Quainton Neighbourhood Development Plan
Consultation Statement
November 2015
1
Consultation Statement
Regulation 15 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012
Contents
1. Scope
2. Background
3. Submission of the Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan
4. The Consultation Period at the Holy Cross and St Mary’s Church
5. Quainton News articles
6. Quainton Parish Council Website
7. Comments received
8. Appendix 1 questionnaire
9. Appendix 2 “Vision for Quainton”
10. Appendix 3 articles in Quainton News
11. Appendix 4 initial letter from Quainton Village Society
12. Appendix 5 leaflet distributed
13. Appendix 6 letter to landowners
14. Appendix 7 letter to interested parties
15. Appendix 8 list of consultees
16. Appendix 9 Comment and response document
17. Appendix 10 Comment from Forward Planning: AVDC and responses
18. Appendix 11Letter from AVDC Ecologist and response
19. Appendix 12 Letter from Buckinghamshire County Council and response
2
1. Scope
1.1 This statement summarises the consultation procedures undertaken by the Parish Council for the Quainton Neighbourhood Development Plan. Regulation 15 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 requires the Parish Council to produce this Consultation Statement and submit it alongside the Quainton Neighbourhood Development Plan.
1.2 Regulation 15 states that a consultation statement is a document which:
contains details of the persons and bodies who have been consulted about the proposed neighbourhood development plan explains how they were consulted summarises the main issues and concerns raised by the persons consulted describes how these issues and concerns have been considered and, where relevant, addressed in the proposed Neighbourhood Development Plan.
2. Background
2.1 Quainton Parish Plan: Quainton has a long history of defining its aims and objectives for its future development whilst maintaining its unique character.
2.2 The first Parish Plan was produced in 1972 and a further plan was initiated in 2005. This later plan was developed using an initial public event in the village school. The comments made were written up into a questionnaire which was delivered to every household in the parish. It asked for views on transport, housing and development, social and recreational facilities, shops, services and amenities. This resulted in an action plan and one of the issues identified was that recent developments had not been in keeping with character of the village and concern that future developments could spoil the village. At that stage it was felt that a village design statement should be produced but the Localism Act was then passed. The Parish Plan is available to view on
http://www.quainton.info/uploads/Parish_Council/Parish_Plan.pdf
2.3 The Parish Council felt that a Neighbourhood Development Plan would be a more robust vehicle for this aim and sought further information.
2.4 Following a presentation by AVDC in April 2011, the Parish Council agreed in June 2011 to look at the feasibility of producing a Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP). An initial NDP group was set up consisting of two Parish Councillors and a parishioner with expertise in planning. In November 2011, as the first stage in the NDP process, a paper questionnaire was devised and sent to all households (approx. 500) in the parish asking questions about how the parish should develop. The paper questionnaire contained both tick box questions and free hand response questions. A link to a sample questionnaire is at Appendix 1. The paper questionnaire was designed to get the views of the parish so policies could be 3
determined and to furnish some reliable data back to AVDC for their new Strategic Plan which was at a consultation stage.
2.5 In December 2011, a “Have your say day” activity was put on in Quainton Memorial Hall to explain to parishioners what a Neighbourhood Development Plan was and to aid them in completing their questionnaires. The display showed how the village had developed, what the geography of the area was, flood areas etc. Parishioners were invited to put their comments on post- it notes which were later collated into the “Vision for Quainton” document. They were asked to express their opinion on which of the green spaces were of particular value to the community, which green spaces should be kept open and which views they particularly enjoyed.
2.6 After the” Have your say” activity, the questionnaires were collected. Some 210 were returned, a return rate of over 39%. Over the following months the data obtained from the questionnaires was professionally analysed and a draft overview report was produced.
2.7 This became the “Vision for Quainton” which can be viewed in full following the link at Appendix 2.
2.8 In March 2012, the Parish Council applied for and received, “front runner funding” of £20,000 to help with the NDP. Following the award of this funding, the Parish Council applied to AVDC for Neighbourhood Area status. This was awarded in September 2012.
2.9 On the 3rd June 2012, in order to promote the Neighbourhood Development Plan process and keep parishioners informed, a display area was set up at a Queen's Golden Jubilee event, which was held on The Green. Although no record was kept of how many people looked at the display, some twenty people expressed an interest in helping with the Neighbourhood Development Plan.
2.10 On 5th July 2012 the first meeting of this support team, the NDP group, was held. Minutes are available of all the meetings on the Parish Council’s website http://www.quainton.info/parish-council/neighbourhood-development-plan
4
2.11 As part of the emerging NDP, it was identified that a crucial part of the village character was the scope and variety of its buildings and their juxtaposition, as well as the important views and green spaces. This had been recognised back in 1972 when a Conservation Area was put in place covering the centre of the village. In the intervening years, although the character of the village had been maintained, several buildings and areas had matured to become an essential part of that character. A revision of the Conservation Area was commissioned from AVDC and the process informed the drafting of the NDP. Consultation on the revised Conservation Area boundary and Statement was also carried out during the consultation period for the NDP.
2.12 Members of the Neighbourhood Development Plan group consulted with an important village group called The Quainton Village Society and asked for thoughts on housing, housing styles, conservation and development in the village. The response is contained in Appendix 4.
2.13 A Local Green Space Audit was carried out. Members of the Neighbourhood Development Plan group set out parameters that would guide what would be designated Local Green Spaces under the NPPF criteria. These were scored and ranked accordingly. The draft Local Green Spaces ranking was displayed on
http://www.quainton.info/uploads/Parish_Council/GreenMatrixRev.pdf
2.14 The Local Green Space Report sets out full details of this. All landowners that could be identified were sent a letter to inform them of the process and invite them to comment on the draft NDP during the consultation period. The letter is at Appendix 6. 45% of landowners either viewed or commented (or both) on the draft NDP and Local Green spaces information. All comments were collated and responses formed in the Comment and Response document in Appendix 9.
2.15 The consultation period and subsequent comments enabled the NDP group to clarify points, in particular regarding the Local Green Spaces. Information from landowners was very much appreciated and helped to form the Local Green Spaces document and the Natural Environment policies in the NDP.
5
2.16 A map was produced which was used at the displays during the consultation period.
Draft Local Green Spaces Map on display at the consultation period.
Map of the parish on display at The Holy Cross and St. Mary’s Church from Friday 3rd July until 14th August 2015 by kind permission of the Churchwardens and Rector.
2.17 A settlement boundary was considered to be an important tool to retain the character and form of the village and its unique setting, so a review of the settlement was undertaken. Where settlement related uses existed on the ground, the site lay within the boundary. Other uses, such as agricultural land remained outside.
2.18 A map was produced which was then used at the displays during the consultation period allowing parishioners and interested parties to make comment if they so wished.
2.19 This was available to view from 3rd July on
http://www.quainton.info/uploads/Parish_Council/VBoundary.JPG
2.20 Throughout this process, the NDP group consulted with the Forward Planning: AVDC Planning Department discussing the draft NDP and the Local Green Spaces documentation. Suggested amendments were made before going to consultation with the parish. The draft maps were produced under the guidance of AVDC.
6
3. Submission of the Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan
3.1 Taking into account background information, technical evidence, the Conservation Area review and the comprehensive early consultations, the Draft Quainton NDP was developed.
3.2 The draft plan was reviewed by AVDC and in general no major concerns were identified and following endorsement by Quainton Parish Council, it was decided that the draft plan could go out to consultation.
3.3 A leaflet was delivered to the whole of the parish informing residents of the consultation days. Appendix 5 illustrates the leaflet delivered.
3.4 A member of the Neighbourhood Development Plan group was interviewed on the local radio station, Mix 96 and spoke about the importance of the NDP and Local Green Spaces and encouraged residents to become involved in commenting on the draft documents.
3.5 An article advertising the NDP and the consultation days was placed in the local newspaper, The Bucks Herald, by the Quainton reporter Mr K. Sutton.
3.6 Consultation on the draft Quainton Neighbourhood Development Plan began on 3rd July 2015 and ran for just over six weeks until August 14th 2015. This allowed it to run concurrently with the draft Conservation Area Review consultation period. All comments, letters and emails received, have been taken into account and are available to view in depth at Appendix 9.
3.7 Letters were sent out to interested parties and stakeholders, inviting them to view and comment on the NDP. A copy of the letter to owners of green spaces is shown at Appendix 6, the letter to interested groups is at Appendix 7 and the list of consultees is shown at Appendix 8.
3.8 A comprehensive display was created which included background information, maps, the policies, information about the Local Green Spaces, how that information on grading was gathered and a photographic display of “Perfect Parish Places”. Information books from Quainton Village Society and old photographs of village events were also on display.
3.9 Paper copies of the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan were available at The Holy Cross and St Mary’s Church, The George and Dragon pub and Coffee shop, Quainton Memorial Hall and the Parish Clerk for the length of the consultation period.
7
4. The Consultation Period at the Holy Cross and St Mary’s Church
4.1 A display was held in the church in between 3rd July and 14th August 2015. On the first weekend, 3rd and 4th July 2015, 102 parishioners and 9 people from outside Quainton signed the attendance sheet and viewed the consultation information and the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan and information on Local Green Spaces. They were also given the opportunity to view a display on the proposed new Conservation Area. Representatives from Quainton Memorial Hall, Quainton Sports Club, Quainton Football Club, other Local Parish Councils and landowners also attended these consultation days and signed the attendance sheet.
4.2 People viewing the draft NDP and the Local Green Spaces information were encouraged to comment using the sheet provided at the venue or via the online form on www.quainton.info.
4.3 Members of the Neighbourhood Development Plan group and Quainton Parish Council were in attendance at all times during the consultation weekend in order to explain the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan, its inception and the accompanying maps, to visiting parishioners and interested parties. The Local Green Spaces display was manned at all times and many questions were answered. People were encouraged to comment.
4.4 Above are some of the photographs of the consultation display in The Holy Cross and St Mary’s Church. Daily public access was available throughout the whole of the consultation period of 3rd July to 14th August 2015.
4.5 A total of 150 comments were received, either on the paper comment sheets or sticky notes provided for the consultation weekends or later via email or letter. Many resident and groups took time to comment on several areas of the NDP and the Local Green Spaces. All of the comments received were analysed and can be viewed at Appendix 9. An overwhelming majority of comments were supportive. All amendments to the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan are noted in the Comment and Response document. Further comments were received from the
8
Forward Planning: AVDC Planning Department, Appendix 10, the AVDC Ecologist, Appendix 11 and Buckinghamshire County Council Appendix 12. These also include the responses.
4.6 To promote the display in the Church a banner was erected on The Green a week before the event.
4.7 The following Saturday, 11th July 2015, a smaller display was set up in the morning at the Quainton C of E Combined School fete. A Parish Councillor and a member of the NDP group were in attendance to talk through the draft NDP and the Local Green Spaces maps.
4.8 A display was erected at the popular Quainton Beer and Music Festival on The Green in the afternoon of 11th July 2015. This event is the main summer fete for Quainton and is attended by a significant proportion of the villagers and many visitors. Members of the Parish Council and Neighbourhood Development Plan group were on hand to explain the draft NDP and Local Green Spaces and the proposed draft Conservation Area. Interested parties were directed to the larger display in the church for more detailed information. Seventy people signed the attendance sheet and many more, including visitors to the
9
Festival, came to view the display and were given comment forms to use if they felt they wanted to.
5. Quainton News articles
5.1 Articles promoting the NDP and Conservation Area Review and the accompanying displays were featured in the village magazine, Quainton News. Below is a link to the July 2015 Quainton News with the front above displaying the Quainton mosaic and inside information on the consultation period.
http://media.wix.com/ugd/6cfd6e_c6f29c8421c04568b2aafb2d0f363b59.pdf
5.2 Quainton News has been used to promote the forming of the NDP since its inception back in 2011. The year, month and page number of articles are at Appendix 3.
