Aylesbury Vale Area

D-HAL003 RAF Halton

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 75

Support

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 182

Received: 11/12/2017

Respondent: Mr David Saunders

Representation Summary:

I wish to support the allocation for redevelopment of the site at RAF Halton, in preference to a site close to Milton Keynes, on grounds of national policy. Details of this argument are given in the attached pdf file.

Full text:

I wish to support the allocation for redevelopment of the site at RAF Halton, in preference to a site close to Milton Keynes, on grounds of national policy. Details of this argument are given in the attached pdf file.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 276

Received: 08/11/2017

Respondent: Wendover Society

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The Society recognises the opportunities provided by the latest version of the plan to meet the housing demand whilst mitigating the effect on Wendover itself.
We applaud the withdrawal of plans to take areas out of the Green Belt
We welcome recognition that there are no suitable large-scale development sites in Wendover.
We have a serious concern over lack of detail in plan, particularly about the infrastructure implications and the consequent effect of the 1000 new homes upon Wendover itself.
The Society looks to positively engage with AVDC / DIO / Bucks CC to progress the plan.

Full text:

Response to the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP)


1 Background

The Wendover Society is a registered charity with over 400 members and has as its objectives to:

a. stimulate public interest and educate the public in the beauty, history and character of the Parish of Wendover, Buckinghamshire and the care and maintenance thereof;
b. encourage the preservation, development and improvement of features contributing to the pleasant and convenient living conditions of the inhabitants of Wendover;
c. encourage high standards of architectural planning and building in keeping with the character of Wendover;

This submission is made by the Society Committee and follows us sending our initial thoughts to our members for their consideration.

Please note our comments relate entirely to the sections of the VALP that affect Wendover / Halton and the immediate surrounding area.

2 Summary


* The Society recognises the opportunities provided by the latest version of the plan to meet the housing demand whilst mitigating the effect on Wendover itself
* We applaud the withdrawal of plans to take areas out of the Green Belt
* We welcome recognition that there are no suitable large-scale development sites in Wendover
* We have a serious concern over lack of detail in plan, particularly about the infrastructure implications and the consequent effect of the 1000 new homes upon Wendover itself
* The Society looks to positively engage with AVDC / DIO / Bucks CC to progress the plan


¬¬¬
3 Detailed comments

The Wendover Society in principle welcomes development that will:

Be sympathetic to the historic nature of the village and in keeping with its conservation area status.

Provide housing and local employment for younger people - helping to keep Wendover as a vibrant community catering for all age ranges

Be supported by the appropriate level of infrastructure

It is on the basis of the above that we have structured our comments as below.

To be clear, we do not oppose the proposed development at Halton in the VALP
- but we do have serious concerns at the lack of detail there is to substantiate the proposals - particularly in the area of infrastructure. To that end we find our ability
to fully agree the proposals that affect Wendover is constrained

Whilst recognising that responsibility for some of these details goes beyond the powers or control of AVDC we are concerned that the VALP has been proposed without us being able to know the Defence Infrastructure Organisation Masterplan for the Halton site or the supporting infrastructure to be put in place by Bucks CC.

With such a potentially major impact from these proposals on Wendover's historic and conservation area centre we therefore comment on the issues that are of concern and where we would welcome further dialogue and expansion / clarity of the plan.

4 Green Belt

We very much applaud the dropping of the draft proposals contained in an earlier version of the plan to remove the Green Belt status of areas around Wendover. We also fully support the comments about the attraction of the village lying amongst such a scenic environment and the ANOB area.

Together with the availability of the leisure facility of the National Trust Coombe Hill area, the Wendover Woods amenity (at Halton), the Weston Turville reservoir and the Ridgeway Path, we believe it is this that's makes Wendover such an attractive place for residents and visitors alike.

(We welcomed the comments of a similar nature made by the Planning Inspector in relation to the application for a development adjacent to Halton Lane at Wendover. These considerations were important in the decision to reject the applicants appeal)

5 Housing

The proposed 1000 homes seems to be only an initial figure.
Page 117 "4.125 In terms of Wendover, approximately 1,000 homes will come forward during the Plan period at RAF Halton Camp after its closure in 2022. This is considered to be a realistic and somewhat conservative estimate, and the figure could increase as detailed master planning is developed. "
This comment is amplified by the following

"4.133 Due to the size of the site, it is expected that there will be further development beyond this plan period, and this will be part of the Local Plan review. Work is underway on behalf of the DIO in order to establish the broad land uses that might come forward. This will inform the masterplan supplementary planning document (SPD) for this site." 

