Aylesbury Vale Area

MM212

Showing comments and forms 1 to 3 of 3

Support

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 2953

Received: 11/12/2019

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Bulpett

Representation Summary:

Provided the transport figures are not collected during holiday periods!!

Full text:

Provided the transport figures are not collected during holiday periods!!

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3331

Received: 16/12/2019

Respondent: The Buckingham Society

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Saved Policy RA 36 from AVDLP has no meaningful replacement. We are deeply concerned that there are no policies contained in VALP to prevent either excessive traffic or damage to the rural network of roads.

Change suggested by respondent:

No comment provided

Full text:


In the Schedule of Saved Polices, the VALP states that saved policy RA36 from AVDLP is replaced by T5. (Appendix F) But T5 deals with vehicle parking alone. The policy RA36 in AVDLP was specifically directed at protecting the rural areas from "excessive traffic", and "avoiding traffic increases and routing unsuited to rural roads". We are deeply concerned that there are no policies contained in VALP to prevent either excessive traffic or damage to the rural network of roads.
Without specific protection for the rural roads, cycling and pedestrian routes cannot be accessed safely. Developments of any residential development numbering 30 or more units in a rural area will see an increase in vehicular movements along minor roads that will generate pollution and cause environmental damage.
The NPPF recognises the difference between the rural and the urban networks and states (para 103) "However, opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural areas, and this should be taken into account in both plan-making and decision-making".
Without this recognition in VALP, we consider it to be inconsistent with national policy

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3549

Received: 15/12/2019

Respondent: Hampden Fields Action Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

1. Given the weakness of the modelling and evidence base, the
modified statement regarding evidence of sufficient capacity is
impossible to justify or achieve.

Change suggested by respondent:

Full remedial action to correct the errors and gaps in the transport evidence base and modelling,
followed by a revised set of proposals including funding plans and timetable, with public consultation
on these modifications.

Full text:

see attachments