Aylesbury Vale Area

MM234

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 2769

Received: 03/12/2019

Respondent: National Trust - Waddesdon Estate/Hartwell House

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Hartwell House Estate considers that the deletion of criteria (a) which requires new development to 'be grouped where possible with existing buildings' will lead to further pressure for new development within the Area of Attractive Landscape outside of the village settlements within the open countryside.

Change suggested by respondent:

Reinstated of Policy NE5; Criteria 'a) be grouped where possible with existing buildings'

Full text:

Hartwell House Estate considers that the deletion of criteria (a) which requires new development to 'be grouped where possible with existing buildings' will lead to further pressure for new development within the Area of Attractive Landscape outside of the village settlements within the open countryside.

Support

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3432

Received: 17/01/2020

Respondent: Wendover Parish Council

Representation Summary:

NE5 - Landscape - visual impact to be minimised, avoid loss of important views, noise effects etc

Full text:

VALP Main Modifications consultation
Response from Wendover Parish Council

The Wendover Parish council have the following comments with regard to the main VALP modifications:
We are pleased to note that:
Much of the VALP remains unchanged for Wendover in that the 132 houses in Wendover have been completed and there are still 1000 in Halton for this plan. There are points we have considered that are the important features of the modifications which have a bearing on Wendover.
WPC are encouraged and in particular support the following points:
 S3 which gives more protection against coalescence and retention of individuality of settlements.

 D-Hal 003 - Where Halton the Sports and Heritage sites are to be retained (p143) and 50% green infrastructure has been specified (p145)

 D7 / E5- Promotes support for local centres (considers effects of out of town shopping etc to be detrimental)

 D8 - Aylesbury Town Centre action plan which details how to improve it in a positive manner (p181)

 H4 - Considers replacement dwellings in the countryside will be permitted if the same size as before, but not bigger

 H6b - Considers Care needs and that the definitions have been revised and are generally good (p206)

 T5 - Vehicle parking has been updated removing small garages as spaces as it is recognised that they are often used for storage not cars! (p246)

 T7 - Refers to electric charging points, at least one per new house, 10% of bays for flats. Employment sites and long stay points to be provided, 1 per 25 spaces, and charging times/ wattage are specified (p250)

 BE4, section9 - more weight is given to protecting these.

 NE1 - Protected sites has given biodiversity more weight and is more specific which is to be encouraged (p266)

 NE4 - AONB is more protected

 NE5 - Landscape - visual impact to be minimised, avoid loss of important views, noise effects etc

 NE7 - Specifies the importance of agricultural land of quality 1, 2 and 3a which should be retained.

 NE9 - Trees etc strengthened to refuse developments adjacent, adding buffers and joining up fragmented areas of woodland with new planting.

 C3 - Uses of natural resources highlights renewable energy and the current issues with water supply and sewage (new reservoirs required?).

 C4 /I1- Green infrastructure has been strengthened and is more precise. I1 also considers playing pitches and open spaces following a new assessment in 2017/19 and their importance management and possible need for extra provision. (also I2 & Appendix D)

 I5 - Water resources consultation required for large developments. We are in a water stress area!

 Appendix B - Deals with parking standards which are largely unchanged save for the garage issue.

 p33 - Halton development effects on the Chilterns Beech woods in terms of recreational use and air quality, and Natural England have asked for clarification, but in general are happy with modifications in line with their comments in the previous consultation.


These points are all supported by WPC as they strengthen the case for sensitive developments which consider their affects on the surrounding landscape, facilities and wildlife.

Cllr Sheila Bulpett 16.12.19
(on behalf of Wendover Parish Council)

Support

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3454

Received: 17/12/2019

Respondent: LDA Design

Representation Summary:

My client supports the amendments made through proposed Main Modification MM234 as they result in a more positively worded and effective policy.
This modification is a more appropriate policy test as it quantifies a degree of harm to be avoided rather than suggesting that any harm be avoided at all.
Furthermore, we support , 'Development will be supported where appropriate mitigation to overcome any adverse impact to the character of the receiving landscape has been agreed'. This reflects a more positively prepared,
mitigation-led approach where potentially adverse effects can be reduced or avoided through good design. (officer summary)

Full text:

See attached document which is submitted on behalf of Figar Land Limited.

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3487

Received: 17/12/2019

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

The revised wording now proposed by AVDC requires further modification, and is necessary to address an internal inconsistency within the policy - to make it effective - and to ensureconsistency with national policy. it is wholly unreasonable that AVDC continues to afford overriding weight to alleged landscape and visual harm arising from development at Eaton Leys.
The retention of Eaton Leys within the AAL is unsound. We do not repeat the case made
through the previous stage of the Examination, however, the case in favour of removing
Eaton Leys from the AAL has been strengthened in this intervening period as a result of
the commencement of construction of 500 homes and a local centre immediately to the
north of the site. Do not consider that the retention of the AAL designation, or the inclusion of Eaton Leys within the designation, is necessary, appropriate or sound. maintain that the AAL
designations should be deleted.

Change suggested by respondent:

Further modifications to Policy NE5 to address internal inconsistencies and to
provide a positive, justified and effective approach. These further modifications
are presented in the Landscape and Visual Statement provided at Appendix 1 of
these representations.
If AAL designations are to be retained, the removal of Eaton Leys from the
Brickhills AAL designation.

Full text:

see attachment

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3599

Received: 17/12/2019

Respondent: Gladman Developments Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

The proposed additional wording towards the end of MM234 states
"development will be supported where appropriate mitigation to overcome any adverse impact to the
character of the receiving landscape has been agreed." Gladman are unclear what this additional
wording means, specifically the element that states, 'has been agreed'. Gladman believe further
clarity is required to ensure that this policy is interpreted consistently through the decision making
process and so that the development industry is clear on what is expected from them.

Change suggested by respondent:

further
clarity is required to ensure that this policy is interpreted consistently through the decision making
process and so that the development industry is clear on what is expected from them.

Full text:

see attachment