We are concerned that any agreement to the current proposals will create a precedent for further large scale development of an unquantified nature. Such an open-ended commitment is not acceptable.
We would request more clarity as what is seen to be the final figure - and request for a 'cap' on number of houses to be built.

We welcome the fact that the estimated 1,000 house capacity is expected to be met entirely by the conversion of the many barrack blocks on the site as well as potentially other suitable buildings together with demolishing buildings and building houses within their footprint where there are no heritage restrictions.

We note that the policy maps included in the VALP designate most of the RAF main site - including the playing fields bounded by Chestnut Avenue and Halton Lane- as scheduled for housing. This we find unacceptable (due to the loss of green space and sporting facilities) - and at variance with what we have been told by AVDC as to the location of the proposed housing.

Wendover is a high cost area for housing - we would look to see specific plans to provide lower cost 'starter homes' and rentals to meet pent up demand from young couples / families. Only by retaining those currently here and by attracting more will we keep the Wendover both balanced in terms of age profile and a vibrant community.

In addition, the development of housing that would be attractive to the older generation would help those in Wendover seeking to 'downsize'.

In view of the above we would look to see more detail of make-up of housing type.

Given the size of the proposed development in relation to the current number of homes in Wendover we would like to see more emphasis on the development of a discrete community at Halton that minimises the degree of impact on Wendover and Halton villages. Whilst the plan does appear to cover this in terms of its spatial strategy it does not do so in terms of the infrastructure planned.

The following comments concentrate on the above issue

6 Retail

The VALP in section 1.15 identifies that increased housing growth would generate an additional requirement of only 29 Sq.m. of retail space. This seems so little it is difficult to comprehend. (When Princess Mary Gate site was developed a convenience store was provided - however this development is only 400 houses in comparison to the initial 1000 at Halton.)

It is noted that in para 4.190 it states that 29 sq.m. is too small to make a specific provision for. Hence the 1000 new houses / a population of perhaps 2500 will have no retail supporting infrastructure, that seems perverse and unacceptable.

7 Medical
We would very much agree with the view of the Clinical Commissioning Group as summarised in the Infrastructure Topic Paper
"Particular concern re village infrastructure and the significant healthcare effects that could result from increases in local population / pressure on services "
It should be borne in mind that the current doctors facilities are overloaded and means that patients have to wait for an appointment.

Dental facilities are limited to one private practice and one private cosmetic practice

Stoke Mandeville Hospital - even without the extra housing across the Vale and despite extensive rebuilding at the hospital facilities are already stretched. It is noted that the hospital missed waiting time targets in latest data released.

Accepting that these facilities are not under the control of AVDC it will be important to ensure that provision is increased as a result of the increased population that they will serve.

8 Schools

We welcome the proposal for a new primary school to serve the new housing, this would then be additional to the existing Halton combined primary school which we understand is at capacity. It is not stated what the expected age range would be at the new primary school. (Note - the existing Wendover primary schools are John Hampden Infant School (age 4 to 7) and the adjacent Wendover CE Junior School (age 7 to 11).

However, no provision is made for pre-school / nursery or secondary schooling. With the increase in households where both parents work after having children we believe that specific provision needs to be made at Halton for nursery / pre-school facilities to compliment the new primary school.

Recognising that school provision is driven by the number of homes to be built, we are concerned that any subsequent addition to the number of houses over and above the 1000 planned (see housing above) will be seen in its own right and not additive to the number planned in the VALP. So, if for instance a further 1000 houses were eventually planned that would not generate a requirement for a secondary school despite the total number ending up at 2000. Already the relatively recent development at Princes Mary Gate of 400 houses has had to be absorbed by Wendover schools adding to the pressures there (see John Colet comment below).

Noting that the number of houses proposed falls below the threshold that generates a requirement to provide a secondary school further consideration needs to be given to this subject. The obvious 'local' secondary school to the new housing is the John Colet at Wendover. The campus has however already been subject to expansion and more is already planned and approved - before any consideration of the 1000 extra homes.

Not only is this a school capacity issue but also a road traffic issue - already, now, without any extra school traffic there are road safety concerns on roads approaching the schools.