5.3 In order to achieve as wide as coverage as possible a specially designed banner giving instant information about the draft NDP was displayed at Quainton Memorial Hall for the period 12th July to the 14th August 2015.
6. Quainton Parish Council Website
10
6.1 The website for Quainton Parish Council www.quainton.info went live on 20th February 2015. A web page dedicated to the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan was introduced on 25th February 2015 and the earlier documents relevant to the NDP, were placed there in the public domain. The draft NDP documents were placed on the web page in time for the consultation period of 3rd July 2015. http://www.quainton.info/parish-council/neighbourhood-development-plan
6.2 An email comment sheet was created with a dedicated email address and the first emailed comment on the consultation information was received on 6th July 2015. All comments received and the responses are to be found at Appendix 9.
6.3 The Chair of the NDP group met the head of Quainton C of E Primary School to discuss the plan and its possible impact on the school.
6.4 Informal discussions took place in the George and Dragon pub with members of the NDP group in attendance.
7. Comments received
7.1 150 comments were received (plus further comments from AVDC and BCC) from residents, interested parties, consultees and stakeholders. They are summarised and any resulting changes to the Neighbourhood Development Plan are recorded at Appendix 9. Following comments on the Local Green Spaces in the parish, a full justification of the Local Green Spaces was drawn up, including photographs and extensive information of the importance of these areas to the parish. Following consultation, those Local Green Spaces which scored highly, along with those that the community considered to be particularly important to protect, were designated Local Green Spaces. Some identified spaces, scoring 12 and above, whilst not necessarily having the protected status of Local Green Spaces, were nevertheless important locally, as set out in the secondary Local Green Spaces map and in the land parcel grading table. All of this detailed information can be found in the Local Green Spaces document.
7.2 Comments from the Forward Planning: AVDC Planning Department and the responses following the comments are to be found at Appendix 10. These comments were used to amend the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan. Discussions took place, after the amendments were made, in order to prepare for submission. A full justification for the Local Green Spaces was written to provide extra information regarding policy NE1.
7.3 A comment email was received from the AVDC Ecologist. The comment and response can be found at Appendix 11.
11
7.4 A letter was received from Buckinghamshire County Council with supportive comments and suggestions. This can be found at Appendix 12 along with the response from the NDP group.
8. Appendix 1. Click on this link to view the questionnaire from 2011. http://www.quainton.info/uploads/Parish_Council/NDPQuest.pdf
9. Appendix 2. Click on this link to view “The Vision for Quainton” http://www.quainton.info/uploads/Parish_Council/Vision_for_Quainton.pdf
10. Appendix 3. Articles in Quainton News http://quaintonnews.wix.com/quainton-news
Below are Quainton News articles and references in Quainton News taken from Quainton Parish Council minutes; updates and notices were placed in this local newsletter which is delivered to the whole of the parish.
http://www.quainton.info/parish-council/minutes
June 2012 – p.17 advert asking for new members to the NDP group
December 2012 – p.13 further appeal for new members to the NDP group
December 2014 – p. 15 article giving information about progress, a reminder of the questionnaire and “Have your say day”
January 2015 – p.11 PC minutes noting that the steering group are continuing with the NDP
March 2015 – p.11 PC minutes reminding people that the proposed document will have significant influence with regard to issues affecting the village and asking for comments on the documents on www.quainton.info
April 2015 – p.11 PC minutes introduce the new Conservation Area to take place for Quainton p.13 separate notice encouraging people to look at the Quainton.info website to see the analysis of the questionnaire and the minutes of the meetings.
May 2015 – p.11 PC minutes reiterating the importance of the NDP with regard to development in the village and that the NDP group are working to prepare the document for public consultation. A notice asking for photos of a favourite place in Quainton (linking to Local Green Spaces)
June 2015 – p.11 PC minutes preparation for the public consultation is well under way, encouraging people to look at the information on the website and share 12
comments and reminding people that the document will play an important role in shaping the future of the village p.13 article entitled “Your Parish Needs You” asking for pictures of your “Perfect Parish Place”. It also notifies that the public consultation will take place soon.
The Wildlife Garden LGS2
One suggested “Perfect Parish Place”
Linked to this on p.40, a notice asking for photos of The Holy Cross and St Mary’s church and its surrounding green spaces.
July 2015 – p.11 PC minutes encouraging people to view the information on the website p. 21 separate notice giving information about the consultation days and the consultation period with times and dates. Introduction of the Quainton mosaic, cover photo on all the draft NDP documents and information matching the leaflet distributed throughout the parish
August 2015 – p.4 separate notice, again with mosaic to attract attention, encouraging people to view the information on the draft NDP p.11 PC minutes 13
encouraging people to view and comment on the draft NDP and also on the draft Conservation Area Review
September 2015 – p. 10 PC minutes stressing the importance of the NDP, in particular in regards to housing development
October 2015 – p. 10 PC minutes informing that all the comments received have been analysed and have helped to form the plan; amendments are being made following these and the Forward Planning: AVDC Planning Department and the NDP’s advisor’s responses.
11. Appendix 4. Initial letter from Quainton Village Society
Quainton Village Society - Neighbourhood Development Plan Considerations and Comments
A) Initial QVS considerations
What is the village worth?
As residents of Quainton, QVS considers that villagers are likely to care about what the village looks like and feels like…after all, it’s why many people choose to live here or stay here. But it’s not just about keeping the “quaint” in Quainton. It’s a combination of things like the size of the village; the mixture of different building styles; the views and the way trees and green spaces help to create a rural atmosphere.
Whether you own a large eighteenth century farmhouse or rent a small Victorian cottage you are likely to feel the same sense of appreciation.
Safeguarding this quality means that we’ve got to try and describe it…how can planners and developers in the future know and understand what we value about Quainton unless we tell them?
All across the country, rural communities are facing the same issue. That’s why there is an initiative to help co-ordinate and adopt villagers’ views into what is known as a Neighbourhood Development Plan.
Quainton’s Neighbourhood Development Plan
Many people feel that they have no say over what development takes place in Quainton but a Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) offers a constructive solution to this dilemma.
Local communities have a unique appreciation and understanding of their own place, and an NDP is based on this knowledge. It describes the qualities that residents value and appreciate in Quainton and its surrounding area.
The NDP should set out clear and simple guidance for the design of all development in the village. It is an advisory document produced by the village community - not by the planning authority. It will not stop change from happening, but it can help affect how any new building fits into the village. NDPs are intended to influence the operation of the statutory planning system, so that new development is in harmony with it’s setting and makes a positive contribution to its environment. What does an NDP cover? • It describes the distinctive character of a village and its surrounding countryside
• It shows how character can be identified at three levels:-
- the landscape setting and views, - the shape of the settlement, - the nature of the buildings themselves; 14
• An NDP sets down design principles based on the distinctive local character • Producing an NDP fosters working in partnership with the local authority, engenders understanding of current planning policies, and offers the chance to influence future policies.
NDPs have been completed by villages in all parts of England. They are of value to residents, planners, designers and developers. There should be broad involvement of local interests so that the finished design statement is a representative document, and one that presents ideas for stimulating and sustaining community involvement in planning issues. It is important that the parish council, plus planning authority councillors and officers are drawn in to the NDP process. Preparing an NDP doesn’t demand design or planning knowledge - the only requirement is an interest in the future well-being of the village. But it needs time, energy, imagination and determination! An effective Neighbourhood Development Plan: • is developed, researched, written and edited by local people
• reflects the representative views of a community
• involves a wide cross-section of residents in its production
• describes the visual character of the village
• demonstrates how local character and distinctiveness can be protected and enhanced in new development
• is compatible with the statutory planning system and its local application
• should be accepted as supplementary planning guidance (and thereby influence developers and decisions on individual planning applications)
How should it happen?
At the heart of an NDP are the thoughts and views of everyone who lives in the village.
Not just the Parish Council.
Not just the Village Society.
It needs co-ordination of course…to make sure it happens. But that will be the responsibility of a group of villagers voluntarily working together to achieve this. The group, in turn, will reach out to all the various interest groups and clubs in the village (the communities within the community) including the school, churches and individual residents.
A picture will be pieced together entirely created by local opinion. It will serve as a template for the future.
Change for the Better
The NDP is not about preserving a chocolate-box image. There are bound to be some new houses in the village over time.
But, the NDP helps planners and developers understand the key components to make sure that when change happens it will be with the village rather than against it.
B) QVS’ responses to the NDP committees’ questions
It is important to understand that QVS considers that the Village Policy and Conservation Area V40, which was adopted, after consultation, in 1972, is a sound and definitive document which is as relevant and pertinent today as when it was adopted. (albeit with minor up-dating amendments).
In addition, we believe that, although some of its recommendations have been flouted in the past, it still carries the same weight to be observed, and places the same obligations on planners, as when it was first adopted.
QVS has been asked to comment on the following 2 questions :-
Key objective 1 What type of development might be welcomed - knowing that the village will have to have some?
Key objective 2 Design/size/position of proposed development and the impact on the village/green spaces/view points 15
Key objective 1
1) New Housing
When the V40 was adopted, it was envisaged that “a future provision of some 40 new houses should be the limit of Quainton development until this plan is reviewed”.
Since this time, Quainton has been asked to absorb far more than 40 new houses in the form of :-
Gradual, single-house infill over time - plus multiple house developments like Klee Close, The Pyghtles, Piggotts Orchard, Canons Orchard, Malletts End, the ‘Potato Factory’ houses, White Hart Field, Cross Farm development, The Croft development and Dimmock Court.
QVS, therefore, consider that there should be no further new house development in Quainton other than sympathetically designed single property infill. This should only be allowed where such infill can be properly achieved and should not allow ‘back-land’ development, which should continue to be firmly resisted - particularly where it would result in gaps being created in existing building frontages.
To quote the 1972 V40 – “There are other villages in the vicinity which could be developed with some gain to their environments rather than to their loss – which Quainton risks”!
Furthermore, QVS has no sympathy with any argument that Quainton must accept further development because national or local government has so decreed.
It has been reported that it is estimated that between 7 and 10 million immigrants have entered the UK over the past 10 years. More accurate figures cannot be verified because government is either is unable to do so or does not wish the true figures to be known. Successive Governments have dismally failed either to control immigration, or even to limit it to their own self-set targets, and this village should not be made a scapegoat for this blatant failure of our Government’s duty by having unwanted development forced upon it.
2) “Affordable” Housing
There are several “affordable” housing developments in Quainton and the latest, Seechfield, has now been added to the earlier development, to its north in Station Road.
This development usurped the adopted V40 principle that “ It is considered that, to the west of this road, viz Station Road, there should be no further development”.
In fact, the Seechfield development was only achieved by the forced application of a Rural Exception Scheme to over-ride planning restrictions. It was promised, at a public meeting at the time by Mrs Polhill, then a Planning Committee member of AVDC, that this development would not be allowed to set a precedent and that her council would not allow further development to the west of Station Road. The Housing Needs Survey Report produced by the Rural Housing Enabler at the time stated :- ‘To forecast the number of homes required in a parish to meet housing need in perpetuity, the indicator used by many local authorities is that the need must be at least twice the number of properties built. This is to ensure sufficient demand in future years. Using this formula, and taking into account all the information provided, the survey has identified a need for eight properties. It further states that :- ‘The number and mix of units above has been approved by the Housing Department of the Aylesbury Vale District Council, and therefore should be considered to be complete.’ Hence - having had a housing need of 8 properties forecast with the above assurances – and then to have had 12 properties built at Seechfield, it is QVS’ firm contention that the “affordable” housing need in Quainton has been more than fulfilled and that there is no further need “in perpetuity”! 3) Retirement Housing We are constantly hearing, from politicians and the media, that we have an ageing population. (It is as if this was a new phenomena but, aren’t we all constantly ageing – and wasn’t the same mantra on the lips of NHS managers 50 years ago?)
