased to note that the defined boundaries to the settlement have been modified in accordance with our earlier representations and now are far more consistent with the extent of built development and the boundaries of the designated village conservation area. Accordingly, we specifically support the defined settlement boundary identified in Figure 6, at the bottom of page 16 of the Submission Version plan.
However, in respect to the detailed policy wording contained within draft Policy H1, we still object to the reference in the second paragraph to "...small scale development of up to 12 houses within the defined settlement boundaries..." as we believe the size of any 'small scale development' ought not to be an arbitrary figure but should instead be determined by the size, form and local characteristics of any site that may potentially come forward for development, the particular development needs of the village, and the need to use land efficiently, in accordance with NPPF guidance. Accordingly, we suggest that this part of the policy wording should be amended to read: "Development proposals for small scale development that help meet local needs and would normally be up to 12 houses, or any other size that respects the particular size, form and characteristics of the site and uses the land efficiently, that is within the defined settlement boundaries of Weston Turville will be supported..."
With respect to draft Policy H2: Development Design in the Neighbourhood Area, my client supports the general aims and objectives behind the suggested policy but objects to some of the detailed wording in the policy as we believe it could be unduly restrictive on potential development opportunities within the defined settlement boundaries. We therefore object to to the references in the fourth bullet point that states "It retains and considers the distinctive qualities of the special and attractive areas of open space within the village" and also object to the references in the tenth bullet point that states "Any new development does not result in the loss of any existing publicly accessible open space." The precise wording used in these particular criteria to draft Policy H2 could potentially thwart what we consider would otherwise be an acceptable partial development of land known as 'Warings Meadow' [previously incorrectly referred to as 'Wareings Meadow'], which forms the basis of more detailed representations later in this submission. Accordingly, we suggest that the criteria references be amended to read: 4th Bullet "It respects the distinctive qualities of..."; and 10th Bullet - replace with: "If and when any partial development of publicly accessible open space is deemed appropriate within the defined settlement boundaries there should be positive enhancement of the retained space that enhances public accessibility and enjoyment of the land".
With respect to draft Policy H3: Housing Mix and Tenure, we note that Submission draft VALP policy currently refers to 35% affordable housing on schemes greater than 10 dwellings and if that figure is maintained in any final version, following Examination, then the figure ought to be consistent. Accordingly, we suggest that the percentage figure referred to in the 1st Bullet point be amended to read: "35%".
With respect to draft Policy T1: Improvements to road safety and ease traffic congestion, reference in the second paragraph is made only to S.106 Planning Obligation Agreements but development contributions might conceivably ultimately come by way of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments, so the policy wording should be amended accordingly.
With respect to draft Policy T3: Encourage better planning of public transport, we note that reference is made in the third paragraph to a maximum 400m distance of developments from bus stops, with a cross-reference made to the DfT best practice guide 'Inclusive Mobility'. However, whilst the 400m distance may be an ideal goal, planning case law has regularly confirmed that distances of between 800m-1600m are still considered perfectly accessible by foot for most people. Even if 1600m is deemed excessive, which we agree would be too far for many people, the 800m threshold is the figure generally deemed accessible and sustainable. Accordingly, we suggest that the the wording should be amended to read: "New developments should ideally be within 400m but no more than 800m from a bus stop..."
With respect to draft Policy E1: Protection of Local Green Spaces and accompanying paragraphs 6.12-6.17, we maintain our previous objection to the extent of the green space identified as "No.3 - Land to the rear of Brookside". We welcome the removal from the suggested area of the residential properties known as Mill Barn and Mill Cottage. However, we still maintain an objection to the field land known as Warings Meadow and the two private woodlands alongside Mill Lane and either side of Mill Cottage being identified as Local Green Spaces. The two private woodlands have no public access, so should not be identified in such a way. The trees were all planted and are regularly maintained by gardeners employed by the landowner. The central field, which is known as 'Warings Meadow' [not Wareings Meadow as I erroneously previously advised] has been previously used for sheep grazing and the growing of tree stocks that were then transplanted elsewhere on the estate or to Kew Gardens or other arboretum. Given the location of the field, which is surrounded on all sides by built residential development, its containment within the defined settlement boundary, its exclusion from the conservation area, its easy highway accessibility onto Brookside and its easy pedestrian connectivity with the rest of the village, its various facilities and bus stops, the central area would make an ideal development allocation in our considered opinion. Such an allocation would help meet some of Weston Turville's own development needs, which the draft plan currently fails to provide for. The land was previously promoted for such development through the District's Council's SHLAA process but was initially dismissed on the erroneous grounds that the site had no safe highway access and that it was affected by flood constraints. At the time, it had been assumed by the District Council that any access would have to be via the very narrow and unsuitable Mill Lane, but through a proposed demolition of No.28 Brookside (which Sir Richard owns) suitable highway access could be facilitated. The drainage constraint initially highlighted by the Environment Agency is based on flawed lidar data and drainage consultants instructed by Sir Richard are currently in negotiation with Officers at the Environment Agency to agree a modified area of flood constraint, which accurately reflects topographic details and up to date river modelling. We are confident that the whole of the suggested development area in Warings Meadow will ultimately be excluded from Flood Zones 2 and 3 and all be classed as Zone 1, which will remove the previous surface water drainage constraint from the site. Public accessibility through the land now proposed for a development allocation is rare, even though an unmarked footpath crosses obliquely through it. That footpath (Ref: WTU/11/1) is currently proposed to be diverted along the southern side of the field, with a compensatory upgrade proposed of the existing permissive footpath, which is far more regularly used. The application is presently being considered by Bucks County Council Rights of Way. The remaining area of the suggested Local Green Space, which amounts to 0.9429ha (2.33 acres) through which the footpaths all pass and which are all sensitively landscaped, are supported as appropriate for Local Green Space designation and could potentially be transferred to public ownership as part of any agreement to facilitate development on the field. A copy of our suggested revised plan for the Local Green Space designation and proposed new 0.9922ha (2.45 acres) housing allocation for sixteen open market homes and nine affordable homes is attached to this submission.
With respect to all the other draft policies in the Plan: E3, C1, C2, C3, HE1, HE2, B1, B2 and B3, those policies are all broadly supported. However, without any planned growth in the village, the continued viability of Weston Turville will become jeopardised and it is unlikely that any S.106 and/or CIL money would be generated sufficient to enhance village facilities and/or help revitalise its centre.
I trust that you, and ultimately the Plan's Examiner, will find these representations helpful and constructive.