The currently planned and approved expansion of the schools will lead to an increase of vehicular traffic during schools opening and closure times - this will compound the already poor safety issues for pedestrians and only add to the existing considerable inconvenience suffered by the residents of nearby roads. As more and more pupils who live outside of catchment / walking distance join the schools this problem will be exacerbated due to the increased rate of car drop-offs. In addition, even without the expansion, currently one of the school buses collecting pupils habitually parks over the entire pavement near the bottom of Wharf Road - there is just nowhere else for it to park!

Approximately 209 properties* are already directly affected by school drop off traffic which is considerable despite the efforts to encourage 'walk to school'. As many residents have pointed out this is an issue not just of inconvenience but also more importantly of safety. In addition, since the previous expansion of the schools there has been an increase in student parking on the neighbouring roads due to the unwillingness of the John Colet school to provide parking on-site. ( *Roads directly affected - Manor Crescent, Manor Road, Wharf Road, Swan Mews, Icknield Close, Grange Gardens and The Paddocks)

The current situation is dangerous and also intolerable for nearby residents. This is before the planned expansion and the further impact of the proposed 1000 homes at Halton. Previously suggestions have been put forward about building a new school entrance for vehicles off the Tring road (B4009). There is an existing roundabout that would provide an ideal access point. This is needed now - and will be even more so when pupils go to the John Colet as a result of the Halton development.

9 Employment

There are civilian employees who will lose their jobs when the RAF exit Halton camp. Together with new housing residents this will generate a demand for employment. (We have approached RAF Halton to ask about the current number of civilian employees but they have not replied. (Our estimates would put the number at 300)

Although this is a subject to be covered in the Halton Masterplan it is hoped that sufficient provision will be made on the RAF site for employment opportunities and it is not just a housing ghetto that is planned.

10 Transport

The absence of retail, medical and secondary school facilities on the proposed development will only cause more traffic into Wendover as the nearest retail centre. It is obvious that the vast majority of the new residents will see Wendover as their 'local' centre - this is in addition to those new residents there who will be commuting to London using Wendover Station.


We are concerned that no mention is made of road or parking improvements in the village to handle the extra traffic either visiting Wendover or travelling through it to access the Amersham / Aylesbury roads or the station has been mentioned.

Commenting on some of the detail:

10.1 Traffic flows

The VALP makes reference to transport modelling that has been carried out. However as presented it is rather confusing

The Transport Topic Paper appended to the VALP information states
"3.21 Lastly there are overall reductions in travel time and congestion on the B4009 through Wendover in the DS+mitigation scenario."
This is the only mention of Wendover in the document and there is no mention of what the DS+mitigation actions are to reduce the travel time?

The B4009 is the road from Halton into the centre of the village so with 1000 houses going in at Halton - and presumably at least 2000 cars using the roads - this comment is therefore vital in understanding what is planned for - or not.

There is a mention the main VALP plan on page 126 to junction improvements at Halton onto the B4009 / Upper Icknield Way - presumably to aid the inhabitants of the 1000 homes getting onto the B4009, but we do not see this as particularly relevant to traffic through Wendover itself?

The position is further confused by a comment in section 1.2 of the 'Reg19 draft - Infrastructure Delivery plan', here it says in relation to Wendover
"A further transport model will be required to assess the impact of this site on the local network."
The position is made further unclear by the Phase 3 countywide traffic modelling notes (p.27):

"...the Countywide Model has limited network coverage in [the area of Halton and Wendover], and as a result the traffic to and from the [RAF Halton site] loads directly onto the B4009 as opposed to the local road network (which is not included in the modelled network). This methodology ensures that the wider strategic impact of the [RAF Halton site] is included in the modelled results, despite the limited network coverage in this area; however the limitation is that any local impacts in Halton will not be captured."

In its technical note the Jacobs Report on Countywide Local Plan modelling (16 August 2017) suggests traffic will avoid the Wendover High Street congestion by using Hale Road and Church lane as a diversionary route. This seems a dangerous assumption to make, the roads are unlit at night and extremely narrow, a volume of traffic using it as a 'rat run' would result in an extremely hazardous situation and we feel such an assumption is totally unacceptable
It is not clear therefore how traffic flows have been assessed / planned to be mitigated and what level of statistical reliability can be ascribed to the data. We think the effect of the planned new housing and its traffic / parking effect should be completely reassessed.
10.2 Car parking
There seems to be no evidence of consideration of the number of incremental car movements that will be generated by new residents visiting and parking in Wendover when using it as their 'local' centre.
Whilst car parking on the new housing space itself will be covered by T5 (page 207) no mention is made of parking provision in Wendover village itself.