Quainton does not have a provision for retirement housing, although it was to have been a provision that could have been made when it’s Memorial Hall was envisaged before the last millennium.
QVS would welcome the provision of such purpose-built accommodation – specifically available for people currently living in the village – so that their current properties could be made available for other people and they could ‘down-size’. Such accommodation is envisaged to be designed as suitable for the older villager who is still independent.
16
Key objective 2 Retirement Housing should be sited as near to the village centre as possible and QVS are aware that a proposal in the 1972 V40 was that the allotment land to the south of Hope House in Station Road – shown marked H2 on Plan 3 (North) – was a proposed housing area. Whilst such a siting would not please the allotment holders, the use of some of this land could fulfil the perceived need. QVS are completely in agreement with the importance of maintaining and preserving all the Landscape and Townscape views delineated in the V40 and development of the above land would not obscure any of these views. Finally Quainton has frequently been described as the Jewel in the Crown of Aylesbury Vale. We believe that this is a true description and it follows, therefore, that it is vitally important that the rural character of Quainton, and its integrity as a cohesive but individual village and community, is maintained if it is to retain its appeal and historic character. It must be protected against any plans for development which threaten it.
QVS – April 2015
17
12. Appendix 5. Leaflet distributed throughout the parish
18
13. Appendix 6. Letter to landowners or interested parties with regard to Local Green Spaces
Quainton Parish Council
Correspondence: 13 Church Street, Quainton, HP22 4AW
Telephone: 01296 651354
Email: [email protected] 1st July 2015
Dear Sir or Madam,
As you are aware the Parish Council has been working to create a Neighbourhood Development Plan to help guide development of the village in all respects over the next 20 years. This is quite a priority as, without such a document, the assumption is that all land is developable.The Parish Council have chosen not to identify specific sites for development but rather have developed policies guided by the community, which specify what might be acceptable with respect to design and new development. As well as this, the Plan aims to preserve areas of archaeological, historical, landscape and biological heritage and green space. In the latter case the document identifies a wide number of important areas of open space within the village that give it a more rural aspect. Some have particular functions such as The Recreation Ground and the Sports field. We have also identified a number of areas where people have habitually walked. These are generally fields where there is a footpath but people have been accustomed to walking more freely. We are writing to you as a landowner of one of the green spaces we are seeking to protect. We would stress that this in no way imposes anything on you as the owner or prejudices its use. The designation as green space is designed to record the importance of the area to the Village and to the people that live within it and will prevent development of such areas for housing. The purpose of this letter is to make you aware of our thinking and to give you an opportunity to let us know if you feel that the designation is inappropriate in any way. There is the possibility that the field can always be omitted from the proposals should you so wish in any final document.We on the Parish Council or others on the Neighbourhood Development Plan Group, would be pleased to discuss the issue further should you feel that would be helpful. If you wish to make formal comments on the Neighbourhood Plan, please fill in one of our comments forms available on the website (from 3rd July www.quainton.info/parish-council-neighbourhood-development-plan) and at the Consultation Days or write to the NDP committeec/o Mr B Fludgate, Clerk to the Parish Council, 13, Church Street, Quainton
Yours sincerely,
Arthur Evans Chair
Quainton Parish Council
Quainton Neighbourhood Development Plan
19
14. Appendix 7. Letter to interested parties, including groups, regarding awareness of the draft NDP consultation period
QUAINTON PARISH COUNCIL
Correspondence: 13 Church Street Quainton Aylesbury Bucks HP22 4AW
Tel: 01296 651354
Email: [email protected]
30th June 2015
Dear Sirs,
Quainton Parish Council is pleased to inform you that the draft Neighbourhood Development Plan for the Parish of Quainton is available to view online at: www.quainton.info/parish-council/public-consultation-neighbourhood-development-plan from 3rd July to 14th August 2015.
The consultation period starts with a consultation evening 6 - 8 pm on Friday 3rd July and Saturday 4th July, 10am to 4pm at The Holy Cross and St Mary's Church, Church Street, Quainton and then 11th July on The Green, Quainton 1pm to 4pm. (Look out for the banner) At these events, copies of the plan will be available to read.
Yours faithfully,
E. A . Evans
Chair of Quainton Parish Council
20
15. Appendix 8. List of groups and interested parties contacted.
Aylesbury Vale District Council
Andy Kirkham, Planning Manager (Forward Plans)
AVDC, Forward Plans, The Gateway, Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury, HP19 8FF [email protected]
Strategic Planning
Buckinghamshire County Council
Buckinghamshire County Council offices, Walton Street, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UA [email protected]
Aylesbury Vale Adjoining Parish Councils http://www.aylesburyvaledc.gov.uk/council-democracy/parish-councils-meetings/contact-details-parish-councils-meetings/
Waddesdon, Hogshaw, Middle Claydon, East Claydon, Woodham, Grendon Underwood, Westcott, Pitchcott, North Marston
The Coal Authority
200 Lichfield Land, Berry Hill, MANSFIELD, Nottinghamshire, NG18 4RG. [email protected]
The Homes and Communities Agency
7th Floor, Maple House, 14a Tottenham Court, Road, LONDON W1T 7BU. [email protected] [email protected]
Natural England
Mr Charles Routh
Consultation Service, Hornbeam House, Hornbeam House, Electra Way, Crewe Business Park, Crewe, Cheshire, CW1 6GJ. [email protected]
The Environment Agency
Mrs Cathy Harrison 21
Red Kite House, Howbery Park, WALLINGFORD
Oxon, OX10 8BD [email protected]
The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England (known as English Heritage)
Mr Martin Small
Eastgate Court, 195-205 High Street, GUILDFORD
Surrey, GU1 3EH. [email protected]
Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (company number 2904587);
Ms Diane Clarke
Square One, 4 Travis Street, Manchester, M1 2NY.
The Highways Agency;
Mr A Watson
Wing 1A, Federated House, London Road, DORKING, Surrey, RH4 1SZ. [email protected]
The Marine Management Organisation
East Midlands Electricity Board
Mobile Phone Operators Association
Herald Way, Pegasus Business Park, East Midlands Airport, Castle Donnington, DERBY
DE74 2TU.
10 St Bride Street
London EC4A 4AA tel: +44 (0)20 7331 2015 www.mobilemastinfo.com [email protected]
BT
Buckinghamshire NHS Primary Care Trust
22
Ms T Donnelly
3rd Floor, Rapid House, 40 Oxford Road, HIGH WYCOMBE, Bucks, HP11 2EE. [email protected]
East Midlands Electricity Board
Herald Way, Pegasus Business Park, East Midlands Airport, Castle Donnington, DERBY
DE74 2TU.
AMEC Environment & Infrastructure UK on behalf of the National Grid
Business Planning Floor B6, 80 St Marys Road
SOUTHAMPTON, Hants, SO9 5AT
Thames Water Property Services
Agent - Miss Carmelle Bell (Savills)
Hawker House, 5-6 Napier Court, Napier House
Reading, Berkshire, RG1 8BW. [email protected]
Voluntary bodies some or all of whose activities benefit all or any part of the neighbourhood area;
Quainton Memorial Hall, [email protected]
Saye and Sele Trust [email protected]
Quainton Village Society C/o Martin Jacobs, Hatherways, Quainton
Buckinghamshire Railway Society,
Sara Jefferson (general manager) Station Road
Windmill Society, C/o Mike Roberts, Cannon's Orchard
Quaint wood Players, C/o Arthur Evans
Winwood Trust, C/o Eric Serjeant
Bodies which represent the interests of different religious groups in the neighbourhood area;
Holy Cross and St Mary's church, The Rectory, Church Street,
The Oxford Diocese
Baptist Union of GB
23
Baptist House, Didcot. OX11 8RT
South East Midlands Local Enterprise Partnership
Cranfield University Innovation Centre
University Way
Cranfield
MK43 0BT [email protected]
Bucks Thames Valley Local Enterprise Partnership c/o The Clare Charity Centre
Wycombe Road
Saunderton
Bucks
HP14 4BF [email protected]
Buckinghamshire Business First – c/o Ms Philippa Batting
Saunderton Estate
Wycombe Road
Saunderton
HP14 4BF [email protected]
Quainton C of E Primary School, [email protected]
All known landowners of Local Green Spaces as per analysis of land parcels
24
16. Appendix 9. Comment and Responses
Paragraph/ Person/ Summary Changes Response reference A total of 150 to policy Number comments were made NDP by 54 respondents. (groups are shaded yellow)
General 17 specific comments Comments on offering general NDP support for NDP 17 residents made comments.
S1 I find the plan very none Thank you for your acceptable and thank supportive comment, no you change for all your hard work to NDP needed. S2 I agree with the overall none Thank you for your plan in general supportive comment, no change to NDP needed. S3 Thanks and congrats to none Thank you for your all involved in this very supportive comment - no important plan for our change village to NDP needed. I concur with all aspects of the plan S4 Nothing missing from none Thank you for your the plan supportive comment, no change to NDP needed. Extra comments on individual policies will be covered later
25
S5 Very clear and none Thank you for your positive professional comment - supportive presentation of the plan comment, no change to NDP needed. S6 Totally agree with the none Supportive comment, no policies stated change to NDP needed. S7 I applaud the work of none Thank you for your the development plan supportive comment team and endorse its underlying aim of maintaining the village character of Quainton and ensuring as best it can that Quainton will remain a pleasant place to live. S8 An excellent plan and none Thank you for your support presentation it needs to be adopted as soon as possible S9 I am very impressed none Thank you for your support with the overall structure of plan and the amount of work that has obviously gone into it S10 Very impressive. A lot of none Thank you for your support. hard work has gone into completing this. A good read! S11 A lot of work, well done none Thank you for your support. S12 Excellent job - none Thank you for your support. comprehensive and sensible plan S13 Happy to support none Thank you for your support. adoption by PC S14 I congratulate all who none Thank you for your worked on this. I supportive support the policies. comment. S15 I support the plan none Thank you for your support of the NDP
26
S16 Worthy successor with none Thank you for your Quainton reservations comments before and Village during the consultation Society period. Further comments from the QVS are addressed further on in particular policy areas. S17 First Class none Your comment is appreciated.
E1 6 specific comments - Environment 6 in support -good quality building in sympathy with the surroundings. 5 residents made comments and 1 group made comments.
E1 E1.1 Providing the design none Thank you for your and materials used are comment of support for both of good quality (like policy E1 expressed in this infill house on the North comment. side of Church Street near the Village shop) E1 E1.2 I'd like to see this Yes Thank you for your include boundaries too - concerned comment, slight eg walls & fences change to wording adding replaced by new out of further clarification on keeping materials boundaries. The PC would walls and fences should hope that walls and fences to be in keeping would be installed or reinstated in keeping with the property but has limited powers over this area. E1 E1.3 I totally support E1 none Thank you for your support. E1 E1.4 I concur with all aspects none Thank you for your specific of the plan, in particular support for this policy. Conservation planning
27
E1 E1. 5 Agree with bins hidden none Policy E1 - included so any new development should show how the waste and recycling bins are screened Thank you for your comment. E1 E1. 6 Such infill should only none Thank you for your Quainton be allowed where it can comment. Village be properly achieved to This comment supports the Society be in character and policy set out in this section. sympathy with its surroundings E2 5 specific comments Environment supporting this policy 5 residents made comments.