Kind regards,
Andy Bateson
On behalf of Sir Richard Lapthorne, CBE
AB Planning & Development Limited
T: 01993 359457 M: 07720 979630
W: www.abplanninganddevelopment.co.uk
A3 486000m 486100m 486200m
485900m 486000m 486100m 486200m 486300m 486400m 486500m
94.2m
31
211200m 211200m 1
29 N 1 29a 11
BROOK END LB Garage ANSTEY BROOK
94.2m Ps 12
28a
38
2 36
1 FB
30 28
211100m Lower Green3 211100m
The Brills 24 Brook End 95.3m 26
The Red House 32a
Ruin
16 18a
18 32
12 MILL LANE Mill House
Brook Farm 1a Brook End Campbell House Other land areas/property
Path (um) Little Homestead (blue edged) owned by 2 4
1 Sir Richard Lapthorne, CBE 3 95.2m
211000m 211000m
Private
19 woodland 0.0881ha
14 0m10m 20m 30m 40m 50m 60m 70m80m 90m 100m MILL LANE Scale 1:2500
Mill Cottage Path (um) WTU/8/1
95.9m ©Crown Copyright and database rights 2017 OS 100019980 woodlandPrivate
0.1742ha Footbridge 31 32 Planning & Development Limited Potential Path (um) WTU/12/2 210900m Development 210900m 14 Ralegh Crescent, Deer Park, Witney, Oxfordshire, OX28 5FD Suggested Area 0.9922ha T: +44(0)1993 358 457 E: P.O.S. Area M: +44(0)7720 979 630 W: www.abplanninganddevelopment.co.uk
20 AB [email protected] 0.7690ha Brookbank Farm Mill Barn Client
11 Sir Richard Lapthorne, CBE Path (um) WTU/11/1 to be diverted along permissive route 9 Path (um) WTU/9/1 Project Permissive Path (um) Path (um) WTU/11/2 Suggested Objection to extent of Local Green Space 14 P.O.S. Area 0.1739ha designation (No.3 - 'Land to the rear of 34 Brookside') and proposed identification of a
30 210800m Mill Farm 210800m Housing Development Allocation of 0.9922ha MILLSTREAM 26 for 25 dwellings, including 9 affordable (35%), 2 Weir 22 formation of access roads, plus creation of
10 11 9 0.9429ha of new Public Open Space within Pond 7
20 the reduced-size Local Green Space, all on
BROOKSIDE land known as Warings Meadow, between
1 2 Mill Lane and Brookside, at Weston Turville, 10 in Buckinghamshire, HP22 5RG
Title
ESS
210700m 6 210700m Site Location Plan
2 2 Status: Objection to Draft Neighbourhood Plan Path (um) WTU/17/1
28 Date: Scale: 98.1m 14 March 2018 1:2500 @ A3
Checked FB Job no. Dwg.no. Rev. by: Path (um) WTU/14/2 AKB ABL005 100-01 -
485900m 486000m 486100m 486200m 486300m 486400m 486500m
14 March 2018 By E-Mail - [email protected]
Neighbourhood Planning Officer Planning Policy Aylesbury Vale District Council The Gateway Gatehouse Road Aylesbury HP19 8FF
Dear Sirs
WESTON TURVILLE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN – SUBMISSION VERSION COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF GADE HOMES AND IN RESPECT OF LAND NORTH OF BYE GREEN, WESTON TURVILLE VOC-17-32
We write on behalf of our client, Gade Homes, which has an interest in the land to the north of Bye Green, on the eastern side of the village. A site location plan is enclosed for reference. We made comments on the draft Neighbourhood Plan in October 2017, and recap on those below for completeness, but now also write to request that the Neighbourhood Plan gives due consideration and recognises the land north of Bye Green as being suitable for residential development that specifically addresses the need identified in the local community. In this context we request that the site be identified as suitable for housing and included within the settlement boundary for Weston Turville. Our reasoned justification for this is set out below.
Background
We have previously commented that whilst it is recognised that the emerging Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) states that Weston Turville village is not required to take any additional housing due to its proximity to the growth of Aylesbury, part of which is within the parish of Weston Turville, it is nevertheless appropriate for the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (WTNP) to seek to accommodate appropriate development that meets identified need, particularly if this helps to set a high precedent standard for future housing schemes.
In this regard we note that the consultation undertaken to date with parish residents in the context of the WTNP has highlighted a number of key issues, including specific housing needs, which potentially may not be met by the general housing development being brought forward through the VALP. This need is recognised as:
14 Raglan Gardens Caversham Reading RG4 5JH
Registered in England, Vocalism Limited no: 10632161. Registered Office: 130 Old Street, London, EC1V 9BD
• Improved infrastructure to support the new housing and residents; • Affordable housing is needed for first time buyers and young families; • Bungalows and housing suitable for elderly residents wishing to downsize; • Retain parish identity and avoid coalescence with Aylesbury and other surrounding parishes; • Controlled development, sympathetic to the character of the area; • Important that new developments provide a mix of housing with off road parking spaces.
The Evidence Report, which supports the WTNP, also states the following key points:
• All the 1,181 households are unshared of which 1,136 are whole houses or bungalows; • There are 601 detached dwellings, 425 semi-detached and 110 terraced. There are 45 flats and apartments, under 4% of all households; • There is a preponderance of larger houses. 925 dwellings have at least three bedrooms, some 78% of all household spaces; • The average price is £554,485 - an increase of 7% on the previous year; • There are a small number of houses (bungalows) for the elderly and two care homes; • There is some evidence of larger houses being under occupied and too little provision for the independent elderly, wishing to downsize into smaller units of housing; • The disposition of housing in the parish suggests that there is little provision for young families wishing to be resident in the area; • There appears to be only one unit of social housing.
The clear messages coming from the Parish and research undertaken are therefore that there is a need for smaller housing to meet the needs of young families, first time buyers and older people wishing to downsize, and a need for ‘more’ affordable housing. As the WTNP does not propose to allocate land for new development it is quite possible that identified need will not be met from the housing development, either committed or currently under determination. Furthermore, we note that committed housing including at Aylesbury Woodlands and Hampden Fields comprises predominantly larger units.
The Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA, as updated) concludes that for market housing over 75% of the housing need is for 3+ bed houses. However, we note that this is not reflective of the need identified in the WTNP, although the mix for affordable housing stated in the HEDNA does show a greater need for smaller units; 38% being 2 bed houses.
Our Representation
Policy Background Since our original representation was made to the draft WTNP in October 2017, the Government has issued the draft National Planning Policy Framework (dNPPF) for consultation (March 2018). This revised document places even more emphasis upon addressing the significant shortfall in housing across the Country. It highlights that small sites such as the site to the north of Bye Green can make an important contribution to meeting housing requirements and, as would be the case with the Gade site, are often built out relatively quickly. Local authorities should promote a good mix of sites with at least 20% of allocated housing sites being less than half a hectare, and also supporting windfall sites such as this (paragraph 60).
Paragraph 70 of the dNPPF also states that ‘Neighbourhood Planning Groups should also consider the opportunities for allocating small sites suitable for housing in their area.’ On this basis it is considered that the site should therefore be identified in the WTNP as having potential for future housing.
2
Paragraph 72 of the dNPPF promotes the development of ‘… entry level exception sites, suitable for first time buyers (or those looking to rent their first home), unless the need for such homes is already being met within the authority’s area. These sites should be outside existing settlements, on land which is not already allocated for housing….’ In this instance, the local need, as identified in the WTNP, is for entry level homes as well as accommodation for downsizers. Whilst not specifically promoting an ‘entry level exception site’, this site presents a unique opportunity to deliver entry level homes in accordance with an identified neighbourhood plan requirement.
Paragraph 85 of the dNPPF acknowledges that there may be instances where sites to meet local business and community needs in rural areas may have to be found outside of existing settlements, and in locations that are not well served by public transport. In such instances, development must be sensitive to its surroundings and not have an unacceptable impact upon local roads, as well as using opportunities to make the location more sustainable. Once again, the Gade Homes proposals are seeking to address a local need as highlighted in more detail below.
Policy H1 of the draft WTNP sets out the Parish Council’s intentions in terms of development and settlement boundaries. It is noted that the Parish Council will support proposals for the development of up to 12 dwellings of sites within the settlement boundaries, subject to compliance with other policies of the Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan. Proposals for development outside of the settlement boundary are not completely ruled out, but are only acceptable in specific identified circumstances.
Policy H2 provides clarity on the Parish Council’s aspirations for the design of development in the village, and these criteria have been taken into consideration when formulating the draft indicative layout for the site (see below).
Policy H4 deals specifically with housing mix and tenure, including a requirement for 30% affordable housing on schemes of 10 units or more and a mix of housing types including 2 and 3 bed units for young families, and a proportion of units for occupancy by older people, with specific proposals for retirement and extra care housing being supported. It is noted that this is a higher level of provision to that of the VALP in response to an identified need in the area.
Commentary In light of the above policy background and context, it is considered that there is significant scope for additional housing, including affordable provision, which specifically addresses identified local needs, to come forward as part of the WTNP process, provided this is consistent with the WTNP and has been subject to meaningful engagement with residents and the Parish Council to determine what should be provided.
Gade Homes has undertaken significant due diligence and an assessment of the constraints on the site over the course of the last six months or so, including considering how its plans can align with the stated objectives of the WTNP: in particular how the scheme can provide for first time buyers, downsizers and households that would otherwise be priced out of Weston Turville; and also preserve the character by enabling comment and buy-in to the design, type and tenure of housing proposed on Gade Homes site.