Car parking in Wendover is already a critical issue. It has become much worse over time due to:

* Incremental population of the village itself with new development
* The development of Princess Mary Gate housing (400 homes)
* Increased usage of Wendover station - and consequent increase in parking in residential roads due to exorbitant station car park charges (£7.50 per day/ £92.00 per month)
* Increased leisure visitors attracted by the location / coffee shops / restaurants etc.

The above increase in demand has not been met by any increase of scale in extra parking spaces, relatively few have been able to be provided due to the constraints of land in the village centre. Demand for parking of late has also meant that a hazardous situation has developed on the B4009 as it meets the Clock Tower with cars parked on the road by Bank Farm.

Parking in Wendover has been a running sore for residents over many years. The Society believes that the only realistic solution to our problems has to be the 'double-decking' of the central car park. This is an issue that has been talked about for years, with differing views within the village, but with the existing problems and the potential of so many more houses to come it is something that all involved need to 'bite the bullet' on.


10.3 Walking / Cycling

There are numerous mentions in the VALP of walking / cycling, but we would have to question if that is going to be the means of transport of choice for the new residents. E.g.
4.131 "The Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) has confirmed that RAF Halton is to close in 2022 and because it is in reasonable walking and cycling distance of Wendover's services and facilities, it is appropriate that it be redeveloped for housing and other associated uses. "
We would question the basis for this conclusion especially in the case of walking.

For instance, the development site is 48* minutes round trip walk to and from Wendover and going back it is additionally uphill. Already the vast majority of residents at Princess Mary Gate which is nearer to the village centre use a car and the railway station is even further than the time quoted above. This timing is based on a fit and able-bodied person walking in fine weather, those who are infirm / with pushchair or children / walking in inclement weather / with shopping bags - or any permutation thereof would take even longer.

(* Elapsed time from Halton Camp main entrance on B4009 to the centre of Wendover High Street, add 12 minutes if to Wendover Train Station and back)

Although walking and cycling may be desirable on health or other grounds we would challenge if this is a valid planning assumption to make. Coupled with the lack of retail space planned at the Halton housing areas we find this an unacceptable situation and would request a review of this subject.

10.4 Public Transport

Whilst mention is made of the public transport provision we wonder how viable an alternative that would be. Bus services to / from Wendover are not that frequent and even if the bus operators were to extend more routes to Halton would there be sufficient demand to justify a frequency of service that would be attractive to residents?





11 Water & Sewage

All utility supplies have capacity issues, and in particular we recall that Water/Sewage was considered a real problem during the planning of the Princess Mary Gate Development.
The removal of RAF Personnel on a one for one basis with new residents would use the same utility capacity, but any net increase in population will further strain capacity.

Bearing in mind the longer-term size of housing development on the RAF camp we hope this aspect has been fully evaluated


12 Conclusion

The VALP, if agreed, presents both opportunity and challenges for Wendover. We welcome the benefits the latest version brings and would urge that the infrastructure issues are reassessed.

The Wendover Society stands ready to contribute in a positive vein to future discussion.


John Mayhead CBE
Chairman - on behalf of The Wendover Society

November 2017.

Copied to
Cllr Steve Bowles
Cllr Peter Strachan
Cllr Richard Newcombe
Wendover parish Council
Halton Parish Council

Please note i have tried to download a representation form from the website indicated but this link dod not seem to work.

Please acknowledge this mail and attachment as a valid submission

John Mayhead CBE
Chairman - The Wendover Society

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 316

Received: 11/12/2017

Respondent: Mr John Currell

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

I support this proposal, but must object to the lack of detail.
To build houses at here rather than in Wendover is good.
Proper reference must be made to all the necessary infrastructure requirements and the potential adverse impact on facilities in Wendover.

Full text:

I support this proposal, but must object to the lack of detail.
To build houses at here rather than in Wendover is good.
Proper reference must be made to all the necessary infrastructure requirements and the potential adverse impact on facilities in Wendover.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 536

Received: 10/12/2017

Respondent: Mr J Bryson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The proposed 1000 homes seems to be only an initial figure.
I am concerned that any agreement to the current proposals will create a precedent for further large scale development of an unquantified nature. Such an open-ended commitment is not acceptable.