E2 E2.1 Supporting materials in none Thank you for your support keeping of policy E2. E2 E2.2 Wholeheartedly support none Thank you for your your intentions & views comment supporting policy in keeping Quainton as E2. special as it is now and for the future I concur with this policy E2 E2.3 I totally support E2 none Thank you for your comment of support for E2 E2 E2. 4 Will the style be taken none Thank you for your into consideration if comment policy E2 building requested paragraph 1 addressing this beyond the concern conservation area? E2 E2.5 The style of the building none Thank you for your is equally important comment policy E2 outside the conservation paragraph 1 addressing this area concern.
H1 Housing 29 specific comments to this policy 21 residents(3 of which made multiple comments) 3 group
28
comments (with one group making multiple comments)
Analysis of comments: A significant proportion The overwhelming oppose backland majority of residents development, opting for want future housing linear patterns of housing in development limited to any gaps along the present the presently drawn highways. Very few settlement boundary. residents, other than landowners, favour development outside the present residential boundary H1 H1. 1 I agree with the none This statement is in support settlement boundary of the settlement boundary. Thank you for your support. H1 H1. 2 Yes, linear building none Policy H1 includes this so down Station Road this is a supporting statement. Thank you for your comment. H1 H1.3 Agree that development none Thank you for your in countryside such as comment, this statement is equestrian, should not supporting the policy have an unacceptable impact on the landscape and roads H1 H1. 4 Back land development none Thank you for your really not allowed other comment. This statement is than maybe supporting the NDP's policy conservatory of restricting backland development. Subject to central government ruling on permitted development. H1 H1.5 I support in principle none Thank you for your Quainton Parish comment and support for Council's and the infill sites parishioners preference infill sites for development
29
H1 H1.6 I support the Parish none Thank you for your council's preference for comment and support for infill for development as infill sites. The majority of identified during the respondees to the NDP consultation questionnaire agreed with process with the local this. community H1 H1.7 I concur with all aspects none Thank you for your of the plan, particularly comment supporting the planning. I think we planning policies. have to face the reality Parishioners responding to that there is a need for the questionnaire felt the small controlled need for the slow expansion expansion of the village. of the village over the life of the NDP. H1 H1.8 Agree with the none Thank you for your restriction on backland comment supporting no development, in back land development particular on Station Road H1 H1.9 Believe there are Thank you for your opportunities for infill comment supporting infill development which will sites in the village. be more suited to the street scene. H1 H1.10 Infill removes those little none Thank you for your idiosyncratic open comment and your opinion spaces that are part of is noted - sympathetic the character of a development of field rather village\town. We may than linear infilling. The have to bite the bullet NDP is not allocating and allow a field to be specific sites for developed with development. sympathetic development instead. H1 H1.11 Particularly agree with none Thank you for your support. the housing policy H1 H1. 12 Seechfield was none These dwellings are not supposed to have been under the control of the shielded by hedge and NDP or the PC, so trees. This did not unfortunately to comment happen. Why? Will this on this is beyond our remit. mean that other infill sites will not be blended by trees to suit
30
local environment
H1 H1.13 I would support none Thank you for your development of comment of suggested allotment development land. The if required NDP is not allocating specific sites for development. H1 H1.14 I would support none Thank you for your development of land comment. The NDP is not known as Strand allocating specific sites for stables development. This land is outside the 30mph zone, the hedge is in the Conservation Area. H1 H1. 15 Trailflat farm - "I do not None Thank you for your email. want to limit or restrict The NDP is not allocating options in regards to specific sites for any potential future development. development of my land. Therefore, as the The revised Housing Policy landowner, I would find H1 and preamble clarifies the Parish's designation what types of development of my site as green outside the Settlement space, within the NDP Boundary would be or any other such plan, acceptable. as inappropriate. I ask you to omit my land The Local Green Spaces from any "Green Zone" have been identified and plan and in fact explained in The Local recognise that I would Green Spaces document. indeed be open to any discussions in relation to developing my land for housing or otherwise. Due to my land's location on the edge of the village, between the village itself, the recreation ground and the sports field, I would nominate my land to be
31
considered for any potential development
H1 H1.16 Bones Close. The main None Thank you for your part of the close is not comment. Anstiss Trust visible from the road The NDP is not allocating (Church Street) and has specific sites for little to no scenic value, development. although residents of 1,3 and 5 Church Street The revised Housing Policy which back on to the H1 and preamble clarifies close, no doubt what types of development appreciate having a field outside the Settlement rather than housing Boundary would be behind their properties. acceptable. The community is, however, in favour of The land is adjacent to the limited development Settlement Boundary on within the village on both sides. unused land to provide further housing and other facilities to attract people, particularly young people, to Quainton and help maintain it as a vibrant place in which to live. The Trustees hope to sell the land for appropriate housing
32
development, while maintaining the foot path running through the close. Such a scheme, we believe, would be consistent with county and national policies.
H1 H1. 17 Quainton Village None Thank you for your Quainton Society, therefore, comment. Many residents Village consider would support this view but, society that there should be no in the face of national further new house pressures, is it feasible? development in Policy H1 allows for infill Quainton other than and the revised Housing single property infill. Policy H1 and preamble clarifies what types of development outside the Settlement Boundary would be acceptable. H1 H1. 18 No back land None Thank you for supporting Quainton development this section of the housing Village policy. society
33
H1 H1. 19 Tebby's Close. We refer yes Thank you for your to the small section of comment. The green space land (approx 1.5 acres) map has been changed the last plot on the following your information. eastern side of the cul de sac known as North The NDP is not allocating End Road, Quainton. specific sites for Historically Tebby's development. Close was a small development on this The revised Housing Policy field). In 1972 village H1 and preamble clarifies plan this land was what types of development excluded from the outside the Settlement village envelope for Boundary would be some reason -even acceptable. though it is of little agricultural use and is The land is adjacent to the the last plot fronting this Settlement Boundary metaled road. On the NDP map this field is marked as 54 "other used grassland". (However the section behind No. 66 North End Road was sold to the owners of that house many years ago). We would prefer the land with road frontage to be included within the village for possible future development, although we have no such plans at present. H1 H1.20 I would like to pledge none Thank you for expressing my support for the NDP your support of this section Settlement Boundary of the Housing Policy. and reaffirm the stance that no development The revised Housing Policy must take place outside H1 and preamble clarifies the Settlement what types of development Boundary. There are outside the Settlement ample potential sites for Boundary would be development within the acceptable. Settlement Boundary and these should take precedence over any sites that landowners
34
have put forward for possible development outside the boundary.
H1 H1.21 I prefer new housing to none Thank you for your be in small, well comment. The majority designed cul-de-sacs. community response for These are pleasant to housing was for linear and live in, safer for children infilling. and fewer cars parked on the main roads. The revised Housing Policy H1 and preamble clarifies what types of housing development would be acceptable. H1 H1. 22 Following the Quainton none Thank you for your NDP being on public comment. display in Quainton The NDP is not allocating church, I would like to specific sites for make it known to the development. Parish Council that our piece of land, adjacent The land is adjacent to to the residential Settlement Boundary on buildings in Station both Road (part of land sides. parcel 46), is available for inclusion within the Settlement Boundary in any future development in Quainton.
35
H1 H1. 23 Quainton is classified as none Thank you for your a "larger" village in the comment. Walsingham settlement hierarchy The AVDC settlement Planning assessment 2013. hierarchy is under review Consultants and awaiting comments Quainton must following the consultation accommodate new period. housing that helps to meet local needs and The NDP allows for small contributes towards controlled expansion within meeting the needs of the settlement boundary to the Vale as a whole. meet local needs. The NDP The NP as drafted is not allocating specific envisages very limited sites for development. growth within the existing settlement Policy H1 and the boundary. No sites are associated preamble has identified, level of been redrafted to clarify that housing is inadequate linear development beyond will not fulfill a key the Settlement Boundary objective. along Station Road is acceptable and that the This should include boundary is primarily aimed development of at retaining the integrity and greenfield land on the appearance of the village. edge of the village Developments around the where it will not harm edges of the Boundary the setting of the village, would erode the special providing a mix of qualities of the setting of the housing to meet local existing development within needs. its landscape acknowledged in the Policy H1 should be Conservation Area Review. amended to reflect this approach and in The NDP reflects the views particular , should of the majority of delete the sentence parishioners who wish to relating to development see the retention of the 'beyond the settlement uniquely historic setting of boundary' the village, with small controlled development within that setting.
36
H1 H1. 24 I would just like to none Thank you for your pledge my support for comment supporting the the NDP settlement Settlement Boundary. boundary and fully agree with the findings, as supported by overwhelming public opinion via the Community consultation in Nov/Dec 2011, that no development should take place outside of the Settlement Boundary H1 H1. 25 I would like to express none Thank you for your my support for the PC's comment general NDP settlement supporting the Settlement boundary restrictions Boundary. H1 H1.26 Provision for new none Thank you for your housing to keep the comment, the NDP allows village viable, villages for small scale growth over must be allowed to grow the life of the NDP. to keep things viable
H1 H1. 27 I would just like to Thank you for your pledge my support for comment. the NDP settlement boundary H1 H1.28 I would like to express none Thank you for your support my support for this of this section of the policy, particularly infill Housing Policies. H1 H1.29 No further incursion Thank you for your QVS should be allowed comment. (settlement boundary) H2 Housing 13 comments minus There is distinct one relevant repeat opposition to any comment 12 properties offering just a single bedroom. 10 residents made Significant numbers comments (1 made recognise that affordable multiple comments) 1 housing for people with group made multiple proven local connections comments is highly desirable. H2 H2. 1 Small homes should none Thank you for offering your have at least 2 support for this aspect of bedrooms the policy 37
H2 H2.2 Young families & room none Thank you for your to bring up children & comment. The housing live in a thriving village policies address this. are essential to Quainton's continuation, some growth is good H2 H2.3 Affordable housing for none Thank you for your families wanting to stay comment. The Housing Policy prefers smaller houses which will address this problem. H2 H2. 4 Growth is essential to none Thank you for your REPEAT sustain the needs of the comment. The housing COMMENT village policies allow small scale growth for targeted groups of young families and the elderly. H2 H2. 5 Increasing numbers of none Unfortunately this is a houses rented out as national problem and investments for the beyond the control of the absent owner leading to NDP and the Parish a lack of sense of Council. Thank you for your belonging comment. H2 H2. 6 Small well designed cul- none Thank you for your de-sacs are safer for comment. families The NDP is not allocating specific sites for development. There is no suggestion in the NDP for the construction of any new through roads. H2 H2. 7 I believe there is a need none Thank you for your for single storey comment. The housing housing, one or two policy addresses this in part bed, on an easy although no mention of accessible level (Station single storey. Road) H2 H2.8 Provision for new none Thank you for your housing to keep the comment, the housing village policies allow for small viable scale growth to help keep the village viable.
38
H2 H2.9 Consider including an none This will be largely affordable housing dependent on national provision which may policies, although the NDP alleviate the housing reiterates the need for need for the elderly including some housing suitable for the elderly in a development. H2 H2. 10 Fully support gradual none Thank you for expressing and limited growth of your support of aspects of mixed housing stock to the housing policy. meet future residents' requirement H2 H2.11 I particularly agree with none Thank you for your support. the housing policy H2i H2.12 QVS welcomes the draft none Thank you for supporting Quainton NDP's emphasis on the this aspect of the housing Village provision of policy. society accommodation for both the over 60's and young families in the belief that the middle range of housing between these groups is already well catered for in Quainton. H2 H2.13 QVS However, it should be none There are already two fairly an aim that such recent developments in the accommodation should village. Any further be for the benefit of the schemes would be subject existing village to National Policies, community or for people including any changes with existing and resulting from the present provable ties to the discussion on "Right to village buy". Only rural exception schemes can dictate this at the time of this NDP and so this is beyond the remit of the NDP.