A set of illustrations and indicative plans (Plans to Accompany Representations by Gade Homes) prepared by Place Make is attached to this letter to help set the context and help explain the locational appropriateness of this site. The aerial photographs at page 9 show how the village has historically expanded in a linear fashion and furthermore, with the construction of Hampden Fields and Aylesbury Woodlands, Weston Turville is becoming increasingly subsumed into the Aylesbury urban area to the
3 north. Unless any new development is focussed around the core of the village where limited opportunities for development exist, or is carefully located to the east or south of the village, further development will lead to the coalescence of Weston Turville, Stoke Mandeville and Aylesbury. In this respect, the aerial images demonstrate that the proposed site comprises a logical extension to the village, filling in a small corner and not extending development any further north or east than the existing outer limits of the village. In addition, any further extension of the site would be appropriately restricted by ecological constraints (see below).
Gade Homes have also instructed specialist consultants to provide some initial advice in respect of the environmental constraints posed by the site, including in relation to the presence of badgers, and also an assessment of flood risk. This assessment has greatly assisted in establishing the potential parameters for development on the site. An overview of the constraints affecting the site in this respect is attached at page 3 of the accompanying plans document. This exercise has established that the most appropriate solution would be to retain the northern part of the site for ecological and environmental purposes, including the retention and protection of the badger setts, whilst concentrating new development on the southern half of the site, but also maintaining a buffer to the existing houses on Bye Green.
Further to this consideration of land form, site area and existing environmental constraints, an indicative proposal was originally prepared to demonstrate how a scheme of c. 25 units on the site, comprising a mix of market and affordable units, and a majority 2 and 3-bed units, helping to meet the needs identified in the Neighbourhood Plan could be delivered. We met with and presented this draft proposal to the Parish Council’s Planning Committee in early January 2018, where it was strongly recommended that we discussed the proposals with the immediate neighbours on Bye Green. This scheme was therefore subsequently discussed with residents immediately adjoining the site to seek their thoughts on the initial proposals. Whilst residents accept that the site is likely to come forward for housing at some point in the not too distant future, it was considered that a 25 unit scheme was too dense and represented too many units for this location and that a lesser number of units would be much more appropriate. In addition, it was suggested that rather than orientating the houses back-to-back, that the front elevations should face the rear gardens of existing Bye Green homes.
As a result of these discussions, we have revisited the proposals for the site and sought to fully address the comments raised by residents including the reduction of the overall number of dwellings and amendments to the layout and siting to provide a better relationship between the existing Bye Green properties as well as opportunities for a landscaped buffer. The current indicative layout shows how a scheme that comprises a total of 15 no. 1, 2, 3 and 4-bed units, with c. 40% being 1 and 2-bed units and c. 40% comprising 3-bed units, could be delivered on the site – providing a mix of units including a higher concentration of of 1, 2 and 3-bed units that meets the identified local need for downsizers and first time buyers, as identified in the draft WTNP. It should be noted that whilst this mix and layout is indicative, it does provide an indication as to how an appropriate scheme could be delivered in an acceptable manner.
In terms of broad parameters, the indicative layout also includes the potential for the following:
• Relatively low density of development, of a scale and massing that fits with the character of the local area and Bye Green to the south; • New homes facing both the north and south boundaries; • Cluster of north and east facing attached units/alms style houses with communal parking and gardens; • SUDS provided partially within an ecological buffer for the badger setts; • Gradually reducing heights from existing bungalows to larger homes facing south;
4 • Potential for a mix of unit types including two apartments at the corner of the attached row of homes; • Off-street parking may be provided at an appropriate level, including within garages; • Potential for an internal footpath along the southern boundary; • Ensures that the boundaries of the site may be well planted and landscaped, and existing hedgerows can be managed and enhanced to assist in screening the development and providing a buffer between the proposals and existing homes;
In terms of affordable housing provision, whilst the Local Plan seeks 25%, it is recognised that there is a significant lack of affordable provision in the village at present and therefore the developer would be open to considering provision at a level of 30% as highlighted in Policy H4 of the draft WTNP. As previously mentioned, it is not necessarily the intention to provide social rented affordable housing, rather that the type of housing proposed addresses specific identified areas of need, for example, it allows for those wanting to own or part-own a home or move to more appropriate accommodation to do so, but this naturally would be subject to engagement and agreement and may be secured by a legal agreement as appropriate.
Summary
We recognise that Weston Turville has been subject to significant development, hence our ongoing desire to work with the Parish Council and the local community to create a scheme that can better represent identified local need. We believe that a small development in the east of the village, located away from the major proposals to the north of the village, represents an opportunity to progress alternative ideas and more considered, meaningful and locally-shaped place.
This site is clearly suitable and available for housing, and in accordance with paragraph 70 of the dNPPF it is considered that the Parish Council should seek to acknowledge the appropriateness of this site for housing and amend the settlement boundary of Weston Turville to incorporate this site within it, hence facilitating the provision of additional housing in the village that will specifically meet the needs identified within the WTNP.
In this respect, we request that the Parish Council should, through the WTNP, acknowledge the potential of this site for development, and the contribution that it can make to meeting identified local housing needs, by an amendment of the settlement boundary. In addition to this representation, we would welcome the opportunity to discuss our plans and timeframes for a planning application coming forward with the Parish Council in due course.
Yours faithfully
Charlotte Grant Director [email protected]
Enc.
Cc W Dalton Esq – Gade Homes Clerk to Weston Turville Parish Council
5 LAND NORTH OF BYE GREEN AT WESTON TURVILLE, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE
PLANS TO ACCOMPANY REPRESENTATIONS BY GADE HOMES TO THE SUBMISSION VERSION WESTON TURVILLE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
LIST OF PLANS:
01 LOCATION PLAN 02 SITE BOUNDARY 03 SITE CONSTRAINTS 04 DESIGN INTENT 05 ILLUSTRATIVE ARRANGEMENT 06 ILLUSTRATIVE ARRANGEMENT (OVER AERIAL) 07 RESPONSE TO CONSTRAINTS 08 VILLAGE CONTEXT 09 REGIONAL AND STRATEGIC CONTEXT
GADE GROUP AMERSHAM HOUSE MILL STREET BERKHAMSTED HERTFORDSHIRE HP4 2DT Project Site
0 50 100 Metres N
Land North of Bye Green, Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire 01 | Location Plan Site Boundary (1.46 ha)
0 10 20 30
Metres N
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
02 | Site Boundary | 1:1000 @ A4 © Place-Make 2018 Site Boundary (1.46 ha)
a
d
e f
c
h
d
g
b
a 30m buffer around e Man-made mound badger setts (up to 2.5m)
b PROW alignment f 1:100 year with climate change extent
c Existing trees g Bye Green ROW within ownership area 0 10 20 30 d Existing scrub h Existing structure Metres N
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
03 | Site Constraints | 1:1000 @ A4 © Place-Make 2018 a
c
h
h
e g a
d
b a f
e b
a Maintain and strengthen boundary planting b Ensure a sufficient set-back from existing homes for privacy c Retain and enhance a designated area for ecology and biodiversity d Frame an open view to the north
Encourage pedestrian connections e to the public right of way to form a circular route f Extend the existing alignment of Bye Green for continuity and integration g Gradually reduce building heights from north to south to reflect the scale and massing of existing homes h Incorporate a sustainable urban drain- age strategy with a combination of wet and dry retention ponds and swales N
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
04 | Design Intent © Place-Make 2018 Site Boundary (1.46 ha)
2.5
2
1.5
KEY
Existing homes at Bye Green
Proposed homes
Potential footpath connections
Shared surfaces with soft surface treatment adjacent to boundary planting Boundary planting - to be retained and enhanced
SUDS; combination of 0 10 20 30 wet and dry attenuation ponds Metres N
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
05 | Illustrative Arrangement | 1:1000 @ A4 © Place-Make 2018 Ecology and biodiversity retention (badger setts buffer area)
SUDS 13 12 PROW 11 SUDS Potential connection 10 to PROW Boundary planting: 5 retain and enhance SUDS 9
4 3
SWALE 14 2 8 15 7 6
1
Boundary planting: retain and enhance
PROW
0 10 20 30 Site Extent Metres N
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
06 | Illustrative Arrangement | 1:1000 @ A4 © Place-Make 2018 Site Boundary
0 10 20 30
N Metres
Land North of Bye Green Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
07 | Response to constraints | 1:1000 @ A4 © Place-Make 2018 New Road
Brook End
Halton Village
Marroway
Stoke Mandeville
Halton
Settlement Conservation Project Site 0 100 200 300 Boundary Areas (1.46 ha) Metres N
Land North of Bye Green, Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire 08 | Village Context © Place-Make 2018 Aylesbury
Ashton Clinton
Weston Turville Stoke Mandeville
Halton
Project Site (1.46 ha)
Weston Turville Conservation Areas Weston Turville Settlement Boundary Proposed development 0 0.5 1 1.5 at Hampden Fields Wendover N Km
Land North of Bye Green, Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire 09 | Regional and Strategic Context © Place-Make 2018
TECHNICAL NOTE
TO: Mark Owen, Senior Planner, Barton Willmore FROM: Kevin Kay, Technical Director, WSP SUBJECT: Response to Weston Turville Pre-submission Neighbourhood Plan DATE: October 18, 2017
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 This Technical Note has been prepared to provide comments on the traffic and highways policies proposed in the Pre-submission Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (WTNP), which will cover the period 2017–2033.