(Officer note: element changed from 4.133 to D-HAL003 RAF Halton)

Full text:

The proposed 1000 homes seems to be only an initial figure.
I am concerned that any agreement to the current proposals will create a precedent for further large scale development of an unquantified nature. Such an open-ended commitment is not acceptable.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 539

Received: 10/12/2017

Respondent: Mr J Bryson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The proposed 1000 homes seems to be only an initial figure. I am concerned that any agreement to the current proposals will create a precedent for further large scale development of an unquantified nature. Such an open-ended commitment is not acceptable

Full text:

The proposed 1000 homes seems to be only an initial figure. I am concerned that any agreement to the current proposals will create a precedent for further large scale development of an unquantified nature. Such an open-ended commitment is not acceptable

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 540

Received: 10/12/2017

Respondent: Mr J Bryson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Plans for RAF Halton site do not take sufficient account of the need for additional school places, particularly nursery and secondary school places to support the 1000 home development

Full text:

Plans for RAF Halton site do not take sufficient account of the need for additional school places, particularly nursery and secondary school places to support the 1000 home development

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 652

Received: 11/12/2017

Respondent: Mr Derek Larkin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

I am surprised that you want to build on the site currently occupied by the Nuffield Pavillion and artificial sports pitch. I would have thought this excellent sporting facility could be retained. I think 1000 extra homes is over the top especially as no new infrastructure, such as a medical centre, is proposed. One thousand new homes these days usually means up to 2000 extra vehicles. There will be acres of brown field sites available for new build after the closure of RAF Halton. I can see no valid reason for any lifting of the designated green belt areas.

Full text:

Sir, Please pass this letter to the relevant department. I have looked at the VALP and am concerned about some of the plans for Halton after the proposed closure of RAF Halton in 2022.

I am surprised that you want to build on the site currently occupied by the Nuffield Pavillion and artificial sports pitch. I would have thought this excellent sporting facility could be retained by the council for use by local schools, and, on a fee payment basis, by adult sporting/social clubs. I understand that this centre was funded by the Nuffield Trust, not MOD. Although MOD owns the land, I wonder if there is a covenant covering the disposal of the building relating to the Trust. Perhaps you could investigate this point.

I think 1000 extra homes is over the top especially as no new infrastructure, such as a medical centre, is proposed. One thousand new homes these days usually means up to 2000 extra vehicles. Aylesbury and its surrounding parishes are already awash with vehicles. Another 2000 cars would not be welcome without drastic improvements to the local road system to accommodate them.

There will be acres of brown field sites available for new build after the closure of RAF Halton. I can see no valid reason for any lifting of the designated green belt areas.

Regards Derek Larkin. Resident Halton Village.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 691

Received: 12/12/2017

Respondent: Mr Alan Sherwell

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

AVDC should be working with others to oppose the closure of this historic RAF base which brings employment and finance to our district rather than seeking an opportunistic development on the site.

Full text:

AVDC should be working with others to oppose the closure of this historic RAF base which brings employment and finance to our district rather than seeking an opportunistic development on the site.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 753

Received: 13/12/2017

Respondent: Sue Barber

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Insufficient evidence to demonstrate that any development at Halton is sustainable

Full text:

The announcement that RAF Halton will close was made in November 2016. AVDC changed their previous draft plan to include RAF land. As this appears to have been done in a rush there is no supporting evidence that a full stagey review of the suitability of such a large development has been made. Such a large development will impact on surrounding villages, particularly Wendover which has insufficient infrastructure to support such a large new community. Halton roads are unsuitable for increased traffic. Halton Lane is a rat run with 5,000 vehicles a day with average speeds of 48mph exceeding the speed limit of 30mph. Perch Bridge has a weight limit of 7.5 tonnes and is currently being monitored due to cracks appearing. Several vehicles exceeding the weight limit have been seen using the bridge. Increased traffics form a large development and further rat running has the potential to seriously damage the bridge further.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 808

Received: 13/12/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Keith Ware

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

I have serious concerns about the ability of existing road and rail networks to cope with additional development in and around Aylesbury and in particular Wendover, when new housing is built on the proposed sites.

Officer Note: reallocated element to D-HAL003 from 1.17 for relevance

Full text:

There are no proposed infrastructure road improvements that would mitigate against the proposed development at the RAF Halton site. The addition of 1000+ houses will have a major impact on existing road networks in and around the area. The local plan identifies a number of sites around the Aylesbury area. What if any transport studies or modelling have taken place to assess the cumulative effect on existing and or proposed roads if all of the sites are developed. The existing road network struggles to cope with existing traffic levels. Additional development will only worsen congestion in and around town. The proposed new road link will do little to help the existing road network.

