Aylesbury Vale Area

Central Aylesbury

Showing comments and forms 1 to 10 of 10

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1542

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: FI Real Estate Management

Agent: DPP Planning

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The site of Verney House has been erroneously allocated as an 'Existing Employment Site' and within the 'Gatehouse Industrial Area'. This does not reflect the present planning status of the site which, as of September 2017, benefits from prior approval consent for residential development. These allocations should therefore be removed. In addition to this, given the approved land use and that the owner of the site intends to bring the site forward as such the site should be allocated for residential development.

Full text:

Please accept by way of this email the attached representations to the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan Proposed Submission Consultation.

The attached representations are made on behalf FI Real Estate Management for whom we are acting as agent. Representations are submitted in relation to the policies and sections set out below:
* Policy E1
* Policy H6
* Section 13 - Central Aylesbury Policies Map

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1571

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Mr Graham John Aylett

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The map needs to show the extent of the Conservation Area within Aylesbury Town Centre.

Full text:


Regarding attractions & identity of the town of Aylesbury (para 4.195) VALP needs to stress the key role of improved MAINTENANCE in the perceptions of visitors, potential new residents and investors. Therefore improving the standards of care & maintenance must be added as the FIRST of THREE main headings for strategic aims listed in para 4.209.
Augmentation of the paragraphs which follows of both policies D.7 & D.8 is required, including the improvement of signage (especially for pedestrians) and observance of the regulation which requires ALL premises, commercial, residential & business a like, to display their number.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1677

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Dayla Site, Exchange Street (AYL064) is currently under construction and had permission at March 2017 but is not shown as a commitment on the Policies Map.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1678

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Aviva Life & Pensions UK Limited

Agent: GL Hearn

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The Local Plan proposals map for Aylesbury should exclude HELAA site ref. AYL078 and the adjacent site known as Alton House from the Gatehouse Industrial Estate key employment site allocation.

Full text:

On behalf of our client, Aviva Life & Pensions UK Limited, please see attached representations duly made towards the Reg. 19 Aylesbury Vale Local Plan

Full text where it has been summarised:

Para 1.14

Paragraph 1.14 is supported in terms of the policy approach of new employment need being met by new allocations to meet forecast need. However, it is apparent that Aylesbury Vale District is retaining historic employment land that is no longer suitable, or viable for current and future employment needs.
The Council is failing to provied an effective planning policy framework by retaining areas of previous employment land at the Gatehouse Industrial Estate which are no longer suitable, viable or deliverable for
employment purposes. The Gatehouse Industrial Estate has already been subject to incremental and
piecemeal redevelopment for alternative land uses, notably for residential at Brook Mews, and residential
being brought forward at Alton House. The character and form of development at the Gatehouse Industrial
Estate has already chaged such that land between Alton House and Brook Mews should be released for
residential and mixed use development.
The Council's approach in retaining the Gatehouse Close Industrial Estate as a key employment site
is inconsistent with the NPPF paragraph 22 which seeks to prevent the long term retention of employment land where there is no reasonable prospect of the land being used for that purpose. In these circumstances Planning Auithorities should review the potential for allocation the land for alternative land uses, including for residential.
The Council's evidence base relating to the Gatehouse Industrial Estate is out-of-date and should be reviewed to take account of existing and permitted residential development locally.

Para 3.78-3.80

Paragraph 3.80 of the VALP emphasises the considerable difficulty of potential large scale allocations being
brought forward speedily to meet immediate and short term (5 year) housing land supply requirements. Whilst
large scale urban extensions or a new settlement would prove a strong solution to medium and longer term
housing delivery, it is clear that a step change is required to increase the short term supply and delivery.
Aviva remain concerned that existing employment sites, such as HELAA site ref. AYL078 - Land at
Gatehouse Close, Aylesbury, have not been adequately assessed to consider the potential for existing
employment land to be releasd in the shorter term to realise and deliver much needed new housing.
Specifically, further consideration must be given to the current and future difficulties associated with HELAA
site ref. AYL078 - Land at Gatehouse Close being successful or viable for employment purposes. HELAA
site AYL078 would be able to deliver approximately 300 dwellings, reducing the need for release of
greenfield land for a similar quantum of housing.

Table 9 and para 6.6:

Aviva object to the HELAA site ref. AYL078 forming part of the key employment site known as the Gatehouse
Industrial Area. Whilst HELAA site ref. AYL0788 is currently in partial use, the only realistic long term use of the
site is for residential development. There is very limited demand for the existing types of units on the site, and the
site's location and poor access for modern commercial vehicles means that the re-use or redevelopment
for employment is not viable. Although the site presently has some very short term tenants the only realistic long
term use of the site would be residential development.
In addition, it is submitted that paragraphs 6.5 and 6.6 are overly protective of employment land, paricularly of
employment land such as that at HELAA site AYL078 which is clearly suitable for alternative more appropriate
land uses. Paragraph 22 of the NPPF states that:
"Planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no
reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose"...and..."land allocations should be regularly reviewed".
The NPPF goes on to say in the same paragraph that "where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being
used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or buildings should be treated on
their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses to support sustainable
local communities".
The NPPF also state that: "To help achieve economic growth, local planning authorities should plan proactively
to meet the development needs of business and support an economy fit for the 21st century".
It is submitted that AVDC should continue to release some greenfield land sites for mixed use development that
consists of residential and employment space. The strategic greenfield sites would allow for the employment sites
to be located in areas that are accessible and sustainable and allow the facilitation of the of the growth of the
Aylesbury Vale economy. Research and development, manufacturing and distribution have all traditionally been
located on the edge of settlements as they benefit from better connectivity.
Given the committed investment projects of East West Rail and HS2 and the larger strategic housing sites, it is
likely that Aylesbury will benefit from improved connectivity by 2033. This therefore means that previously
allocated land for employment that was once 'out of town' (such as land at HELAA site ref. AYL 078 Gatehouse
Industrial Estate) will be situated in an urban hinterland due to settlement expansion, rendering the employment
sites surplus to modern day requirements.
In the case of HELAA site ref. AYL078 it is submitted by Aviva that there is very limited demand for the type of
units on the site, and the site's location and poor access for modern commercial vehicles, means that re-use or
redevelopment is not viable as a continuation of 'B' uses.
In conclusion, it is submitted that either the Gatehouse Industrial Estate should no longer be identified as a key
employment site, or alternatively the HELAA site ref. AYL078 should be excluded from identification in the Local
Plan proposals map as no longer forming part of the Gatehouse Industrial Estate as a key employment site.