2 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
2.1.1 The proposed Hampden Fields development is located on the south eastern edge of Aylesbury, lying between the A413 and the A41 inside the boundary of Weston Turville Parish. Its proximity to the urban edge of Aylesbury and immediate accessibility to existing road and public transport infrastructure are characteristics that have been singled out as benefits of locating a strategic development in this area.
2.1.2 The development proposals are for a residential-led mixed-use development supported by new employment, local retail, education and community facilities. It will also directly facilitate the delivery of a dual-carriageway link road, which is proposed to link the A413 Wendover Road with the A41 Aston Clinton Road.
2.1.3 The new A413–A41 link road will serve as both the site access and as a cross-radial strategic road around the south of Aylesbury, providing an alternative route for traffic to the B4544 Marroway/Main Street/Brook End/Weston Road through Weston Turville village.
3 WESTON TURVILLE PRE-SUBMISSION NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
3.1.1 The Vison Statement for the WTNP is (p.9):
To: maintain the individual identities of the different settlements in the parish whilst creating a cohesive and thriving community for local residents and businesses.
To: safeguard the rural identity of the parish whilst providing housing that meets local needs which includes protecting and improving landscaping and green.
3.1.2 Nested below this are several objectives related to transport (p.10):
To work with the Highways Authority to improve road safety and ease traffic congestion in the parish to ensure new development does not have an adverse impact To preserve and enhance existing sustrans (sustainable transport – footpaths, cycleways and bus routes) network infrastructure in the village
3.1.3 The following transport policies are also relatable to the proposed development at Hampden Fields (pp.18–19).
Policy T1: Improvements to road safety and ease traffic congestion
Development proposals should demonstrate that they can deliver appropriate site access and traffic mitigation through agreement with the Highways Authority and Parish Council, to ensure no adverse effects on traffic congestion by new development. Development contributions will be sought to pay for traffic calming schemes and road safety improvements.
Policy T2: Strategy for improving pedestrian and cycle connections within the Parish and to surrounding area
Development proposals must demonstrate how the site connects with existing sustainable transport links and where lacking, secure improvements to ensure safe access for all in line with current industry standards and the Highways Authority policies.
Policy T3: Encourage better planning of public transport
Development proposals will be required to submit a sustainable transport strategy. Where there is a lack of adequate sustainable transport links, developers will be required to incorporate sustainable transport connections into the site as part of the site plan and transport strategy. Developments should be no more than 400m from a bus stop and there should be suitable and safe public footpath access to the nearest bus stop.
4 ALIGNMENT WITH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
4.1.1 An assessment of the proposals at Hampden Fields against the current transport policies outlined in the WTNP is outlined below:
The Hampden Fields Consortium is committed to support and contribute to funding for the delivery of traffic calming measures through Weston Turville, and to work with the local parishes on any such measures that are proportionate and in keeping with the rural setting. This commitment is separate to the planning process.
The transport assessments submitted in support of the Outline Planning Application for the proposals have demonstrated how the development can be accommodated on the road network, including through a package of positive physical off-site infrastructure schemes.
Modelling work has confirmed that the proposed development will lead to changes in the pattern of vehicle movements across the wider area. These changes will result in a shift in through traffic away from less suitable roads through Weston Turville onto the new A413–A41 link road. This will lead to net reductions in traffic on local streets and rural roads.
The proposed development includes substantial green infrastructure and segregated shared use footways/cycleways, as well as direct routes Stoke Mandeville Railway Station. Further, improved pedestrian infrastructure will be provided along the A41 corridor.
The masterplan has been designed to take full advantage of public transport by making full use of the new dual-carriageway A413–A41 link Page 2
road to deliver a new dedicated bus service serving the development. The new bus service would enhance the connection between the Town Centre and Hampden Fields and the increased service frequency will also benefit existing residents in the surrounding communities.
The promoters of Hampden Fields development proposals are committed to supporting a range of infrastructure and other sustainable transport measures through the adoption of a Strategic Transport Infrastructure Fund (STIF). This will provide for some funding flexibility based on the prioritisation and /or phasing of transport measures.
5 WIDER BENEFITS OF HAMPDEN FIELDS The wider benefits of Hampden Fields are outlined below:
5.1 SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL
5.1.1 The transport strategy for Hampden Fields focuses on removing the barriers to sustainable travel by placing an emphasis on the role of the urban form in creating attractive and sustainable communities. This will include a range of facilities in a Local Centre off New Road, which will be easily accessible to residents in Weston Turville.
5.1.2 In practice, this has been achieved through the provision of a permeable network of streets and footpaths, which will foster the concept of a walkable neighbourhood where vehicular use is minimised. Existing Public Rights of Way (PRoW) have been integrated in the framework masterplan and an improvement plan has been included to deliver a comprehensive network linking the development with Bedgrove, Weston Turville, Stoke Mandeville and the surrounding countryside and open space. This includes improvements to:
PRoW WTU/7/1 connecting Weston Turville–A41 Aston Clinton Road PRoWs WTU/33/1, WTU/3/1 and WTU/3/2 connecting the B4544 Marroway– A41 Aston Clinton Road/Bedgrove
5.2 RELIEF FOR LOCAL ROADS
5.2.1 It is forecast that there will be a reduction in traffic flows, including trips along Brook End/Weston Road and London Road/Aylesbury Road, as a result of the Hampden Fields development. This conclusion is borne from the outcome of the transport modelling that Jacobs has carried out on behalf of BCC.
5.2.2 Notwithstanding this, the proposed traffic calming interventions for Weston Turville will generally help to support the reduced attractiveness of the B4544 for through traffic and ‘locking-in’ the benefits of the new strategic link roads. Rather than be a requirement of the development, these are seen as complimentary measures, which will be worked through in consultation with the Parish Council.
5.2.3 Other infrastructure scheme have also been proposed:
The configuration of the southern junction would see the B4544 Marroway (west) approach continuing as the so-called Marroway Link north-south through the development. This would result in a change of priority that would see the B4544 Marroway (east) approach, from Weston Turville, forming a minor arm to the new junction. This will contribute to enhancing the sense of arrival into the village by providing an arrangement suitable for delivering a new gateway feature into the village, which public consultation feedback suggested would help to strengthen its identity.
Page 3
The diversion of New Road around a Local Centre, at the point at which it crosses the new A413–A41 link road will ensure that New Road is not made more attractive as a through-route while maintaining connectivity to Weston Turville and Aston Clinton.
5.3 A41 WOODLANDS ROUNDABOUT
5.3.1 The operation of this roundabout is recognised to be sometimes affected by downstream two-to-one merging of traffic on the A41 Aston Clinton Road westbound. This can cause infrequent blocking back through the roundabout and impacts on the Aylesbury Road arm.
5.3.2 The introduction of Hampden Fields will deliver a re-configuration and upgrade of the roundabout to accommodate the new A413–A41 link road. The proposals also allow for the Eastern Link Road (South) to connect to the roundabout.