Have Chiltern Railways been consulted on the scale of proposed development sites and their ability to cope with anticipated additional passenger levels once these sites are developed. The existing stations and car parks are already near capacity and Chiltern may struggle to cope with additional demand on their services. As a regular commuter, I can say it is already difficult to get a seat in rush hour.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 815

Received: 13/12/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Keith Ware

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Limit development of new housing proportionate to the existing level of housing on the site. 1000 new homes are too many for existing surrounding communities, infrastructure, transport and road networks.

Full text:

Limit development of new housing proportionate to the existing level of housing on the site. 1000 new homes are too many for existing surrounding communities, infrastructure, transport and road networks.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 839

Received: 12/12/2017

Respondent: Mr Brian Thompson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

1. Housing allocation.agree with the proposal to limit the housing development at RAF Halton to same footprint and size as existing and maintaining openness
2. Consultation - Unsound because A - Halton community not properly consulted B - consultation is flawed because of significant lack of information C - Uncertainities due to various comments about changes in the future withno evidence to support them provided.
3. Geography - Unsound as plan has fudged the location of RAF Halton as being in Wendover, therefore assumes it is within walking distance and infrastructure is there. Usurping the role of the Boundary Commission.
4. Green Belt - unsound. There is no compelling case/exceptional case for lifting the green belt in Halton. The VALP contradicts itself
5. Infrastructure unsound as missing key information. Concern over local GP support
6. Policy map for Halton is unsound contrary to NPPF

Full text:

See attached report covering

1. Housing Allocation
2. Consultation Process
3. Geography - Where is Halton?
4. Green Belt
5. Infrastructure
6. Policy Map Errors

Support

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 914

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: The Canal & River Trust

Representation Summary:

The Trust wish to raise the need for this allocation to provide a contribution towards the restoration of the Wendover Arm of the Grand union canal and its towpath in order to mitigate against additional use that this allocation will bring and to ensure completion of the Grand Union Triangle walking and cycling route as an important Green Infrastructure asset.

Full text:

The Trust wish to raise the need for this allocation to provide a contribution towards the restoration of the Wendover Arm of the Grand union canal and its towpath in order to mitigate against additional use that this allocation will bring and to ensure completion of the Grand Union Triangle walking and cycling route as an important Green Infrastructure asset.

Support

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 938

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Conservation Board

Representation Summary:

The Chilterns Conservation Board does not object to the re-use of this previously developed site provided that full account and care is taken with the setting of the Chilterns AONB, which wraps around two sides of this large site. The woodland setting helps with reducing harm to AONB views (unlike RAF Halton Airfield where the Board would object to development). Please see our Position Statement on Development Affecting the Setting of the Chilterns
AONB at www.chilternsaonb.org/conservation-board/planning-development.html. Particular care will be needed over design, heights, external lighting and traffic generation, as well as protecting the site's rich heritage and existing trees.

Full text:

The Chilterns Conservation Board does not object to the re-use of this previously developed site provided that full account and care is taken with the setting of the Chilterns AONB, which wraps around two sides of this large site. The woodland setting helps with reducing harm to AONB views (unlike RAF Halton Airfield where the Board would object to development). Please see our Position Statement on Development Affecting the Setting of the Chilterns
AONB at www.chilternsaonb.org/conservation-board/planning-development.html. Particular care will be needed over design, heights, external lighting and traffic generation, as well as protecting the site's rich heritage and existing trees.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 968

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Martin Holden

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Policy map shows housing allocation on the sports facilities and playing fields off Chestnut Ave and Halton lane, this is contrary to council and national planning policy.

Part of the land of Halton House (Listed) also appear allocated for housing , also contrary to policy.

Local plan proposes future removal of Green Belt ,but no evidence to support this.
Statement should be removed from local plan report.

There is no detail of infrastructure t support changes to area.

Full text:

Policy map shows housing allocation on the sports facilities and playing fields off Chestnut Ave and Halton lane, this is contrary to council and national planning policy.

Part of the land of Halton House (Listed) also appear allocated for housing , also contrary to policy.

Local plan proposes future removal of Green Belt ,but no evidence to support this.
Statement should be removed from local plan report.