S2 and table 1:

Policy S2 is supported in terms of identifying an approach to delivery of land for housing and employment growth
and development, including to meet some of the needs of adjoining highly constrained districts including
Wycombe and Chiltern/South Bucks Districts.
Nevertheless, the approach of releasing large greenfield sites for residential development to meet the needs of
Aylesbury and adjoining authorities is not justified, effective or consistent with National Policy where there is
significant previously developed land available that can deliver new homes at sustainable locations.
Aylesbury District is seeking to retain historic/ existing employment land for employment purposes where there is
no realistic or viable prospect of the land contributing towards employment development throughout the Plan
period.
Land at the Gatehouse Industrial Estate should be reviewed in light of current and permitted residential
developments at Brook Mews and Alton House and in light of the long term and persistent vacancies and
poor take up of employment land and premises.
Aylesbury Vale has not recently reviewed the ability for the Gatehouse Close Industrial Estate to contrbute
towards employment development, and it is submitted that in accordance with paragraph 22 of the NPPF land
east of the residential scheme at Alton House should be allocated for an alternative and more suitable land use
i.e. a logical and sustainable form of residential linking Alton House, with Brook Mews.

S7:

Poliy S7 is supported by Aviva. Policy S7 appropriately expects efficient and effective use of land and
encourages reuse of previously developed (brownfield) land in sustainable locations. Nevertheless, Policy S7
should be strengthened to confirm that Aylesbury Vale will encourage efficient and effective use of land, in
sustainable locations and subject to specific site considerations, ahead of release of greenfield or Green Belt
land.
Policy S7 should also be strengthened to set out how Aylesbury Vale intends to apply the emerging
requirements from the government for Council's to prepare brownfield land registers.
Paragraph 3.67 only makes reference to the emerging brownfield land register initiative. Aviva submit that
Aylesbury Vale should set out within paragrph 3.81 and policy S7 strong support for the principles of
brownfield land. Indeed, it is recommended that Aylesbury Vale should provide confirmation that a brownfield
land register will be prepared by the Council, to be informed by detailed and fresh assessment of suitable,
available and deliverable previosuly developed land, such as HELAA site ref. AYL078 - Land at Gatehouse
Close, Aylesbury.

Policy maps for Aylesbury:

Aviva object to the potential housing allocations VALP policy map inset for Aylesbury, as the map fails to identify
HELAA site ref. AYL078, land at Gatehouse Close as a potential housing allocation. HELAA site ref. AYL078
is located immediately adjacent to, and shares its eastern boundary with the now completed residential
development at Brook Mews, as well as its western boundary with the permitted residenital development at
Alton House. HELAA site ref. AYL078 also shares the same credentials as a highly sustainable location for
residential development, being within walking distance of Aylesbury town centre and railway station, as well as
the range and mix of commnity facilites and servies within and around the town centre.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1679

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Western House, Rickford's Hill had permission at March 2017 and so should be shown on the Policies Map

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1680

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Wing House, Britannia Street had planning permission at March 2017 and so should be shown on the Policies Map as a commitment.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1681

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Walton Square (formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street had permission at March 2017 and so should be shown on the Policies Map as a commitment.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1682

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

22 Cambridge Street (12 flats) had planning permission at March 2017 and so should be shown on the Policies Map as a commitment.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1683

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Questions whether it had permission at 31/03/2017. If not suggests that it should be included in the housing allocation.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1685

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Mr David Vowles

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Full text:


Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan
Understandably a few errors has crept into this complex document. No doubt the council will be preparing a list of corrections to put to the inspector of the public examination. In case you have not picked them up already, here are some which I have spotted and which could cause confusion.

Cross references
Paragraph 4.18 - D2 & S4 should read D1 & S5
Paragraph 4.154 - D4 should read D2
Paragraph 4.165 - D2 should read D3
Paragraph D7 (2nd Paragraph.) E2 should read E6

Commitments in central Aylesbury
I think the following had permission at March 2017 but are not shown as commitments on the proposals map:-

Dayla site, Exchange St (RefAYL064)-currently under construction

P.T.O

Western House Rickford's Hill (under construction)
Wing House, Britannia Street (completed?)
Walton Square (Formerly Ringwood House) Walton Street (under construction)
22 Cambridge Street (12 flats under construction)

The site at Ardenham Lane (Ref. AYL032) appear to show the vacant (car park) land between Chiltern House and Sunley House as a commitment. Did it have permission at 31/03/2017? If not shouldn't it be included in the housing allocation?

Also the text concerning this site (para 4:102 and table) refers to Ashton Court. Should this be Ardenham Court?

Site AYL058 at Buckingham Street is shown as a commitment covering Heron House, Elsinore House, Cromwell Court, the Methodist Church and Coopers Yard car park. In fact I think only Heron House was a commitment at March 2017. The remainder of the site should either be deleted or shown as a housing allocation.

Yours Sincerely
David Vowles