5.4 REDUCING TOWN CENTRE-BOUND TRAFFIC
5.4.1 Land for a Park and Ride site close to the A41 Woodlands roundabout has been allocated in the framework masterplan. This could allow the delivery of 450 spaces, though it would be up to BCC to develop a business case for this and/or implement. The aim of the Park and Ride will be to intercept some Aylesbury town centre-bound traffic and transfer these trips onto public transport. This will relieve the pressures on A41 Aston Clinton Road and promote public transport priority, in line with the County Council’s aspiration to designate the road as a Primary Public Transport Corridor (PPTC).
Kevin Kay Technical Director, Development (Planning)
Page 4
From: Chris Webbley [mailto Sent: 14 March 2018 11:32 To: Planning Policy Cc: Martin Jarvis; Mandi Simons; WTPC Clerk Subject: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan: comments
Dear Planning Policy Team,
I am commenting in a personal capacity on this Plan, and wish these comments to be considered by the examiner.
OVERALL COMMENTS
1. I warmly commend the Parish Council team for putting together a clear, readable and positive plan. 2. I ask the examiner to note and give weight to the fact that the parish’s Vision (S.4.1) expresses attitudes that are forward-looking (‘creating’, 'providing’, ‘enhance’) as well as protecting what needs to be protected (‘maintain’, safeguard’, ‘conserve’). This balance is also reflected in the policies contained in the Plan. 3. The traffic management element needs to be stronger and more specific to address a key issue.
COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC PLAN ELEMENTS
5.3: Strongly support.
6.1: Strongly support
Policy H1: In criterion II at the end of this policy, it seems that there is some ambiguity regarding the type of building that could be allowed. Does it mean, “it is through well- designed new buildings and / or the re-use of redundant and disused buildings”? In other words could a completely new building be allowed?
Policy H4: If the maximum number of dwellings to be allowed under H1 is 12, then the affordable housing criterion only seems to apply to a very narrow band of sizes of development (11 and 12). I fear that a developer would be able to bypass this requirement by simply planning no more than 10. This would negate the desirable aim of increasing the variety of housing stock in the parish.
Policy T1: I think this policy is not strong enough to address the current and growing issues affecting traffic movement in the village settlement. As shown in the local consultation, HGV movements (not deliveries) are a big issue and need to be restricted. There should be a clear statement that weight and width restrictions on through routes (New Road, Main Street, the Marroway and World’s End Lane) will be sought in conjunction with the Highways and Planning Authorities.
6.13, 6.17, and policy E1: Strongly support
Policy C2: Strongly support
Policy HE2: Strongly support
Policy B1: Strongly support
Policy B3: Strongly support
Yours sincerely,
Chris Webbley
Aston Clinton Neighbourhood Plan
Publication Stage Consultation
Comment Form January 2018 – March 2018
Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan
Aylesbury Vale District Council has published the final version of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan. The Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan and supporting documents are available to view at https://www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk/section/neighbourhood-planning/ and paper copies are available to view at the AVDCs offices at the Gateway in Aylesbury.
This consultation seeks your views on the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan and whether it meets the basic conditions1. All comments will be sent to an independent examiner who will examine the plan. If the examiner determines that the plan meets the basic conditions then a referendum shall be held on whether to ‘make’ the Neighbourhood Plan.
All comments should be received by 5pm on Wednesday 14 March 2018
How to submit your comments? Comments can be: • Emailed to: [email protected] • Posted to: Planning Policy, AVDC, The Gateway, Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP19 8FF, DX 4130 Aylesbury 1 (Please leave time to ensure it is delivered to our offices before the closing date & time).
Completing the comments form There are two parts to this comment form:
• Part A Personal/agent contact details (personal details will not be published except your name and organisation if applicable).
• Part B For comment (this will be made publically available).
Please do not send multiple copies of the same comment (either electronically or in writing). Where groups share a common view you can submit one comment representing the group.
1 http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/neighbourhood-planning/the-basic-conditions-that-a- draft-neighbourhood-plan-or-order-must-meet-if-it-is-to-proceed-to-referendum/
Comments form: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan publication stage
Part A: Contact Details
1. Personal Contact Details: If an AGENT please also complete Q2. If you provide an email address we will contact you that way as this helps us save time and resources. We need your contact details to take your comments into account. Personal details w Title i First Name l Last Name l Job Title (where relevant) Organisation (where relevant) n Buckinghamshire Advantage Email (if provided we will o always contact you this way) t Address City/Town C County o Details will not be published except for your name and organisation.
Agent details (where applicable):
Title Mr First Name Jerry Last Name Unsworth Job Title (where relevant) Project Manager Planning (Woodlands) Organisation (where relevant) Buckinghamshire Advantage Email (if provided we will always contact [email protected] you this way) & [email protected] Address The Saunderton Estate, Wycombe Road City/Town Saunderton County Buckinghamshire HP14 Postcode HP14 4BF Telephone Number
3. Which of the following do you consider yourself (please tick only one):
Adjoining Local Authority □ Other Local Authority □ Member of the Public □ Parish or Town Councillor □ Developer Interest ✓ Community or Stakeholder Group □ Environmental Organisation □ Other (please specify) ______
End of part A
Part B: Comments on the Neighbourhood Plan
Please note all comments will be made publically available. If you do not have sufficient space please continue on a separate sheet if necessary.
1. Which part of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan does your comment relate to?
BA Rep 1: Policy Review Document and conformity with Strategic Planning Policy BA Rep 2: Paragraph 2.5 (pages 6 & 7) BA Rep 3: Policy H1: Weston Turville Settlement Boundaries BA Rep 4: Policy H4: Housing Mix & Tenure BA Rep 5: Transport Section (page 21)
2. Please make your comments here. Please be as precise as possible and ensure any relevant evidence and supporting information is included. There will not normally be a subsequent opportunity to make further comments.
Preliminary note re Buckinghamshire Advantage: Buckinghamshire Advantage is the delivery arm of the Buckinghamshire Thames Valley Local Enterprise Partnership and is promoting the ‘Aylesbury Woodlands’ development, which lies partly within, but mostly outside Weston Turville Parish. This development takes forward key elements of the designated ‘Aylesbury Garden Town’, including the new ‘Enterprise Zone’ and a section of the town’s new outer ring road. That link road is facilitated by the wider Woodlands development and will enable traffic from the A418 to reach the A41 at the end of the Aston Clinton by-pass. The development has been the subject of application ref: 16/01040/AOP, which AVDC Planning Committee resolved on 26 October 2017 should be approved, subject to completion of planning legal agreements and conditions – which are presently being finalised. Together with the VALP, which is now approaching it’s final stage, this provides part of the planning context for the production of the NP.
Relevant planning application documents cane be found via: http://aylesburywoodlands.co.uk/consultation-documents/
BA Rep 1 Policy Review Document and conformity with Strategic Planning Policy The ‘Policy Review’ Document (PRD) supporting the WTNP, dated January 2018, purports to be up to date with regards to the emerging Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) to 2033. The document is dated 10th August 2016 with a note that it was updated in January 2018. We highlight that the summary of the VALP given on pages 12-16 of the WTNP PRD is not up to date and only appears to make reference to a 2016 consultation document for the VALP. There has since been consultation on the ‘submission draft’ version of the VALP – which closed on 14 December 2017 and on 28 February 2018 the VALP was submitted for Examination and the Inspector has been appointed. Information on the Plan can be found here: https://www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk/section/vale-aylesbury-local-plan-valp-2013-2033 Because the 2004 Adopted Local Plan is so out of date and not in conformity with the NPPF (in so far as its housing strategy/ the degree to which it meets housing needs) the VALP is of increased importance in terms of understanding the strategic planning policy context for the WTNP, especially as Aylesbury has been identified for ‘Garden Town’ growth status by Government. The WTNP needs to be accompanied by an up to date Policy Review Document to enable the Examiner to conduct a fair and thorough examination. We do not seek to do that here but do draw particular attention to VALP Policy AGT3 (Pages 80-82). This brings forward a strategic allocation of land for around 1,760 homes, 102,800 sq.m. of employment land and infrastructure included part of a new series of link roads around Aylesbury, part of which falls within Weston Turville Parish and the NP area. The Aylesbury Woodlands development is in line with policy AGT3 (though this policy will no doubt be the subject of some refinement after Examination) and it is important that the WTNP facilitates its implementation.
