VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses – Background ID Name Comment VALP16-07-13-00205 Terry Cavender Comments on Background - 1.64 There are 3 canal arms in the Vale and all three should be called out hence sentence two should (Buckingham Canal become: "The Grand Union Canal and its arms to Wendover, Aylesbury and Buckingham....." Society) VALP16-07-22-00212 Andrea Hughes Comments on Background - Totally against Paul Newman building 300 houses on beautiful countryside off Derwent Road, Linslade. I have lived in Linslade for over 33 years and love walking through fields and seeing all the trees and birds and wildlife. Also the building of the new homes would cause major disruption to the local community with no benefit to the town. VALP16-07-22-00219 Chris Wright (Oxon and Comments on Background - Population growth needs to have infrastructure and public services in place to cope and need to avoid Bucks Rail Action catch up. East West Rail being a classic example with AVDC and BCC campaigning since 1987. Committee) VALP16-07-27-00225 Robert Willis Comments on Background - Commenting on application for land at Valley Farm, reference site 109 and 110, Aylesbury Vale Green Belt Assessment Part 2 Report, July 2016. VALP16-07-27-00226 Michael Wendt Comments on Background - Aylesbry Vale Green Belt Assessment part 2 Parcels of land for green belt provision designated 109 and 110 including Valley Farm Pages 38 to 41 VALP16-07-28-00233 David Ginnane Comments on Background - The suitability of site WGR001 VALP16-07-29-00241 Victoria Wright Comments on Background - I recognise the need to build more homes in the Aylesbury Vale. VALP16-07-30-00242 Peter Rawcliffe Comments on Background - None VALP16-08-03-00248 Marcia Davis Comments on Background - none VALP16-08-04-00249 Alan Lambourne Comments on Background - No comments (Westcott Parish Council) VALP16-08-05-00254 Abigail Alderson Comments on Background - Section 1.9 – needs to refer to SFRA (Buckinghamshire Section 1.21 – SFRA – mention that level 1 is being prepared but this may well lead to level 2 SFRA which will be more detailed in a County Council) number of areas identified to be more at risk. Section 1.64 states that “most areas are in Flood Zone 1” this needs to be clarified as to which areas it is referring to and what “most” means. Statement is too vague and could be misleading and mis-representative of the flood risk and needs some context. VALP16-08-05-00265 Michael Hobbs Comments on Background - The suggested figure for housing growth need of 30% has been plucked out of the air, a more normal figure would be 10%. This has no basis in reality. Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 1 of 85 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses – Background ID Name Comment VALP16-08-05-00266 Graham Winwright Comments on Background - The Councils would like to put on record at this stage of your emerging Plan that in both Chiltern and (Chiltern and South South Bucks Councils' view our councils have to-date successfully met the on-going Duty to Co-operate and have achieved Bucks District Councils) significant outcomes in terms of joint evidence base work, progressing duty to co operate understanding and statements/agreements, housing distribution across the Bucks HMA and in supporting meeting all of the Bucking hamshire district local plan timetables. This includes Aylesbury Vale District Council being able to positively respond to the decision of Chiltern and South Bucks to undertake a joint local plan. Our co-operation has been on-going and will no doubt continue. Aylesbury Vale's commitment to the Duty to Co-operate, as set out in paras. 1.10 -1.13 of the draft Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan, is therefore welcomed and reciprocated. The Councils are particularly grateful and supportive of Aylesbury Vale for recognising the constraints affecting the Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan area and being able to take account of meeting Chiltern and South Bucks unmet development needs as a priority (being part of the Bucking hamshire HMA and FEMA). You will be aware that in accordance with our councils, and others, January 2016 Addendum to the Bucks Memorandum of Understanding the Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan covers the plan period to 2036. Clearly this Memorandum of Understanding will need to be reconsidered now that Aylesbury Vale is bringing forward a plan to the earlier date of 2033. Chiltern, South Bucks, Wycombe and Aylesbury Vale District Councils form a 'best-fit' housing market area and functional economic market area and, as such, it is the councils' view that the collective responsibility for the authorities is to try to meet the HMA's and FEMA's needs as defined in the Buckinghamshire HEDNA within their local plan areas through the delivery of sustainable development. Given this position it is the councils' view