VALP Main Modifications
Representation ID: 2743
Respondent: Mr Douglas Cross
Legally compliant? No
1. It is unreasonable for Aylesbury Vale to meet its housing needs by unilaterally 'tacking on' an additional 1,800 homes to Milton Keynes.
2. Medical and retail infrastructure in insufficient to support the addition of 4,320 people.
3. The addition of 2,520 cars will increase noise and congestion.
4. The development is not coordinated with the Milton Keynes planning guidelines (past, present and future)
Coordination is required between Milton Keynes Council Planning Department and Aylesbury Vale in order to ensure that the development is in line with Milton Keynes planning requirements, including access to medical care, road infrastructure, retail infrastructure, etc.
It is unreasonable for Aylesbury Vale to meet its housing needs by unilaterally 'tacking on' an additional 1,800 homes to Milton Keynes.
With an average family size of 2.4 persons (2017 ONS Data), Shenley Park alone will increase the population of Milton Keynes by 4,320 people. Each of whom will require access to a GP, hospital, dentist, supermarket, etc. It has been assumed that these facilities are readily accessible and have sufficient capacity. This is not the case. The nearest GP, Westcroft medical centre, already has long waiting times and queues for appointments. Milton Keynes Hospital Maternity unit has to turn people away at peak times and waiting times at A&E are already three to four hours.
It is unreasonable to expect that Milton Keynes should provide these facilities for the residents of Aylesbury Vale, who will not contribute council tax towards maintaining them.
Further, in the South East, the average number of cars per household is 1.4 (Data from 2018), meaning that an additional 2,520 cars will be present in Shenley Park. These will contribute significantly to background noise (The Western edge of Kingsmead and Oxley Park are currently the only 'quiet' parts of Milton Keynes), and to congestion (the A421 at bottledump roundabout already queues at peak times). Shenley Park will need to be gritted in Winter and this may not be properly coordinated with Milton Keynes, resulting in resident confusion and frustration. Will the council tax paid to Aylesbury Vale cover the gritting, or will this provision be expected of Milton Keynes?
Milton Keynes have their own planning philosophies and requirements, to ensure that the city develops in a measured, controlled way. For example, at inception Milton Keynes did not allow any buildings of more than two storeys high. Has this development been planned according to the latest Milton Keynes planning guidelines? Is the anticipated housing density the same as a typical estate in MK? How will any changes in guidelines over the delivery period be reflected in the Aylesbury Vale plan? Will a planning working group be established to ensure this. None of these points have been identified by the 'plan' document.