BA Rep 2 Paragraph 2.5 (pages 6 & 7) The statement in 2.5 is supported – where reference is made to the VALP and that WTNP is “therefore not in a position to resist the wider growth of Aylesbury into the parish”. However, this highlights the importance that the strategic ‘VALP’ context is accurately set out in the WTNP and the documents supporting it. Please refer to our BA rep 1.
BA Rep 3 Policy H1 The wording of this policy is unduly restrictive, setting up a presumption that proposals beyond those complying with the three specified categories, will not be permitted. This would not allow for development to take place within the Aylesbury Woodlands site and the policy should be amended to recognise that development which conforms with the VALP (as finally agreed) or which is justified by other material considerations would be accepted.
BA Rep 4 Policy H4 The wording of this policy (like other policies referred to above) need to build in more flexibility to accommodate development proposals that may come forward pursuant to the final VALP. The existing wording is too restrictive: – Reference to a 30% affordable policy that is not in line with the emerging VALP (and seeks to repeat policy that is best dealt with in upper tier planning policy). – Reference to the mix of housing types linked only to ‘housing needs arising in the village’ whereas strategic growth in the Garden Town will need to meet housing needs arising from a wider area. – reference to retirement housing being only within ‘settlement boundaries’.
We ask that wording be amended to be positive towards growth arising from allocations in the final VALP or that is justified by other material circumstances.
BA Rep 5 Transport Section - omission This section should recognise that strategic development arising from the VALP will facilitate a new outer orbital ring road and the WTNP should be supportive of that. A corrected and up to date ‘Policy Review’ document supporting the WTNP would provide the context for that.
4. Do you wish to be notified of Aylesbury Vale District Council’s decision to ‘make’ the neighbourhood Plan
Yes ✓ No □
End of part B
Thank you for completing the comment form.
Contact Details If you have any questions, comments or queries please contact us on the details below:
Planning Policy - Telephone: 01296 585679
Email: [email protected]
Address: The Gateway, Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP19 8FF, DX 4130 Aylesbury 1
Website: http://www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk/planning-policy/
Transport Economy Environment Buckinghamshire County Council County Hall, Walton Street Mark Kemp Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UA Director Growth, Strategy & Highways
Stephanie Buller, Mr Ben Stutman Planning Policy, 01296 382577 AVDC, The Gateway, [email protected] Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury, Telephone 0845 3708090 HP19 8FF www.buckscc.gov.uk
Submitted by email: Date: 14th March 2018 [email protected]
Dear Stephanie Buller,
Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan – Submission Consultation
Thank you for consulting Buckinghamshire County Council (BCC). BCC welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Weston Turville Parish Neighbourhood Plan Submission Consultation.
BCC acknowledges the importance of a plan-led approach to managing housing growth and development across Aylesbury Vale District. Within Buckinghamshire, BCC has a statutory role for strategic planning as the County Highways Authority, County Transport Authority, County Education Authority and County Minerals and Waste Planning Authority. It also has an obligation for joint working with District Councils within Buckinghamshire on their Local Plans. The County Council also fulfils other functions which advise on planning proposals such as the Lead Local Flood Authority, the County Archaeology service, the County Ecology Service and the Public Rights of Way service.
BCC as a statutory Authority has an influencing role over County wide strategic planning matters with each of the Districts within the County as part of the duty to co-operate (Localism Act 2011) and a public health obligation to safeguard social, economic and environmental wellbeing of the County. BCC considers the plan to be legally compliant, complies with the Duty to Co-operate and sound.
BCC welcomes the inclusion of our comments submitted to the Parish during the pre-submission consultation. Annex A below sets out further comments to consider before the plan goes to examination. These include considerations around Education, Archaeology, and Highways Development Management.
If you have any queries, please contact the strategic planning team via the following email address: [email protected].
Yours faithfully,
Ben Stutman Growth and Strategy Graduate Officer Email: [email protected]
Annex A: matters of consideration for the decision maker
Education
We are aware of the concerns raised regarding sufficient school places, however our comments in the pre-submission consultation (below) still apply:
The Neighbourhood Plan sets out the following objective with regard to Education: To ensure sufficient capacity for children living in the parish to access primary and junior education within the parish
While BCC acknowledges parental expectation to attend their local catchment school, there is tension between local schools for local children and parental choice. While the school is popular and generally full in all year groups, currently a third of children living in the village attend a school outside the area (with a similar number of children attending the school from outside the area). For this reason, it is not possible to achieve a perfect match between pupils and places. This is reinforced by the Government admissions code which does not allow Local Authorities to guarantee places to parents at local catchment area level in case the pattern of preferences expressed does not allow this guarantee to be met or there are peaks in the population.
Based on current trends in parental choice and the relatively small scale housing proposed in the draft Vale of Aylesbury Plan, BCC would not expect the school to be oversubscribed from within catchment. However, together with the scale of housing proposed across the wider planning area, BCC is proposing to expand capacity in the Wendover primary schools to meet any increased demand.
Furthermore, we welcome policy HE2 which encourages developers to make contributions towards additional education provision in the area.
Archaeology
Following our comments to the pre-submission consultation (below), we would like to see the recognition of the significant archaeological potential within the parish outside of the village settlement area:
The Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (Pre-Submission consultation) is lacking detail on the historic environment, although it does mention the Conservation Area, scheduled monuments and listed buildings. In recent years several archaeological excavations have taken place ahead of development in the parish and the results demonstrate considerable archaeological potential. Akeman Street passes through the north of the parish and numerous late Iron/Age and Roman farmsteads have been recorded either side of the road. In 2012 a significant Roman site was discovered on the ‘Hampden Fields’ development area, which should be preserved in situ. The introductory section which describes the history of the village (p.6-8) would benefit from more detail regarding the prehistoric, Roman and medieval remains in the village. There are nationally important scheduled medieval moated sites and medieval manorial remains surviving in the parish that should be made reference to.
BCC supports Policy GP59 in the ‘Other Policies’ section:
Offering advice for dealing with the preservation of archaeological remains
BCC recommends the addition of a Heritage Policy to ensure that due regard should be had to the protection of designated and non-designated heritage assets, of which the parish has many.
Highways Development Management
The Plan includes an aspiration for traffic calming through the village. However, from experience the low quantum of housing proposed would not raise enough funding cover such works as outlined in the plan. It is our opinion that alternative sources of funding other than the very limited residential development outlined in the Neighbourhood plan would be required if the Traffic Calming aspiration of the Neighbourhood Plan is to be realised.
From: Peter Chilman [mailto Sent: 14 March 2018 16:53 To: Planning Policy Subject: Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan - My Comments.
For the attention of the Planning Policy Team,
Please see below my comments on the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan which I would like the Examiner to take into consideration:
Opening Comment. As an opening comment I would like to thank the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group for all their hard work in putting this clear plan together.
Specific Comments on Policies within the Plan.
5.3. I soundly support this.
6.1. I soundly support this.
Policy H1. In item II it is not clear which type of building would be allowed, well designed new buildings and or the re-use of redundant and disused buildings. Therefore does this mean a completely new building could be allowed?
Policy T1. This policy is not sufficient to address the growing issues affecting traffic in village. There should be a clear statement regarding heavy goods vehicle movements and the need for physical weight and width restrictions which should be applied in conjunction with the Highways and Planning Authorities. The weight and width restrictions should be enforced on all through routes (Worlds End Lane, New Road, Marroway and Main Street).
6.13, 6.17 and Policy E1. I soundly support this.
Policy C2. I soundly support this.
Policy HE2. I soundly support this.
Policy B1. I soundly support this.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Chilman.
Representations to the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan (Regulation 16) Submission Version
Land south-west of Weston Turville, Buckinghamshire
March 2018
On Behalf of Bellway Homes Limited
Contents
1. Introduction 3
2. Housing Requirements for Weston Turville 5
3. Development Opportunity: land south-west of Weston Turville 7
4. Development Management Policies 12
5. Summary and Conclusions 13
Alison Young / Sara Dutfield [email protected] / [email protected] Client Bellway Homes Limited Our reference BELR3021
14 Mar 2018
1. Introduction
1.1 On behalf of our client, Bellway Homes Limited, please find set out below formal representations submitted in respect of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan 2013– 2033 (WTNP) Submission Version. Our client has an interest in land to the east of Wendover Road and south of Marroway.
