Aylesbury Vale Area

VALP Proposed Submission

Search Representations

Results for Granborough Parish Council search

New search New search

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

S2 Spatial Strategy for Growth

Representation ID: 1887

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Granborough Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The GPC does have some concerns about the cumulative impact of such development where smaller villages share limited infrastructure, in particular schools.

The GPC is still concerned as to the overall impact on the plan of meeting the unmet need from the other Buckinghamshire Districts. This has meant that AVDC has had to identify sites which are, at the very least, unpopular with local communities and in some circumstances contrary to the declared wishes of local communities as contained in their approved neighbourhood plans.

One of the reasons why other authorities are claiming that they cannot meet their identified housing need is by proposing low housing densities, and thus not maximising the sites available, hence GPC believes that AVDC has at this time made over-provision.

Full text:

The Granborough Parish Council (GPC) has considered the PROPOSED SUBMISSION - VALE OF AYLESBURY LOCAL PLAN 2013- 2033 (VALP) and wishes to make the following observations.
1. The GPC welcomes the revised submission to be submitted in early 2018 as it believes that Aylesbury Vale District Council has taken regard to many of the comments made during the 2016 consultation exercise. The GPC also notes that the comments made on the earlier draft will be passed to the Inspector at the time of the Inspection, hence the GPC does not intend to repeat some of the comments it made in 2016.

2. The GPC fully recognises the need for the plan to be submitted early in 2018

3. The GPC is particularly pleased to note that in respect of Granborough and other smaller settlements/villages that the proposal to specify the number of properties to be built has been replaced with the concept that the growth in such smaller villages will be met through a combination of sites allocated in a neighbourhood plan (if one exists) and on sites coming forward as part of the development management process. The GPC does however still have some concerns about the cumulative impact of such development where smaller villages share limited infrastructure, in particular schools. The concern is that this may result in children in the smaller villages, without schools, being displaced from the normal catchment schools due them being filled by children from the development in the locality of the school.

4. The GPC is concerned as to the figures proposed of 25% for affordable housing as part of developments of over 11 properties (gross) or 0.3 ha. This figure would appear to be lower than that being proposed by other neighbouring local authorities. As the provision of affordable housing would appear to be essential to maintain existing communities due to the high price of housing, the GPC would wish to see consideration being given to increasing this percentage to 30%. GPC is concerned that there appears to be nothing in the VALP which will actively deliver affordable housing to smaller villages where the proposed (albeit welcomed) policies are aimed to prevent the development of sites of a scale to generate a need for affordable housing. We appear to be in a "catch 22" situation where a smaller village recognises the need for a small number of affordable housing to allow people to remain in the village, but these cannot be provided

5. The GPC is still concerned as to the overall impact on the plan of meeting the unmet need from the other Buckinghamshire Districts. Whilst GPC recognises the need to cooperate, it still believes that the apparent willingness of AVDC to accommodate some 8000 properties which are over and above the number identified as being needed in AVDC has an overall negative impact on the viability and acceptability of the VALP. It is the acceptance of this number of properties by AVDC which has meant that AVDC has had to identify sites which are, at the very least, unpopular with local communities and in some circumstances contrary to the declared wishes of local communities as contained in their approved neighbourhood plans.

One of the reasons why other authorities are claiming that they cannot meet their identified housing need is by proposing low housing densities, and thus not maximising the sites available to them even having regard to the constraints of green belt and AONB's. The proposed housing densities for Wycombe appear far lower than proposed by AVDC hence GPC believes that AVDC has at this time made over-provision for properties which the other DC's could accommodate, if they proposed higher densities. This must bring into question the soundness of neighbouring local plan proposals, whilst at the same time indicating that AVDC can accommodate them.

The GPC is extremely concerned about the need to review the VALP within a very short time of its adoption to accommodate further government requirements for housing. If the proposed unmet need figures from the other DC's are accepted, this could be taken as an acceptance that these authorities are "full" and will look for yet further development in AVDC to meet identified need in their areas which are in the main serving London and the Thames corridor. The GPC's concerns are further exacerbated by the proposals for the Oxford - Cambridge Express way which will generate the demand from Government for even more housing and commercial sites to be identified in the centre/north of AVDC on a scale which will potentially dwarf those required so far. Implicit in this is the prospect that AVDC could be seen as a prime area for massive scale development simply because it is currently rural and does not have the benefit of statutory protection.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

H1 Affordable housing

Representation ID: 1889

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Granborough Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The GPC is concerned as to the figures proposed of 25% for affordable housing as part of developments of over 11 properties (gross) or 0.3 ha. This figure would appear to be lower than that being proposed by other neighbouring local authorities. As the provision of affordable housing would appear to be essential to maintain existing communities due to the high price of housing, the GPC would wish to see consideration being given to increasing this percentage to 30%. GPC is concerned that there appears to be nothing in the VALP which will actively deliver affordable housing to smaller villages where the proposed (albeit welcomed) policies are aimed to prevent the development of sites of a scale to generate a need for affordable housing. We appear to be in a "catch 22" situation where a smaller village recognises the need for a small number of affordable housing to allow people to remain in the village, but these cannot be provided

Full text:

The Granborough Parish Council (GPC) has considered the PROPOSED SUBMISSION - VALE OF AYLESBURY LOCAL PLAN 2013- 2033 (VALP) and wishes to make the following observations.
1. The GPC welcomes the revised submission to be submitted in early 2018 as it believes that Aylesbury Vale District Council has taken regard to many of the comments made during the 2016 consultation exercise. The GPC also notes that the comments made on the earlier draft will be passed to the Inspector at the time of the Inspection, hence the GPC does not intend to repeat some of the comments it made in 2016.

