VALP Main Modifications
Representation ID: 2966
Respondent: Mr Brian Fattorini
Legally compliant? Yes
Lack of clarity over details proposed and still fails to take into consideration fundamental disconnectedness of site.
Clarification of location of additional 3.5 ha.
1) The VALP Main Modifications public consultation for D-HAD007 states an increase in site size from 10 ha to 13.5 ha but it is not clear from the text or drawings where this additional 3.5 ha is located.
2) The public therefore have to make the assumption that the site size is to be increased by extending outwards along the full length of the northwest boundary.
3) Text concerning the pedestrian and cycle link from the site to the village and airfield has been made more definite as the words "if appropriate and possible" are deleted.
4) The second assumption the public therefore have to make is that this increase in size along the northwest boundary is to accommodate the pedestrian and cycle link, presumably because this was proving impossible to implement otherwise.
5) One of the major public concerns about this site is its isolated and disconnectedness from shops, schools and amenities with only the one road set to provide access for the "Provision of at least 269 dwellings". Unfortunately this access road is on the opposite side of the village meaning that traffic going to & returning from the railway station, Co-op store & airfield sports pavilion will be inclined to use the direct route through the narrow lanes in the village.
6) Bucks CC Highways have assessed the area and although they consider it able to support the increase in traffic little or no consideration is given to the impact on pedestrians and cyclists already using the narrow local lanes, particularly as:
- there are no footpaths on these lanes (single carriageway in places)
- blind S-bend on Rudds Lane
- the lanes are pot holed & uneven
- little or no street lighting
- treacherous in winter
CONCLUSION - Without consideration of this site within the context of the airfield developments then this proposal must be refused. It cannot be treated in isolation. If this proposal is granted then there must be a relief road encompassing the pedestrian and cycle link connecting it to the airfield development, Co-op store, care home, sports pavilion and railway station.