1.2 The site area extends to approximately 13.1 hectares, and the demise of the site is referenced as WTV029 and WTV030 in the Council’s Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) 2017.
1.3 Our client’s land interests are detailed on the plan at figure 1. In summary, this is a well located site in close proximity to the village’s services/facilities. Development of this site would represent a logical and appropriate extension to the village and there are no over-riding technical constraints to the delivery of this site for housing and open space.
1.4 The submission of these representations follows the submission of written representations to the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan which is currently at examination.
1.5 In respect of the Submission Version of the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan, the main thrusts of our client’s representations are:
The lack of any proposed allocations does not support the sustainable growth of Weston Turville, nor does it make a contribution to the growth of Aylesbury as a whole. Furthermore it does not reflect the significant infrastructure that is planned to be delivered in proximity to the village as a result of the Aylesbury Garden Town allocation, proposed through the VALP.
The supporting evidence that provides the basis for the Neighbourhood Plan indicates that Weston Turville could accommodate more new homes over the plan period.
The development management policies do not always accord with the spatial strategy of the plan and therefore in some cases may not be achievable.
Our client’s site, as set out above, is deliverable, viable and achievable and would contribute towards the delivery of sustainable development in Weston Turville.
1.6 These representations are made in the context of the requirement for the draft Neighbourhood Plan to meet a set of basic conditions, in order that it can be put to a referendum. Those basic conditions (insofar as they relate to Neighbourhood Plans) are set out in paragraph 8(2) of Schedule 4B to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as applied to neighbourhood plans by section 38A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, and are as follows:
(a) Having regard to national policies and advice contained in guidance issued by the Secretary of State;
(b) Contributes to the achievement of sustainable development;
(c) is in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan for the area;
(d) Does not breach, and is otherwise compatible with, EU obligations;
(e) Prescribed conditions are met and prescribed matters have been complied with in connection with the proposals for the Plan;
2. Housing Requirements for Weston Turville
2.1 The Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan does not allocate any sites for housing development but rather policy H1 directs growth to within the three defined settlement boundaries within the parish. Policy H1 also restricts development within settlement boundaries to small scale developments of up to 12 homes. The policy places tight restrictions on the circumstances in which housing development will be allowed outside of settlement boundaries and principally refers to rural exception sites, meeting the essential needs of rural workers, and reuse of redundant buildings; all of which are otherwise provided for in national and/or local policy.
2.2 Weston Turville is a sustainable village in its own right and is also only a short distance from Aylesbury. This proximity to Aylesbury is reflected in the Local Plan, which does not disaggregate the housing figures for Weston Turville from the wider Aylesbury figures.
2.3 The WTNP states that the absence of housing allocations is because “the emerging Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan states that Weston Turville village is not required to take any additional housing due to its proximity to the growth of Aylesbury, part of which is within the parish of Weston Turville.”1
2.4 We contend that the approach of the VALP has been misunderstood by the Weston Turville Neighbourhood Plan as the VALP does not say that the village is not required to take additional housing, but simply that sites are not allocated at Weston Turville (and Bierton) due to their proximity to the growth at Aylesbury Garden Town (VALP, paragraph 4.152).
2.5 As such we do not consider the fact that the Aylesbury Garden Town allocation is largely located within the parish of Weston Turville as sufficient justification to not plan for sustainable growth within Weston Turville itself. This is particularly relevant as Weston Turville itself is identified as a “medium village” within the settlement hierarchy of the VALP because it has key services and facilities, making it a “moderately sustainable location for development.”
2.6 We have submitted representations on the Pre-Submission Local Plan setting out why we consider it is not appropriate to place so much reliance on large strategic allocations for housing delivery. These will be considered in detail at the Local Plan examination, however we would highlight that there are significant challenges to the delivery of large strategic sites which is why the Planning Practice Guidance encourages Neighbourhood Plans to allocate reserve sites. The WTNP not only fails to allocate sites, but also fails to allocate any reserve sites. This approach lacks the flexibility to respond to changing circumstances, such as increased housing need or slower rates of delivery.
2.7 The NPPF requires Neighbourhood Plans to plan positively to support local development. As the approach in the WTNP will neither meet the housing needs of
1 WTNP paragraph 2.4
Weston Turville, nor make any additional contribution to meeting the wider needs of Aylesbury, it is not positive and does not support local development.
2.8 Although policy H1 allows for small scale development of up to 12 homes within the defined settlement boundaries, no evidence has been put forward to demonstrate development opportunities and/or deliverability for these small scale sites. Furthermore, the Parish Council have not put forward any justification for the site size cap of 12 dwellings.
2.9 During consultation on the neighbourhood plan, residents raised issues relating to improved services and facilities within the village and this was translated into objectives and policies for the Neighbourhood Plan. It is questionable how deliverable these objectives and policies are likely to be given that no additional housing has been allocated to contribute towards these services and facilities. By allocating additional development, contributions could be made through planning obligations or the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), albeit Aylesbury Vale has not yet adopted CIL.
2.10 Given the opportunities for sustainable development in Weston Turville, and the fact that any development that takes place will not only support the village in terms of housing and infrastructure, but also contribute to the wider Aylesbury area; this approach does meet the basic conditions in relation to (a) having regard to national policies and advice; and (b) contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. Reflecting on Weston Turville’s position in the settlement hierarchy as a medium village and the associated approach set out in policy S3, we would also contend that the approach is not in general conformity with the development plan (condition c).
3. Development Opportunity: land south-west of Weston Turville
3.1 The 13.1ha site forms a parcel of land to the rear of a linear residential development along Wendover Road to the west and Marroway to the north. The site is currently in agricultural use and directly abuts a mobile home site to the east, which is now proposed for allocation as a gypsy / traveller site through the VALP. The site is illustrated at Figure 1 below.
Figure 1- Aerial View of Site
3.2 Wider Context
3.3 However, it is relevant to an assessment of context to note that the Proposed Submission Local Plan envisages that a major strategic allocation shall be made on land ‘South of the A41 (Aylesbury South East)’. Proposed allocation D-AGT4 relates to land immediately to the north of the subject site. The allocation seeks to facilitate the delivery of 3,111 dwellings, a 60 bed care home, employment land, two primary schools, a local centre, strategic flood defences, a dualled Southern Link Road and a strategic link road between said Southern Link Road and Marroway.
3.4 The extent of the allocation is illustrated in Figure 2 overleaf.
Figure 2 – Extent of Proposed Allocation D-AGT4
3.5 It is relevant also to refer to the number of applications that have been submitted to AVDC within close proximity to the site. A summary of surrounding applications is provided below:
3.6 16/04238/AOP - Outline planning application (with all matters reserved save for access) for the erection of up to 375 new homes and associated landscape and highway works including a new railway footbridge on land off Wendover Road, Stoke Mandeville – Awaiting decision.
3.7 16/00424/AOP - Outline planning application (with all matters reserved) for a mixed- use sustainable urban extension comprising: up to 3,000 dwellings and a 60 bed care home/extra care facility (Use Class C2/C3); provision of land for a Park and Ride site; a total of 6.90ha of employment land (comprising of up to 29,200 sq.m. B1c/B1/B2/B8 uses); provision of two primary schools (one 2 form entry and one 3 form entry); a mixed use local centre (3.75ha) with provision for a foodstore of up to 1,200 square metres (GFA), further retail (including a pharmacy), restaurant and café units, a doctor's surgery, gym, public house with letting rooms, professional services, multi- functional community space and a day nursery, and live work units; multi-functional green infrastructure (totalling 108.43ha) including parkland, sports pitches, sports pavilions, children's play areas, mixed use games areas, including a skate park/BMX
facility, informal open space, allotments, community orchards, landscaping; extensions to domestic gardens at Tamarisk Way (0.22ha); strategic flood defences and surface water attenuation; vehicular access points from New Road, Marroway, A413 Wendover Road and A41 Aston Clinton Road; a dualled Southern Link Road between A413 Wendover Road and A41 Aston Clinton Road and a strategic link road between the Southern Link Road and Marroway; internal roads, streets, lanes, squares, footpaths and cycleways and upgrades to Public Rights Of Ways (PRoWs); and car parking related to the above land uses, buildings and facilities – the application is subject to a holding objection pending a potential call-in by the Secretary of State following the Council’s resolution to grant outline planning permission at the end of October 2017..