CF1 17 comments - 13 Community residents made Facilities comments with 2 making multiple comments.
39
CF1 CF1. 1 I think it is important to none Thank you for your get a pre-school back comment. in the village and rescue Quainton Primary School the Saye and Sele Hall are exploring the possibility of a nursery on their site. CF1 CF1. 2 I would like to see pre- none Thank you for your school back in the comment. As mentioned village above Quainton Primary School are exploring the possibility of a nursery on site. CF 1 CF1. 3 Helping the elderly- none Quainton Village Society working group - informal produce a village directory advertising local services and the Village Store has a noticeboard displaying notices. Thank you for your comment. CF1 CF1. 4 Mini bus availability for none This is beyond the remit of multi purposes please the NDP but possibly a fundraising group could be set up to solve this problem? Thank you for your comment though. CF1 CF1. 5 Cleaning ladies please none This is beyond the remit of the NDP. The local Village Store often has advertisements for local services, such as cleaning or gardening. Thank you for your comment. CF1 CF1. 6 I would like a reliable none This is beyond the remit of local (Quainton) taxi the NDP. Thank you for your comment though. CF1 CF1.7 Wouldn't it be great if none NDP has no powers to do the New Year's Day anything like this. Thank fox hunt could be you for your comment. replaced by an altogether different, less destructive activity? Please divert this group from the village
40
CF1 CF1.8 With the planned yes Additional information East/West rail link, I added about East West would like to see a Railway in the NDP. station in Quainton. I Providing a new station is know this would beyond the remit of the probably lead to more NDP or the Parish Council. houses being built but I feel that this area south Thank you for your of will be forced by comment. central government to provide more land for house building so the village of Quainton may as well have the convenience of a railway station. The population of Quainton is ageing, resident have lived here for many years and want to continue to do so, however, if ever unable to drive, this would be very difficult. A rail link to Aylesbury and beyond would be a life line. CF1 CF1. 9 Agree with the policy none Thank you for your protecting Community comment supporting this Facilities policy. CF1 CF1. 10 Little support for our none Thank you for your local shop. Use it or comment. Quainton has lose recently lost the butcher's it - once gone very shop so this is an obvious difficult to open concern over viability of elsewhere local store. It is up to the local residents to use local facilities in order to ensure their survival. CF1 CF1.11 Please support the local none Thank you for your shop, Council should comment. subsidise if possible or as above add Post Office to it, or lottery etc
41
CF1 CF12 Swan and Castle would none Thank you for your be ideal as a shop comment and we are sure many people would agree with you but this is beyond the remit of the NDP. CF1 CF1. 13 Would love a Post none Thank you for your Office as part of our comment. The possibility village has previously been store. explored -response from PO, store not suitable. CF1 CF1. 14 Maybe a take away? none Thank you for your But would rather the comment. NDP and PC has pub no control was back over this. CF1 CF1. 15 Extended opening time none Thank you for your should be allowed comment. The Village Store for local shops. have in the past extended opening hours but did not find the disruption to family life or the monetary aspect a benefit. CF1 CF1. 16 Footpaths in Station none Thank you for your Road. One side none, comment and the walkers in existing good side the village would certainly usually used for parking. agree with you but Bucks A footpath over the County Council have railway bridge would be control over these issues very welcome. Very and the prospect of HS2 dangerous for working on that road pedestrians and suggests this would not be cyclists. feasible at the moment. CF1 CF1.17 We need another pub. none Thank you for your comment and we feel sure many people would support this but this is beyond the remit of the NDP.
NE1 Natural 34 comments minus 6 Environment repeated relevant comments 28
17 residents made comments with 7 making multiple
42
comments
NE1 NE1.1 The views from the rear none The Conservation Area of Cautley Close across review illustrates the to Waddesdon Manor importance of these should be preserved panoramic views. Thank you for your comment. NE1 NE1. 2 Although partially none Thank you for your managed aren't these comment, both areas are areas displayed in the Local (allotments/old Green Spaces map and allotments) Natural LGS grading document. Environment too? The allotments are an important part of village life and are well used. NE.1 NE1.3 The views round the none Thank you for your whole of Quainton, comment. The NDP group including Denham, are and the Parish Council wonderful and should would agree as does the be preserved. Conservation Area Review 2015. NE.1 NE1.4 Support 8,9,10, 17, 18 none Thank you for your and paddocks between comment supporting Local church and road. Agree Green Spaces designation. with most of the policies NE1 NE1. 5 Support retention of none Thank you for your Green spaces comment supporting policy (proposed) NE1 NE1 NE1.6 Field marked 28 - yes Changes have been made boundary incorrect, also to the boundary on the not Local Green Spaces map. accessible to public. I Changes have been made cannot see any grounds to the Local Green Spaces on which my plot can, or grading document following should, be designated a your information - sentence green space about no right to roam added to the NDP. New footpath map now on display at the top of The Green. Thank you for your
43
comment.
NE1 NE1.7 Land parcel refs. 36 & yes Thank you for your 54. Comments make comment. The clarity of the little wording has been improved sense. Document rows and further information need expanding before added to the Local Green converting into PDF. Spaces grading document. There is considerable/diverse You will be interested in the range of wildlife in this comments from AVDC area ecologist and the Bucks Bird Club. NE1 NE1.8 I think the ranking for none Thank you for your land parcel number 1 comment. This will be taken should be increased to into account in the Green the maximum score of Spaces grading. 14 to protect it from being developed for houses NE1 NE1. 9 Whilst there is a yes Agree that the document footpath traversing an needs to emphasise that area of his land, it is not there is no right to roam on possible to access the farmland and that walkers remainder of the should stick to footpaths. property from that A new footpath map is on footpath. There has display at the top of The never been a possibility Green to guide walkers. of anyone "walking more freely" over the Thank you for your land and therefore we comment. believe it should not form part of your "protected" green spaces.
44
NE1 NE1. 10 Land parcel 28 yes Thank you for your boundary is inaccurate comment. Changes have on the map. Different been made to the Local parts of the field are Green Spaces grading owned by different document following this people. The Public have information - include access only on footpath. sentence about no right to This field does not need roam. special designation as it Adjustments have been is already covered by a made to the boundary of covenant. Please adjust this field on the Local Green map. We have owned, Spaces map. Some parts of managed and kept the the field now labelled 54. field free from development for many years now and would like the situation to carry on as before as we feel this gives the field all the protection it needs. NE1 NE1.11 With reference to land none Thank you for your parcel No. 1 on the comment - this will be taken document, the total into account in the Local score should be higher Green Spaces grading than 11 - historical document. significance NE1 NE1.12 Land parcel no.1 - we none Thank you for your believe it is a field of comment. This will be taken natural agricultural into account in the Local beauty- the field, Green Spaces grading opposite the wildlife document. garden and the church, forms a visual focal point of entry into the eastern end of the village and should be retained totally within its originally intended agricultural form NE1 NE1.13 Whilst fully supporting none Thank you for your the proposals of the comment. This will be taken Quainton into account in the Local Neighbourhood Plan, I Green Spaces grading believe the ranking of document. this parcel (Land Parcel reference 1) should be higher in the areas of 45
beauty and historical significance.
NE1 NE1.14 Land parcel 1 should be none Thank you for your scored higher comment. This will be taken this corner of the village into account in the Green below the church and by Space grading. the wildlife garden is special to the village because it controls access to Quainton hills and the views of them. NE1 NE1. 15 I concur with all aspects none Thank you for your particularly green comment supporting these spaces policies. NE1 NE1.16 Concerns regarding the yes Thank you for your Local Green Spaces comment. This will be taken designations and the into account in the Green benefit they have to the Spaces grading document community. In particular and a full justification is LGS5 and LGS6 which present in the Local Green are residential sites and spaces document. A partial don’t appear to warrant justification is available in such a designation. the NDP. NE1 NE1.17 Land parcel 1 - the none Thank you for your scoring seems low for comment. This will be taken beauty and should be into account in the Local increased to two Green Spaces grading because it is opposite document. the wildlife garden and is visible from the There is further information graveyard when there is on wildlife in policy NE2. no foliage. There is considerable/diverse range of wildlife in this area. NE1 NE1.18 I support keeping the none Thank you for your rural feel by protecting comment. This will be taken the green spaces into account in the Local around the village, Green Spaces grading particularly land parcel 1 document.
46
NE1 NE1.19 Land parcel 54 (behind yes Thank you for your The Green) has no comment. This will be taken access other than via 40 into account in the Local or past the windmill, Green Spaces grading which are both in the document. Wording will be conservation area. checked. Full justification Range of wildlife on will be given in the Green these fields. Space document and partial justification in the NDP. Please see the Bucks Bird Club comment at NE2.6 which agrees with your comment on the range of wildlife in the area. NE1 NE1.20 Support for green space none Thank you for your parcel 1 - should be comment. This will be taken scored higher. The into account in the Local footpath has been used Green Spaces grading for centuries by pilgrims document. from Quainton and beyond heading to North Marston, an historic pilgrimage destination NE1 NE1.21 The green spaces are a none Thank you for your key part of Quainton supportive comment. that everyone wishes to preserve and as such should be sacrosanct. The public were consulted and this was top of people's priorities NE1 NE1.22 I support the green none Thank you for your spaces policies comment of support for policy NE1 NE1. NE1.23 I support the green none Thank you for your support spaces policies of policy NE1 NE1 NE1.24 Total support, further none Thank you for your support support LGS1 The for policy NE1 - a full village Green description of the justification of LGS, The Green, is available in the Local Green Spaces grading document and maps.