There is no detail of infrastructure t support changes to area.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 975

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: J Mapleston-Stroud

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to HAL003 because of the impacts on the existing residents, e.g. road congestion and because the site is in the Green Belt, there are presumably many other brownfield sites available in the Vale, I fear that this could place the Plan at risk of being found unsound.

Full text:

Dear Sir / Madam
I am writing with regards to the allocation of RAF Halton for 1,000 homes in the draft Aylesbury Vale Local Plan.
I am broadly opposed to the allocation on the basis that the site seems to have been allocated with very little consideration given to its impact on existing residents. For example, 1,000 extra houses will cause gridlock on local roads, and there does not seem to be a clear plan for avoiding this.
I am also opposed to this development as the site is in the Green Belt. As there are presumably many other brownfield sites available in the Vale, I fear that this could place the Plan at risk of being found unsound. We cannot allow this to happen and risk yet more speculative development.
Yours Faithfully
J. Mapleston - Stroud

Support

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1058

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: DIO Safety Environment & Engineering

Representation Summary:

The proposed Local Plan for The Vale of Aylesbury lies within the statutory height, technical, explosive and birdstrike safeguarding consultation zones surrounding Halton airfield.
Therefore, this office would need to be consulted on all planning consultations for this area.

Full text:

Please find attached my letter confirming the safeguarding position of the Ministry of Defence in respect of the above consultation.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1140

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Mrs J Goward

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

objecting to RAF Halton site allocation due to GB, AONB proximity

Full text:

I would like to object to the plan to allocate RAF Halton for as many as 1,000 houses. It is wholly unnecessary to allocate this Green Belt site, near to the Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, when there are other options.
Councillors should think again before rushing ahead with such a big change to the local plan.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1149

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: T Nichaly

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to inclusion of to RAF Halton due to traffic issues and risk of Halton being used as a rat run by new residents.

Full text:

As part of the consultation on the local plan I would like to register my objection to RAF Halton being set aside for a large number of homes.
These are already significant problems with traffic in the area, and these proposals will only make matters worse. Building so many new homes on RAF Halton will encourage people to treat the local villages as a rat run and cause severe congestion. Yet there seem to be no plans for improving local infrastructure to help cope with the extra pressure.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1151

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: P Bennewith

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to the allocation of Halton camp due to deliverability, appropriate and relationship and impact on GB.

Full text:

I believe the VALP should be modified to remove the allocation at RAF Halton.
With little consultation, the decision to allocated this site is high presumptuous. There are unanswered questions about whether 1,000 houses on this the site is deliverable or appropriate.
RAF Halton falls within the 10% of the borough which is in the greenbelt. A major development here would be contrary to national policy.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1153

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Miriam Hodson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

objection to allocation HAL003 in the draft. I understand there are serious questions over the site's potential for development, and furthermore it iis not available until 2022.
As this will not help fix the housing crisis, I believe a more deliverable site should be allocated in its place until more details are available.

Full text:

I would like to register my objection to allocation HAL003 in the draft. I understand there are serious questions over the site's potential for development, and furthermore it iis not available until 2022.
As this will not help fix the housing crisis, I believe a more deliverable site should be allocated in its place until more details are available.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1154

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: K Gordon

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

oppose the allocation of RAF Halton in the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan.
The site will not come forward for development until 2022, so it will not help to address the current housing crisis or help people to stay in the District. Surely there must be sites which can be delivered faster to help fix this urgent problem?

Full text:

I wish to oppose the allocation of RAF Halton in the Aylesbury Vale Local Plan.
The site will not come forward for development until 2022, so it will not help to address the current housing crisis or help people to stay in the District. Surely there must be sites which can be delivered faster to help fix this urgent problem?

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1155

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Sarah O'Carroll

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

While there is a need for new homes in Aylesbury Vale, RAF Halton is the wrong place to put them.
RAF Halton is in the Green Belt, and both national policy and common sense says we should exhaust other options before deciding to build on the Green Belt. This is even more the case for a sensitive site like RAF Halton, which has so much history and local wildlife.
Adding RAF Halton to the plan is unnecessary and the Council should think again about how to meet our housing need.