3.8 16/03542/AOP - Outline planning application with all matters reserved with the exception of the main site access for up to 50 dwellings (including up to 30% affordable housing), introduction of structural planting and landscaping, informal public open space and children's play area, surface water flood mitigation and attenuation, vehicular access point from Marroway and associated ancillary works - Appeal dismissed.
3.9 16/03548/APP - Development of the site for 26 dwelling units, new access, landscaping and open space – Approved.
3.10 The proximity of surrounding applications to the site is shown below in Figure 3.
3.11 The committee report for 16/00424/AOP sets out that the proposals are in a sustainable location and will contribute towards and deliver essential new transport infrastructure that contributes to the alleviation of traffic congestion in Aylesbury and its surrounding villages; and is supported by a genuine sustainable mix of leisure, commercial and community uses resulting in the formation of a new high quality
sustainable community. It recognises that there will be adverse effects in landscape terms and would have a material impact on the western edges of Weston Turville, but that this will be mitigated by a detailed landscape scheme
3.12 Site Characteristics
3.13 The site is located within Environment Agency Flood Zone 1 and is not affected by any national or international ecological designations. It is not within the Conservation Area and does not contain any listed buildings.
3.14 The site is not located within the Chiltern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, although like the Aylesbury Garden Town site, its development would likely have an effect on the landscape and this would be considered in detail through a landscape and visual impact assessment. The developable area of the site would be further refined through scheme design.
3.15 Access could be provided from Marroway which already has a number of residential accesses to the north of the site and also provides access to the gypsy / traveller site to the east of the site. Access to the site would be designed to highway standards and any necessary highway improvements would be delivered as part of the development. As such, we consider that the site does not have any overriding constraints to delivery.
3.16 Our client’s site was considered under the HELAA (2017), with the site references listed as WTV029 and WTV030. The latter (WTV030) comprises a narrow 0.73ha parcel at the northern-most edge of the site adjoining Marroway, while the former (WTV029) comprises 12.1ha of land making up the two large fields to the south. Both were considered unsuitable for development for the following reasons:
WTV029 “The site is poorly related to, and outside the built-up limit, of either Stoke Mandeville or Weston Turville. Development of the site would close an important gap between the two settlements. There is also no road frontage to the site with the current boundary. It would be an unsustainable form of development and detrimental to the character of the area.”
WTV030 “Although the site is adjacent and partly opposite existing ribbon development the site is poorly related to, and outside the built-up limit of, either Weston Turville or Stoke Mandeville. Development of the site would close an important gap between the two settlements. It would be an unsustainable form of development and detrimental to the character of the area.”
3.17 However, we consider that the context of the site will change significantly as a result of the proposed allocation D-AGT4 and the associated application at Hampden Fields (Ref 16/00424/AOP), which we anticipate will be approved either as a result of the Secretary of State not calling the application in, or through the call-in inquiry procedure.
3.18 As noted, the southern extent of 16/00424/AOP adjoins our client’s site (to the north, on the opposite side of Marroway), which would therefore bring the new development limits of Aylesbury to the edge of the site. Given its proximity, these infrastructure improvements would also directly benefit the site, alongside existing benefits such as the site’s close proximity to Stoke Mandeville train station.
3.19 We therefore consider that the concerns raised in relation to HELAA site WTV029 and WTV030 are now invalid in light of the proposed allocation and the schemes coming forward, which will materially change the surrounding context and the site’s inter- relationship with Aylesbury, together with that of Stoke Mandeville and Weston Turville as a whole. The subject site therefore represents a logical extension to the settlement, in a highly sustainable location.
3.20 The HELAA includes multiple sites in Weston Turville demonstrating that there is developer interest and housing demand in the area, however nearly all sites have been classified as unsuitable for housing, with the Neighbourhood Plan instead focusing development within the settlement boundaries.
3.21 As much of Weston Turville village is covered by a Conservation Area, (as illustrated on Figure 7 of the WTNP), this would represent a constraint to development within the village as any development would have to be sensitively and sympathetically designed to avoid detrimental effects on the historic environment. This is likely to make it more difficult to find sites that could deliver up to 12 dwellings within the village. By way of contrast, our client’s site is not affected by the Conservation Area.
3.22 Development of the site will not result in the coalescence of Weston Turville with either Aylesbury or Stoke Mandeville given that fields to the east and south of the gypsy / traveller site could be retained as a physical gap.
3.23 The site is located adjacent to the settlement boundary of Wendover Road and Hampden Hall, which is to the west of the main village. This stretch of development is well served by bus with the Arriva operating the No.50 service at least hourly and the X300 however often.
3.24 In summary, there is the opportunity to create a well-designed development which retains the separate identities and character of Weston Turville and Stoke Mandeville while capitalising on the significant strategic and local benefits and infrastructure investment arising from the strategic allocation to the north which is part of the Aylesbury Garden Town.
4. Development Management Policies
4.1 Policy H4 seeks to achieve 30% affordable housing on sites which exceed the threshold of 10 dwellings. As the WTNP places a cap on site size of up to 12 dwellings, we consider that it is very unlikely that any affordable housing will be delivered in Weston Turville, given the opportunity to do so requires a site within the settlement boundary that is suitable for delivering precisely 11 or 12 dwellings.
4.2 Policy H4 aims to deliver housing designs that are suitable for older persons on sites of over 10 units. This will be similarly difficult to achieve as only sites of 11 and 12 dwellings will be required to do so and as such risks older person’s housing needs being left unaddressed in Weston Turville. Furthermore, no evidence has been put forward to demonstrate the type of older persons housing required or its impact on viability.
4.3 For both of these reasons we consider that policy H4 is not in accordance with national policy (condition a) and will not be effective and as such the WTNP will not contribute to sustainable development (condition b).
4.4 Policies T2 and T3 seek to enhance sustainable transport links within the parish and while we support the thrust of the policy, we would suggest that this aim has not been adequately reflected in the spatial approach to development in the WTNP. Not only is our client’ site in close proximity to Stoke Mandeville Station, but also it is directly connected to the Aylesbury Garden Town proposal to the north which will provide significantly enhanced pedestrian and cycle connections.
4.5 Policy T3 states that new developments should be no more than 400m from a bus stop. While our client’s site is well served by bus, we nonetheless consider that this should be expressed as a preference in terms of sustainability rather than a requirement. This would offer greater flexibility for otherwise sustainable sites to come forward.
5. Summary and Conclusions
5.1 In summary, the WTNP should identify allocations to provide the necessary flexibility to accommodate housing requirements of the village and the wider district. This site south-west of Weston Turville is well located in close proximity to the services/facilities of Weston Turville and Stoke Mandeville as well as being a short distance from Aylesbury. Development of this site would represent a logical and appropriate extension to the settlement boundary and there are no over-riding technical constraints to the delivery of this site.
5.2 The Neighbourhood Plan does not meet three of the Basic Conditions as prescribed in the Regulations as follows:
• Having regard to national policies and advice contained in guidance issued by the Secretary of State
5.3 The Neighbourhood Plan does not have regard to the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained within the NPPF because it seeks to restrict development to sites located within existing settlement boundaries of up to 12 dwellings, regardless of the site’s sustainability and ability to address housing needs.
• Contributes to the achievement of sustainable development;
5.4 The Neighbourhood Plan does not take into account the opportunities to contribute towards sustainable development afforded by the Aylesbury Garden Town proposed allocation. It also does not allow for development of a sufficient scale to come forward to address some of the infrastructure requirements identified by the community.
• Is in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan for the area;
5.5 The Neighbourhood Plan is not in conformity with strategic policy S3 of the emerging Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (submitted for examination) as it does not reflect Weston Turville’s positon of in the settlement hierarchy as a medium village.
Turley Office 6th Floor North 2 Charlotte Place Southampton SO14 0TB
T 023 8072 4888