47
NE1 NE1.25 I feel it is important to none Thank you for your keep the green areas comment of support for the around the village open, green spaces LGS 4, 5 and such as LGS5 and 6. A full description of the LGS6, they protect busy justification of LGSs is built up areas and available in the Local Green provide a rural back Spaces document. drop. LGS5 - much of North End green space is full of cars. LGS6 important trees and green space, admittedly someone's garden but this area is heavily surrounded by housing particularly when the two new "large houses" are built on the car park of the Swan and Castle. LGS4, important to keep open for views and the important rural (walking) link to Waddesdon. There are some ancient stone stepping stones in these pastures. NE1 NE1. 26 Important not to lose none Thank you for your support. The Green in centre of A full description of the village - support LGS1. justification of LGS1 The Green is available in the Local Green Spaces document. NE1 NE1.27 LGS2 very important for none Thank you for your support families for LGS2. A full description of the justification of LGS2 The Wildlife Garden is available in the Local Green Spaces document. NE1 NE1.28 I support the green none Thank you for your spaces in the village, comment of support for particularly the wildlife policy NE1 and in particular garden and The Green The Green and the Wildlife Garden. A full description of the justification of LGS1 and LGS2 is available in the Local Green Spaces document. 48
NE1 NE1.29 small The Trustees hope to yes Thank you for your REPEAT Anstiss sell the land for comment. Recognition of COMMENT field appropriate housing comment is in the Local development, while Green Spaces grading maintaining the foot document. path running through The NDP and PC is not the close. Such a allocating any specific sites scheme, we believe, would be consistent with national policies NE1 NE1.30 I would support yes Thank you for your REPEAT development of comment. We are assuming COMMENT allotment if required you are mentioning the pasture land of the previous allotments. The NDP and PC is not allocating any specific sites. Recognition of comment in the Local Green Spaces grading document and the Local Green Spaces document. NE1 NE1.31 I would support yes Thank you for your REPEAT development of land comment, recognition of the COMMENT known comment is in the Local as Strand stables Green Spaces grading document and the Local Green Spaces document The NDP and PC is not allocating any specific sites. NE1. NE1.32 We would prefer the yes Thank you for your REPEAT Tebby's land with road frontage comment, recognition of COMMENT Close to be included within the this comment in the Local village for possible Green Spaces grading future development. document and the Local Green Spaces document. The NDP and PC is not allocating any specific sites NE1 NE1.33 I would like it known to yes Thank you for your field 46 the Parish Council that comment. Recognition of REPEAT our piece of land, this comment is in the Local COMMENT adjacent to the Green Spaces grading residential buildings in document and the Local Station Road, is Green Spaces document. available for inclusion The NDP and PC is not within the Settlement allocating any specific sites
49
Boundary in any future development in Quainton
NE1 NE1. 34 Quainton is classified as none Thank you for your a "larger" village in the comment. REPEAT Walsingham settlement hierarchy The AVDC settlement COMMENT Planning assessment 2013. hierarchy is under review Consultants and awaiting comments Quainton must following the consultation accommodate new period. housing that helps to meet local needs and The NDP allows for small contributes towards controlled expansion within meeting the needs of the settlement boundary to the Vale as a whole. meet local needs. The NDP The NP as drafted is not allocating specific envisages very limited sites for development. growth within the existing settlement Policy H1 and the boundary. No sites are associated preamble has identified, level of been redrafted to clarify that housing is inadequate linear development beyond will not fulfill a key the Settlement Boundary objective. along Station Road is acceptable and that the This should include boundary is primarily aimed development of at retaining the integrity and greenfield land on the appearance of the village. edge of the village Developments around the where it will not harm edges of the Boundary the setting of the village, would erode the special providing a mix of qualities of the setting of the housing to meet local existing development within needs. its landscape acknowledged in the Policy H1 should be Conservation Area Review. amended to reflect this approach and in The NDP reflects the views particular , should of the majority of delete the sentence parishioners who wish to relating to development see the retention of the 'beyond the settlement uniquely historic setting of boundary' the village, with small controlled development 50
within that setting.
NE 2 Natural 5 comments Environment 2 residents made comments and 2 groups (1 made multiple comments) NE2 NE2. 1 Seechfield was none Thank you for your supposed to have been comment. This is outside shielded the remit of the NDP. by hedges and trees, Policy NE2 clearly states why didn’t this happen? policy on landscaping for any proposed development in the future. NE2 NE2.2 I support this policy none Thank you for your comment supporting NE2.
51
NE2 NE2. 3 We are pleased to see yes Thank you for your letter Natural that policies have been and your supporting England included regarding the statements -comment natural environment to supporting NE2 added to guide development that plan may come forward. In particular, we support the commitment to a net increase of biodiversity outlined in policy NE2 NE2 NE2.4 We also note that there yes Thank you for your letter. Natural are two Sites of The comment and England Scientific Interest description of the two (SSSIs) located with the SSSI's to be added to the Parish - Finemere Wood plan in NE2. SSSI and part of Full description to be Grendon and available in the Local Green Doddersall Woods Spaces document and a SSSI. We would expect shortened version is in the these to be included in a NDP. description of the natural environment of the Parish, and provided for in the environmental policies
52
NE2 NE2. 5 Bucks Bird Club - the yes Thank you for your email. Bucks Bird attached photos are Further information on the Club some of the birds seen terrain added "The terrain and photographed by on Quainton Hills and myself on Quainton surrounding base fields is a Hills, they include unique environment Redstart, Whinchat, attracting a variety of Wheatear, Red backed wildlife. Unlike other hill shrike, Great Grey ranges in the county there Shrike, Yellow wagtail is no road access to these etc. Description of the grazed fields and this terrain and its unique provides an important site habitat for birds as it is relatively undisturbed. The hills attract a wide number of species including migrant birds who stop to feed on the unsprayed cropped fields which are rich in insect/invertebrate life. Areas of rougher grass, with a good rodent population, attract Barn Owls and recently the rarer short-eared Owl, on the northern slopes. Redstarts, a rare bird in this country, stay two to three weeks near the church to complete their feather moult before continuing to Africa. In summary, Bucks Bird Club confirm that Quainton Hills and base level farmland are one of the most important bird sites in the county as shown in data records on www.bucksbirdclub.co.uk"
Local 6 comments Employment 3 residents made comments, 2 made multiple comments, 1 group a made a comment.
53
LE1 LE1. 1 Minimising light and Yes Thank you for your noise pollution should comment -including "noise" be a priority in local in paragraph 27.5 employment buildings LE1 LE1. 2 Equestrian and none Thank you for your agriculture premises. comment the Policy will These address this for future can become an eyesore development and do not provide adequate parking LE1.1 LE1. 3 QVS Farm based businesses none Policy LE1 addresses this. should not be allowed Thank you for your where the type of comment. business would bring further heavy lorry traffic and congestion into the village. LE1 LE1. 4 Is residential parking none Policy LE1 addresses this. only a possibility? Thank you for your comment. LE1 LE1. 5 Support local none Thank you for your businesses. comment. The NDP group and PC would support this point of view. LE1 LE1. 6 Base business meeting none Thank you for your or events will create comment. awareness for the QVS directory and show village businesses case events in Memorial Hall highlight local businesses and groups. Volunteers are always welcome with new initiative s.
T1 Traffic 10 comments 9 residents made comments and 1 made multiple comments
54
T1 T1. 1 In an area of high none Thank you for your property prices where comment supporting this children are forced to policy live with parents well into adulthood, new 3+ bedroom homes need 3+ parking spaces T1 T1.2 3+ homes unrealistic to none Thank you for your expect 3 parking spaces comment - During the consultation event many parking problems were mentioned throughout the village. Policy T1.2 encourages off road parking. T1 T1. 3 Support this policy, none Thank you for your roadside parking needs comment supporting the addressing policy. T1 T1.4 Station Road is a long none Thank you for your line of parked cars and comment. We would getting worse by the imagine that most people day. When leaving the who travel down Station village toward station Road and all who live along visibility is very poor so the road, would agree with overtaking along this you. stretch is hazardous. T1 T1.5 I support off road none Thank you for your parking for new comment supporting policy dwellings. I agree with T1 this policy. Too many cars on streets already T1 T1. 6 The traffic and speed on none Thank you for your support, Station Road is an Policy T1 addresses this for accident waiting to new developments - cars happen, especially at off the road and parking rush hour. Pulling out is spaces provided. dangerous from the drive with all the parking on the road T1 T1.7 Planning permission none Thank you for your should include addition comment but unfortunately to deeds about this is beyond the control of maintaining/increasing NDP and the PC. the parking spaces when extending. I fear
55
we have to give up a field to become a car park
T1 T1.8 Parking opposite the none Thank you for your village hall obstructs comment. This problem has viewing cars exiting been identified by residents Cannon's Orchard and in many of the streets in the makes it dangerous village which is why the NDP regard the Traffic Policies so important with a view to alleviating this problem for future developments. T1 T1.9 Totally agree with yes Thank you for your policies stated. Parking comment. The NDP will along address your concerns in top of The Green and regards to new dwellings turning from Upper but like so many villages, Street gives buses and the houses were built the like, problems and before cars were invented, causes damage to so parking is a nationwide verges etc. Double issue. yellow lines might be an idea T1 T1.10 Station Road - No Traffic policies should help ridiculous now! to prevent further congestion from parked vehicles.
56
T2 Traffic 2 9 comments Majority of comments in 4 residents made this area - parking/ comments, 1 made congestion/speeding/road multiple comments. 1 side parking/school drop group commented off/pick up Messages left at the consultation days suggested parking and congestion problems in nearly all of the village roads. Lower Street, Winwood Drive, Wheelwright's Yard, Torbay and Station Road were mentioned as particularly bad during the school run period. Station Road was a huge concern regarding speeding, parking and congestion, with the added problem of some extra parking needed for certain properties. The Strand and White Hart Field were mentioned as having huge parking issues and speeding out and into the village. Upper Street and Church Street were also mentioned with regard to parking issues. T2 T2. 1 Encourage people to none Policy T2 supports this park on their drives idea. Thank you for your comment. T2 T2. 2 Fine anyone who uses a none Thank you for your road/footpath to comment. The NDP and PC park on if they have do not have powers to do room off road on this but the local police can driveway be contacted. The policy should address anything like this in any future development as parking spaces will be provided off the road.
57
T2 T2. 3 Care home in Station none Policy T2 should address Road not enough this for future parking developments. Policy LE1 spaces, causes also supports the congestion/road installation of adequate blocking parking and visitor parking for business premises. Thank you for your comment. T2 T2. 4 Station Road is just a none Thank you for your long line of parked cars comment. We would and getting worse by imagine the majority of the day...visibility very people in the village would poor, overtaking parked agree with this viewpoint. cars is horrendous The Traffic policies will address this for future development. T2 T2. 5 Spaces should be none Thank you for your Quainton designated as No comment of support. Village Parking in Station Road, Solving traffic problems society Lower Street and The already in the village will Green, such that probably need a separate vehicles can pull into group to look into this them to allow other matter in detail so ideas can vehicles to pass. be presented to the local police and Bucks county Council. Some areas of the village have white lines to discourage parking in inappropriate places. T2. T2.6 A hard line should be none Thank you for your taken to prevent vans comment. This is outside and cars from parking the remit of the NDP but the on the pavements local police can be contacted. T2 T2. 7 Farm vehicles are a none Local contractor has had problem - knocking on meetings with residents in doors to the past re this problem - move cars in The but maybe this needs to Strand happen again if houses have changed hands.
58
T2 T2.8 Parking a massive none Policy T2/T1 should prevent problem on The Green future development parking and problems -it is felt that The Strand. I think a people prefer to park near bullet has to be bit on homes and the Traffic this one. A field for policies will encourage new parking development to include adequate parking. Thank you for your comment. T2 T2.9 I totally agree with these none Thank you for your support policies with T1 and T2.
I1 Infrastructure 6 comments 3 residents made comments and 3 groups made comments. I1 I1. 1 Thames Support policy I1. yes Thank you for your letter. Water Suggest slight wording The wording has been change in policy. amended in the NDP to "impact of development include the suggested on water and waste wording. water" I1 I1. 2 Telephone and mobile none BT is introducing faster network to improve broadband to customers in the village
I1 I1. 3 Sewage system already none Thank you for your a major problem comment supporting policy agree with policy I1 I1. At adequate capacity the time of this comment sheet Thames Water are working in many areas of Quainton. I1 I1. 4 Problem of pollution by none Whilst offering sympathy at kerosene (domestic this dreadful situation, it is oil) outside the remit of the NDP. The Parish Council have offered some limited support in the past. The Parish Council appreciate the support of Quainton's MP with this concern.
59
I1 I1.5 "We support I1 to yes Thank you for your letter - Environment ensure that there is the comment has been Agency adequate added to the NDP. sewage and water supply capacity for new development" I1 I1.6 Network Rail - generic none Nothing in NDP effecting letter Network Rail
17. Appendix 10. Comments and responses from Forward Planning: AVDC Planning Department
Page Para Issue and Recommended Change Quainton response
/policy
No.
General Consider numbering all paragraphs Agreed, plan to be changed Consider numbering or referencing each plan within document or including as Appendices
Credit all photos and images used
Need to be consistent within document as to whether it is a ‘Neighbourhood Development Plan’ or ‘Neighbourhood Plan’
Plans and maps are also indistinct or missing and this needs to be improved.