Full text:

I understand that the council is seeking views on the 'Local Plan'.
While there is a need for new homes in Aylesbury Vale, RAF Halton is the wrong place to put them.
RAF Halton is in the Green Belt, and both national policy and common sense says we should exhaust other options before deciding to build on the Green Belt. This is even more the case for a sensitive site like RAF Halton, which has so much history and local wildlife.
Adding RAF Halton to the plan is unnecessary and the Council should think again about how to meet our housing need.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1156

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Richard Birch

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

I strongly oppose the sudden allocation of a Green Belt site for so much housing at this late stage in the Plan process. There has been hardly aby consultation with local residents, and I cannot see evidence that a proper Green Belt review has been carried out on the site.
I would urge you to remove this site from the Local Plan and give local people more of a say.

Full text:

I am writing with regards to the proposed allocation of RAF Halton in the Local Plan for 1000 homes.
I strongly oppose the sudden allocation of a Green Belt site for so much housing at this late stage in the Plan process. There has been hardly aby consultation with local residents, and I cannot see evidence that a proper Green Belt review has been carried out on the site.
I would urge you to remove this site from the Local Plan and give local people more of a say.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1157

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: R Hall

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The site is in the Green Belt, we have plenty of brownfield sites and I don't believe the council have done the appropriate assessments which hoes against the national planning policy (which states that brownfield sites should be considered before anything in the Green Belt).
The decision to allocate for housing is premature as insufficient consultation and assessment have been carried out. Andd it is completely unnecessary to allocate the site immediately as there will be an immediate Local Plan review once the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan is adopted.

Full text:

I am writing to you to express my concern for the above allocation. The site is in the Green Belt, we have plenty of brownfield sites and I don't believe the council have done the appropriate assessments which hoes against the national planning policy (which states that brownfield sites should be considered before anything in the Green Belt).
The decision to allocate for housing is premature as insufficient consultation and assessment have been carried out. Andd it is completely unnecessary to allocate the site immediately as there will be an immediate Local Plan review once the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan is adopted.
I trust you will bear this in mind when considering the Plan.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1158

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Sir/ Madam

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Please accept this letter as a representation against the development of RAF Halton, which I understand is being proposed in the Local Plan.
The allocation seems to be a knee jerk reaction to meet the Vale's housing targets, given that it has been added to the Plan at much a late stage with so little consultation. Please reconsider this proposal until such time as more detailed assessments of its sustainability, and more consultation with the community, have been carried out.

Full text:

Please accept this letter as a representation against the development of RAF Halton, which I understand is being proposed in the Local Plan.
The allocation seems to be a knee jerk reaction to meet the Vale's housing targets, given that it has been added to the Plan at much a late stage with so little consultation. Please reconsider this proposal until such time as more detailed assessments of its sustainability, and more consultation with the community, have been carried out.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1159

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Sir/ Madam

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

oppose the development at Halton RAF which is being proposed in the draft Local Plan.

Full text:

I would like to oppose the development at Halton RAF which is being proposed in the draft Local Plan.
Although I am aware that the site will not come forward until 2022, we already suffer from traffic problems in the local area, and 1000 extra homes will make this far worse.
In the Council's documents I cannot see any attempt to mitigate this impact or to improve local infrastructure. There also does not seem to be a strategy to manage all the extra car journeys the development will generate.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1170

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Sir/ Madam

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

objection to allocation HAL003 (RAF Halton) in the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan.

Full text:

Please register this letter of objection to allocation HAL003 (RAF Halton) in the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan.

National planning policy states that brownfield sites should be considered before Green Belt ones, and RAF Halton is in the Green Belt. As 90% of the District is not in the Green Belt, I do not believe the council can have considered all other options for housing as it is supposed to do. I also can see no evidence of full Green Belt assessment ever having been carried out on the site.

Please remove this allocation from the Plan in favour of a brownfield site

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1171

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: JS Ince

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

objection to the proposed allocation of RAF Halton for 1,000 houses.

Full text:

Please accept this as a letter objection to the proposed allocation of RAF Halton for 1,000 houses.

I can see no evidence that this site's suitability for such a large number of houses has been properly assessed, particularly with regard to its impact on local heritage assets, which includes several Listed Buildings and a scheduled monument. I also believe that development will cause severe harm to valuable local ecology sites, such as the adjacent Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 1172

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Mr Michael Hodson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

oppose the suggestion that RAF Halton be allocate for new homes.

Full text:

I oppose the suggestion that RAF Halton be allocate for new homes. I don't believe the Council have properly consulted on such a significant change to the Local Plan, nor has the harm it could do to the heritage and ecology of such an important place been fully considered.