that the needs of the Buckinghamshire HEDNA authorities should first be met within the best fit Buckinghamshire HMA local plan areas before the unmet needs of other authorities should be considered. Aylesbury Vale District Council also appear to take this approach in the new draft VALP in that para. 1.13 includes the housing needs of the three districts. This is welcomed and should be continued as our respective plans progress. The statement in the draft VALP (para. 1.17) about the provision of infrastructure being essential to support new housing needs is supported however it is unclear what level of work has been undertaken other than traffic modelling and a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. It would be useful if Aylesbury Vale could provide further detail as to what they intend to do to address this issue prior to Submission and for discussions under the Duty to Co-operate to take place where there are potential cross border matters to consider. VALP16-08-06-00270 Malcolm Oliver Comments on Background - 1.56 / 1.57 (Transport) makes reference to the lack of good communications in the north of the District. There is no mention of the lack of investment north & east from the major Aylesbury Growth Area to the improved network in Bedfordshire - the Leighton South & West by-passes giving access to MK, the currently being developed M1/A5 link & the expanded Luton Airport. This undermines the dialogue being carried out as described by Peter Williams to get the A421 trunk redevelopment to be rerouted to cater for the major growth area in the district & create a major link from the E-W developments in Bedfordshire to the improved networks in Oxfordshire. 1.61. The express bus between Aylesbury & MK via Wing has been discontinued for some years. Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 2 of 85 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses – Background ID Name Comment VALP16-08-08-00274 Russell Cooper Comments on Background - We write to oppose the planned developments in Haddenham. The draft Aylesbury Vale Local Plan shows that one of the reasons for the proposal for a new settlement of 4,500 or more houses is the wish by Wycombe District Council that 5,000 houses needed in their district should be provided in Aylesbury Vale. In total, the draft Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) includes 10,000 "unmet needs" from surrounding districts. Our review of the draft Wycombe Plan shows that Wycombe are assuming much lower densities for new housing developments in their district than those which have been assumed around Haddenham. The Haddenham plan assumed, on advice from AVDC, that the density should be 30 houses per hectare while Wycombe appear to be assuming about 12. I recognise that Wycombe is constrained by green belt land and has proximity to the Chilterns area of outstanding natural beauty however, in my view, it is not reasonable for you to seek to offload your requirements onto a neighbouring district such as Haddenham. In short you will be ruining a beautiful rural village, which will be over-populated, lack the essential infrastructure and negatively impact the children and families. VALP16-08-09-00275 Andrew Burnett Comments on Background - 1.13 It is suggested that 1200 homes are needed to meet the unmet needs of other local authorities. One reason for these unmet needs may be that the land required is green belt land. In this case, it would be absurd to use green belt land in AVDC to meet this need. VALP16-08-09-00276 David Warburton Comments on Background - I attended the meeting arranged by Haddenham Parish Council in association with the Haddenham Village Society last night and wish to pass on our comments about the new local plan; VALP16-08-09-00281 Simon Dackombe Comments on Background - Paragraphs 1.17 - 1.19 (Thames Valley Police) TVP note that there is a significant emphasis on the delivery of transport Infrastructure as a key requirement. Whilst acknowledging the importance this has It is considered that it would be appropriate to also highlight at this early stage in the document the need to deliver other key infrastructure components including Policing and other Emergency Services infrastructure. VALP16-08-10-00282 Michael Dickson Comments on Background - None Date: 25/11/2016 Project Number: 1664569/A0 Page 3 of 85 VALP Summer 2016 Consultation Responses – Background ID Name Comment VALP16-08-10-00284 Roz Owens Comments on Background - I note the requirement to co-operate with other local authorities, but we must push back against the beautiful productive countryside around Aylesbury and Buckingham being covered in houses and ending up acting as an extended suburb of London. Growth in the borough should be to support local needs as spreading housing further afield brings greater likelihood of requirements to travel (often by car) to reach employment or keep up established social connections.