2 List all Appendices to be included in the Agreed, plan to be Contents section changed
3 3 First sentence – refer to neighbourhoods rather Agreed, plan to be than ‘local councils’ as AVDC could be described changed as a local council. This can be followed up by a new sentence stating that the Parish Council is a proper body for the preparation of a NP under the Localism Act.
60
Consider adding ‘It is anticipated the plan will Point understood, but need to respond to changing circumstances the NP will be a long including the growth identified in the Vale of term plan, Aylesbury Local Plan due to be made in summer responding to the 2017’ changing policy environment after reviews as set out in the monitoring and review section. No need in this part of the document to refer specifically to AVDC’s Plan which may be subject to a changing timetable.
Can also say that a made NP becomes part of Agreed, plan to be the development plan for Aylesbury Vale which changed has to be the basis for planning decisions and that a full suite of policies to deal with all matters has not been drawn up so, on matters where there is no policy in this plan, the NPPF or AVDC’s policies will apply as appropriate.
4 1 Last sentence could also say that AVDC has Agreed, plan to be commenced the preparation of a new Local Plan changed but this is not yet sufficiently advance to be taken into account in this Plan.
4 2 1st sentence prejudges the approach that may be taken by AVDC in its new Local Plan. It would be more accurate if it started in the past…and Agreed, plan to be then will be ‘was’ changed to ‘has been’. changed
2nd sentence also prejudges future policy. It Disagree ‘small’ is a might be better if it referred to the current descriptive term settlement hierarchy which says that Quainton is (hence not beginning a Larger Village which in the past has had limited with a capital letter), growth. not reference to the Settlement Hierarchy
Last sentence after credentials consider says Disagree, there is no ‘…for significant growth’ need to describe future growth potential as
61
‘significant’
4 3 Consider adding the distance to the nearest Agreed, plan to be secondary school which could usefully be added changed
but in relation to the bus service is the last Agreed, more detail departure really 07:45 am and what are the to be put in plan return times? Consider specifying the transport available is during peak hours.
Not sure why you need to refer to both an Agree estimate and the census figures. Why not just quote the census?
4 5 1st sentence – could also say ‘which this Plan Agreed, plan to be must have regard to’. This will mean the second changed sentence makes more sense.
Bullet point 2 – Plan period to 2033? Agreed, plan to be changed
Bullet point 3 – over the next eighteen years. Agreed, plan to be changed
Bullet point 3 does not appear to be true as there The NP does not is no calculation of what that the housing need allocate sites for for Quainton is in the document. Without this how development. It do they know what amount of housing will meet therefore follows that the ‘need’? There is only an indication of what there is no need for a the level of development has been in the past but target figure. that is not necessarily representative of the level of need. It would be better if the growth expected There are potential by the HEDNA in percentage terms could be opportunities for applied to the settlement as other councils have development, so the done in their NPs. If this is not done it could be bullet point is ‘true’. said that it has not properly addressed future
growth. It should also reference the NPPF. No need to reference the NPPF at this point.
62
5 4 What is meant by ‘Quainton has been frequently This a descriptive been described as the Jewel in the Crown of part of the plan and Aylesbury Vale’. To the outsider it seems a the residents are throwaway sentence without any substance does familiar with this it mean scenic beauty or cultural contribution? phrase
6 1 Avoid the acronym WWII – say ‘Second World Agreed, plan to be War’ or ‘World War Two’ changed
9 1 Amend bullet points 5 and 6 to read ‘Protect and Agreed, plan to be enhance…’ changed
9 Refer to Appendix 1 in text rather than as Agreed, plan to be separate heading. changed
10 The status of the Conservation Area Review Agreed, plan to be should be stated i.e. have the revision been updated to reflect formally made to the CA? Areas not formally new Conservation designated cannot benefit from the full status Area designation accorded to those that are.
11 2 In relation to the Conservation Area designation Agreed in principle, referred to this applies to built up areas and as however, the setting such the setting often plays little part in the of the village forms decision to designate. Any reference to the part of its heritage. landscape setting should instead refer to any Plan to be changed assessment of the value of the landscape or to clarify this. current designations of the landscape.
12 E1 What does ‘in harmony’ mean? Better to use Agreed, plan to be ‘conserve or enhance the character and changed appearance of the Conservation Area’
The final sentence isn’t clear English. Are you Agreed, plan to be meaning ‘Boundary treatments where planning changed but permission is required should be of a traditional reference to that style and reflect the surrounding area…’ which requires planning permission is unnecessary.
This Policy does not have sufficient regard to the Do not agree, NPPF requirements of paragraphs 133 and 134 of the policy will be applied NPPF, particularly with regard to taking into in any case, so there is no need to repeat
63
account public benefits. wording from paras 133 and 134
12 3 It would be clearer to an outsider to refer to ‘The Agreed, reference to draft Conservation Area Review 2015’ to draw be deleted attention that the review is very current and in a sense dovetailing with the neighbourhood plan work.
12 5 Plans for Appendix 2 not included within Agreed, plan to be document changed
14 There seems to be a conflict between the aims of Agreed there allowing growth and the measures being put in appears to be some place to control growth. On the one hand some conflict. It is difficult growth is desired but there is no figure to say to point to a specific what an acceptable level of growth is and there target or location for are very few if any locations where that growth growth when the can occur. This does not reflect Planning Plan does not seek Practice Guidance on the purpose of to allocate sites. neighbourhood plans and is therefore potentially Some text and policy at risk of not meeting the basic conditions. changes will clarify this. Strongly disagree that the NP is at risk of not meeting the basic conditions, there is no requirement in NPPG to identify sites for development in NP’s.
14 E2 Consider ‘…new building and extensions where No need to refer to planning permission is required should be an this, it is implicit. asset to….’
2 storeys is too prescriptive – what about attic Agreed, plan to be rooms? changed
Preserve and enhance’ – not sure it is possible Agreed, plan to be to have both – better to use more accepted changed ‘Conserve or enhance’
64
Unsure that everything outside a Conservation The wording does Area should ‘be an asset’ not imply this, NPPF refers to non- designated heritage assets
15 2 As there are no site allocations within the plan Agreed, wording the wording ‘may be a couple of potential sites changed to refer to where linear development may be possible to potential for growth meet local demands’ may be misleading. It rather than a ‘couple suggests there are sites already in mind but does of sites’. not specify where they are. Consider removing line to remove any confusion and subsequent queries.
15 5 The statement that the village will not need Agreed, plan to be further affordable housing over the next 18 years changed to needs to be supported by evidence that there will acknowledge that be no further need for affordable housing. It also there may be places the Neighbourhood Plan in direct conflict requirements in the with the District Council’s policy on affordable future housing and this is in sharp contrast to the position taken by other Neighbourhood Plans in Aylesbury Vale.
15 H1 Has this policy been taken from a ‘made’ The policy is unique neighbourhood plan? to Quainton although other Neighbourhood and Local Plans refer to settlement boundaries and linear development
Second sentence ‘Linear development’ Agreed, plan to be changed
Define the terms ‘linear’, ‘infill’ and ‘defensible Agreed, plan to be boundary’ changed
Do you mean ‘small gap or infill site between Agreed, plan to be existing dwellings’ rather than ‘buildings’ changed
65
Without a definition large areas could be Agreed, plan to be described as infill and therefore be permitted changed under this policy. The term “small gap’ should be defined in terms of plots or distance between properties.
Policy conflicts with 5th paragraph of supporting Agreed, plan to be text regarding development beyond the changed settlement boundary. Supporting text says no new housing development will be supported beyond the boundary but policy says new homes will be permitted where there is a small gap or infill site beyond the settlement boundary.
4th paragraph – does this refer to all forms of Yes development rather than just dwellings?
This policy does not have regard to paragraph 55 Do not agree, of the NPPF in that it is more restrictive than the justification is given NPPF without justification. On that basis there is in the text for the a risk of failing to meet the basic conditions. Settlement Boundary and for development being restricted to relate to the current pattern of development. One of the important qualities of Quainton as set out in the Conservation Area Review is the close- knit form of the village in its setting. Wording is added to make this clearer.
17 H2 What about provision of housing for young Policy already states families? a preference
Last line should be ‘habitation’ or say Agreed, plan to be ‘occupation’ changed
66
The plan neglects to mention affordable housing. Agreed, reference Suggest the plan includes reference to the fact included, but not that on sites over 25 units (or 1 hectare), specific to current affordable housing will be required by the local AVDC emerging authority. Also suggest that this is future-proofed policy which may be to a certain extent; the new local plan may subject to change. require a different percentage of affordable housing, on a different sized site, so the NP should reflect the coming changes.
Rural In terms of the allocation of affordable Noted, no reference housing, this will be done through the AVDC needed Allocations policy (Bucks Home Choice).
Exception Sites can be wholly allocated to the parish where they are located (in perpetuity), so I would suggest if the parish wants to enable Agreed, reference affordable housing in the future, that they include included a positive reference to pursuing RES where possible.
18 2 ‘...Seechfield housing development which is Agreed, plan to be owned by…’ changed
19 2 The appendices referred to before policy NE1 Agreed, LGS paper have not been supplied and the scoring matrix will be reviewed and referred to does not clearly set out the plan to be updated justification for the designation of the areas as following Local Green Spaces. On that basis the plan does consultation. not meet the basic conditions. Further the specific sites referred to in NE1 have significant deficiencies. Both LGS3 and LGS4 may be Do not agree that described as ‘an extensive tract of land’, road LGS3 and 4 are verges under LGS5 are very unlikely to face ‘extensive’ other threat of development so they do not need NP’s have far bigger protection and a private garden under LGS6 designations (e.g. would also be very unlikely to meet the criteria of Wing). being demonstrably special to the community as well as being protected from unsuitable development by its designation as within a Conservation Area. LGS5 are not verges, it is agreed that the description is poor.
LGS6, whilst being 67
private land is important to be kept open because of the character of the surrounding development.
19 NE1 Provide justification for each Local Green Space Agreed, plan to be changed LGS7 description missing from document
Names of LGS areas do not correspond with names in Green Spaces document.
20 Plan Reason for the Conservation Area views and TPO’s do not need to vistas map to be included in this section? The be shown on the text refers to TPOs within the Conservation Area Plan, difficult to see and these are not shown on the plan. them. The map will be in the LGS Paper
21 NE2 The use of the biodiversity impact calculator may Noted, but reference not be appropriate based on examiner’s decision retained in other cases.
Not all new development will require bird or bat Agreed, plan to be boxes. Consider wording similar to that of Wing changed NP ‘Integrate bird and bat boxes into the brickwork of all houses bordering open space and minimise light pollution of wildlife corridors‘
21 Plan It is difficult to read the legend of the Plan. Agreed, plan to be Consider putting plan in Appendix on a whole changed page or use higher resolution image.
68
22 LE1 The first sentence of policy LE1 will not be able Agreed, plan to be to operate as there no other locations where changed employment development could take place so a net loss would be inevitable.
Should refer to where a site is redundant to Noted, but the NP accord with NPPF paragraphs 22 and 28. does not need to refer to redundant sites as the NPPF provides those policies
The phrase ‘local people’ must be defined to Agreed, plan to be make the policy useable. changed
What will amount to ‘adequate’ parking? This will be determined by AVDC at planning application stage
Penultimate sentence – if you mean Agreed, plan to be ‘employment opportunities for local people’ it changed. Recognise might be clearer to say ‘parish residents’ if that is that this cannot be what is intended. This cannot be enforced. enforced.
What about employment sites extending into the Second point in countryside? Policy does not seem to cover this. policy LE1 covers this issue, replaced ‘neighbourhood area’ with ‘parish’ to add clarity
23 T1 Does this include garage parking? Majority of Garage parking only garages are used for other uses such as allowed to count domestic storage so we would suggest not. where the garage space is adequate.
2nd paragraph need to be related to a clear Agreed parking standard/thresholds.
No consent required for many cases where extra It will apply where bedrooms will be provided to the second part of permission is T1 will not apply in many cases. needed, no need to
69
be specific.
They can choose to adopt BCC parking Agreed, plan standards if you wish. AVDC won’t be doing so. changed
24 T2 Unclear as to how a judgement or decision can Agreed, plan be reached with planning applications as to changed to accord whether a development would ‘further inhibit the with NPPF free…’
Policy T2 conflicts with paragraph 32 of the NPPF particularly the second sentence of the third bullet point.
24 5 Refer to ‘Parish Council’ rather than shorthand Agreed, plan to be ‘P.C.’ changed
Consider referring to when and where the LED Agreed, plan to be lights were installed if the plan is going to be changed to refer to used in the Parish until 2033. What will happen if more up to date the LED technology changes or improvements technology. are made to the design of light columns. It might be better for the Parish Council to identify what it is about the lights that they like and then put reference to this in the plan.
24 I1 Remove the second sentence and replace it at Agreed, plan to be the end of the first paragraph of the supporting changed text. This has been recommended by the Examiner for Haddenham NP as it is a general comment rather than a Policy requirement.
This is essentially a matter for the water companies who have a statutory duty to provide adequate water and sewerage services.
27 2 NPPF was introduced in Spring 2012 Agreed, plan to be changed
28 Add Appendices and refer to them within the Agreed, plan to be main document changed
70
Local Green Spaces
General Further explanation of methodology for site Agreed, plan scoring is recommended. changed
Reasons for the allocation of each area to be designated in line with Paragraph 77 of the NPPF. How is the area used by or of importance to the local community?
Settlement Boundary
General Reason for excluding 16 The Green from The house and garden Settlement Boundary? were accidentally missed off on the map Settlement Boundary may be too restrictive for but were manually development. added in readiness for the consultation period. The map has been amended.
The purpose of the Settlement Boundary is to define the village, policies allow for development for housing and businesses beyond the boundary.
71
18. Appendix 11. Letter from AVDC Ecologist
18.1 I was aware of some of the bird sightings on the hills around Quainton and will make sure our biological records are up to date with those from Bucks Bird Club. I have pretty strong links with the Bird Club through the Peregrine Falcon Project which they support but thank you again for the update.
As for the Neighbourhood Plan you could include a separate statement in the Natural Environment Section. Great to see you have taken on board the recommendations put forward by us. This should make life much easier for me as Developers will be made aware up front of what is required of them. A line in the Tree, Hedgerows and Wildlife section could be added making note of the importance the surrounding areas has for farm land birds as identified by Bucks Bird Club. Perhaps something along the line of - Specific ornithological assessments will be required to determine the current status of land use by farmland birds. Features within the landscape these birds use should be retained and any loss of habitat as a result of development must be mitigated, compensated and enhanced.
The reason I mention the loss of habitat rather than saying no loss must be incurred is that for some farmland birds such as lapwing it is impossible to compensate on site for loss as what this species is using are the open fields to feed and roost on and it is these fields that will be lost to development thus the need to extenuate the enhancement aspect along side the mitigation and compensation. This is an area I believe your plan to be very strong in.
AVDC Ecologist
18.2
AVDC Ecologist Comment Response
Policy NE2 Great to see that you have taken on Thank you for your comment. board the recommendations put The suggested comment by forward by us. A line in the Tree, AVDC Ecologist was added on Hedgerows and Wildlife section p. 24 "specific ornithological could be added making note of the assessments will be required to importance the surrounding area has determine the current status of for farm land birds as identified by land use by farmland birds. Bucks Bird Club. Features within the landscape these birds use should be retained and any loss of habitat as a result of development must
72
be mitigated, compensated or enhanced."
19. Appendix 12. Letter from Buckinghamshire County Council and responses.
19.1
Transport • Economy • Environment Buckinghamshire County Council
County Hall, Walton Street
Stephen Walford Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 1UA
Director Growth & Strategy
Mr Arthur Evans Miss Emily Hodgson
Chair of Quainton Parish Council 01296 383142
13 Church Street [email protected]
Quainton
Bucks Telephone 0845 3708090
HP22 4AW www.buckscc.gov.uk
Submitted by email: 17th August 2015
Dear Mr Evans
Re: Pre-Submission of Quainton Neighbourhood Plan 73
Thank you for inviting Buckinghamshire County Council to comment on the Neighbourhood Development Plan for Quainton. We would like to draw your attention to our now adopted Memorandum of Understanding for Neighbourhood Planning, which details the role and expectations of the County Council with regards to the Neighbourhood Development Plan process1.
Our observations are primarily based around the need to:
1. Strengthen regard to the value of the historic environment 2. Ensure adequate Education provision 3. Provide Green Infrastructure and 4. Acknowledge future Infrastructure Schemes
1. Strengthen regard to the value of the historic environment We maintain the local Historic Environment Record2 and provide expert advice on archaeology and related matters. As you will be aware, Paragraph 128 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)3 states that information held in the relevant historic environment record should be consulted and expert advice obtained where necessary. The NPPF recognises that the effect of an application on a heritage asset or its setting is a material planning consideration.
We welcome the inclusion of the historic environment throughout the document and its prominence within the section titled, ‘The Village’. Page 6 includes, ‘Beyond the Conservation Area, the village is largely surrounded by Archaeological Notification Areas (areas to be protected). While we welcome this it should be noted that these areas do not preclude development but that any proposals will probably require assessment and evaluation to properly assess any impacts.
We also welcome the vision which recognises the Parish’s rich heritage and the 4th objective on page nine. For clarity we would recommend the following addition:
1 The agreed Memorandum of Understanding can be viewed here: https://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s55061/Appendix%201%20-%20Memorandum%20of%20Understanding.pdf
2 For further information and procedures relating to archaeology and development (including service specifications and charges) please refer to http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/bcc/archaeology/Archaeology.page?
3 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Paragraph 128 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf
74
Conserve and enhance the historic environment, ensuring that any new development, including alterations and change of use, does not have an adverse effect on the historic buildings, streetscape, landscape and archaeological remains.
We particularly welcome the paragraph on page 13 and would raise whether this could be another policy separate to Policy E2:
The Parish is surrounded by Archaeological Notification Areas and has several Scheduled Ancient Monuments including the deserted village of Denham. Any designated or undesignated historic heritage assets in the Parish and their settings both above and below ground and including listed buildings and any monuments that may be scheduled will be conserved and enhanced for their historic significance and their importance to local distinctiveness, character and sense of place. Proposals must take account of the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage assets.
2. Ensure adequate Education provision BCC has a statutory duty to ensure sufficient school places in Buckinghamshire. We can confirm that the local primary school has sufficient capacity to accommodate the low level future housing growth indicated in the Quainton Pre-submission Neighbourhood Plan.
3. Provide Green Infrastructure The County Council would expect suitable consideration to be given to the protection, improvement and creation of Green Infrastructure across Buckinghamshire. The priorities and aspirations set out in both the Buckinghamshire Green Infrastructure Strategy (2009)4 and the Green Infrastructure Delivery Plan (2013)5 should be reflected in Local Policy and supported in development proposals. Commitment to these priorities and aspirations will enhance the strategic Green Infrastructure network across the County, boosting sustainable route connectivity throughout Buckinghamshire and into neighbouring areas and increase opportunities for recreational activity and environmental protection across this highly valued resource.
4. Acknowledge future Infrastructure Schemes The Parish will be impacted on by the National Infrastructure schemes, East West Rail (EWR)6 and High Speed 2 (HS2). The Parish may wish to note that although there are no plans for a new station in
4 Buckinghamshire Green Infrastructure Strategy (2009) http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/media/1470112/_Green-Infrastructure- Main-Report-April-2009.pdf
5Green Infrastructure Delivery Plan (2013) http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/media/1521901/5326-Bucks-GI-Delivery-Plan-FINAL- ISSUE_2013_08_07_low_res.pdf
6 The EWR website provides more background information http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/
75
the Parish, the existing operational railway that passes through Quainton, particularly through the Buckinghamshire Railway Centre, from Aylesbury to Calvert is planned to be upgraded as part of the EWR scheme. The nearest planned EWR stations to Quainton will be at Winslow (direction of travel towards Milton Keynes) and Aylesbury Vale Parkway (direction of travel towards London) improving the communities connectivity to the wider transport network. Current planned date for EWR services to begin is March 2019.
HS2 will run through the south western edge of the village joining the alignment of the existing operational railway just north of the Buckinghamshire Railway Centre. The biggest impact on the Parish will come through the realignment of Station Road. The Parish Council has petitioned to have the currently proposed alignment changed to ensure a shorter diversion. As the Highways Authority our view is that further consideration for a closer alignment should be given in conjunction with the Railway Centre requirements and in consultation with the local community. The village will be impacted by highways diversions throughout the construction of the scheme whatever the outcome of the alignment is. The Authority is currently petitioning, in partnership with Steeple Claydon Parish and other bodies including AVDC, for a station to be provided at Steeple Claydon by HS2 on the EWR rail. Although geographically closer to this is Aylesbury Parkway a Steeple Claydon Station would provide direct trains to Oxford, something that will not be provided at Aylesbury Parkway.
We hope these comments are helpful to you in the preparation of your neighbourhood plan. If you have any specific queries relating to these comments above, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will endeavour to deal with your enquiries as quickly as possible or signpost you to the relevant contact.
Yours sincerely
Miss Emily Hodgson
Strategic Planning Policy Officer
76
19.2
77
Paragraph and Group Bucks Comment Changes to NDP Team Response page County Council plan
Page 4 BCC The Parish may wish to note that although Yes Additional comment about there are no plans for a new station in the East West Railway Parish, the existing operational railway included in "The strategic that passes through Quainton, particularly context of the plan" through the Buckinghamshire Railway Centre, from Aylesbury to Calvert is planned to be upgraded as part of the EWR scheme
Page 4 BCC HS2 will run through the south western None HS2 beyond the remit of edge of the village joining the alignment of the NDP committee and the existing operational railway just north the Parish Council. The of the Buckingham Railway Centre. The Parish Council are biggest impact on the Parish will come petitioning the HS2 through the realignment of Station Road. standing committee in late The Parish Council has petitioned to have October regarding the the currently proposed alignment to alignment of Station Road ensure a shorter diversion. As the and other important Highways Authority our view is that further issues. consideration for a closer alignment should be given in conjunction with the Railway Centre requirements and in consultation with the local community.
Page 5 BCC We welcome the inclusion of the historic None Thank you for your environment throughout the document and supportive its prominence within the section titled comment "The Village" Page 10 We also welcome the vision which Yes included suggested recognises the Parish's rich heritage and wording in the 4th objective …for clarity include "and objective 4 archaelogical remains" Page13 We particulary welcome p.13 None We appreciate the approval by BCC of the paragraph regarding the importance of Quainton being surrounded by Archaelogical Notification Areas etc Page 18 Yes Thank you clarifying the BCC has a statutory duty to ensure position of BCC and the sufficient school places in provision of school places Buckinghamshire. We can confirm that at Quainton C of E the local primary school has sufficient Primary School. This capacity to accommodate the low level comment has been future housing growth indicated in the included in the NDP in the Quainton Pre-submission Neighbourhood Housing 2 section. Plan
78