2. The GPC fully recognises the need for the plan to be submitted early in 2018

3. The GPC is particularly pleased to note that in respect of Granborough and other smaller settlements/villages that the proposal to specify the number of properties to be built has been replaced with the concept that the growth in such smaller villages will be met through a combination of sites allocated in a neighbourhood plan (if one exists) and on sites coming forward as part of the development management process. The GPC does however still have some concerns about the cumulative impact of such development where smaller villages share limited infrastructure, in particular schools. The concern is that this may result in children in the smaller villages, without schools, being displaced from the normal catchment schools due them being filled by children from the development in the locality of the school.

4. The GPC is concerned as to the figures proposed of 25% for affordable housing as part of developments of over 11 properties (gross) or 0.3 ha. This figure would appear to be lower than that being proposed by other neighbouring local authorities. As the provision of affordable housing would appear to be essential to maintain existing communities due to the high price of housing, the GPC would wish to see consideration being given to increasing this percentage to 30%. GPC is concerned that there appears to be nothing in the VALP which will actively deliver affordable housing to smaller villages where the proposed (albeit welcomed) policies are aimed to prevent the development of sites of a scale to generate a need for affordable housing. We appear to be in a "catch 22" situation where a smaller village recognises the need for a small number of affordable housing to allow people to remain in the village, but these cannot be provided

5. The GPC is still concerned as to the overall impact on the plan of meeting the unmet need from the other Buckinghamshire Districts. Whilst GPC recognises the need to cooperate, it still believes that the apparent willingness of AVDC to accommodate some 8000 properties which are over and above the number identified as being needed in AVDC has an overall negative impact on the viability and acceptability of the VALP. It is the acceptance of this number of properties by AVDC which has meant that AVDC has had to identify sites which are, at the very least, unpopular with local communities and in some circumstances contrary to the declared wishes of local communities as contained in their approved neighbourhood plans.

One of the reasons why other authorities are claiming that they cannot meet their identified housing need is by proposing low housing densities, and thus not maximising the sites available to them even having regard to the constraints of green belt and AONB's. The proposed housing densities for Wycombe appear far lower than proposed by AVDC hence GPC believes that AVDC has at this time made over-provision for properties which the other DC's could accommodate, if they proposed higher densities. This must bring into question the soundness of neighbouring local plan proposals, whilst at the same time indicating that AVDC can accommodate them.

The GPC is extremely concerned about the need to review the VALP within a very short time of its adoption to accommodate further government requirements for housing. If the proposed unmet need figures from the other DC's are accepted, this could be taken as an acceptance that these authorities are "full" and will look for yet further development in AVDC to meet identified need in their areas which are in the main serving London and the Thames corridor. The GPC's concerns are further exacerbated by the proposals for the Oxford - Cambridge Express way which will generate the demand from Government for even more housing and commercial sites to be identified in the centre/north of AVDC on a scale which will potentially dwarf those required so far. Implicit in this is the prospect that AVDC could be seen as a prime area for massive scale development simply because it is currently rural and does not have the benefit of statutory protection.

Object

VALP Proposed Submission

S9 Monitoring and review

Representation ID: 1891

Received: 14/12/2017

Respondent: Granborough Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The GPC is extremely concerned about the need to review the VALP within a very short time of its adoption to accommodate further government requirements for housing. If the proposed unmet need figures from the other DC's are accepted, this could be taken as an acceptance that these authorities are "full" and will look for yet further development in AVDC to meet identified need in their areas which are in the main serving London and the Thames corridor. The GPC's concerns are further exacerbated by the proposals for the Oxford - Cambridge Express way which will generate the demand from Government for even more housing and commercial sites to be identified in the centre/north of AVDC on a scale which will potentially dwarf those required so far. Implicit in this is the prospect that AVDC could be seen as a prime area for massive scale development simply because it is currently rural and does not have the benefit of statutory protection.

Full text:

The Granborough Parish Council (GPC) has considered the PROPOSED SUBMISSION - VALE OF AYLESBURY LOCAL PLAN 2013- 2033 (VALP) and wishes to make the following observations.
1. The GPC welcomes the revised submission to be submitted in early 2018 as it believes that Aylesbury Vale District Council has taken regard to many of the comments made during the 2016 consultation exercise. The GPC also notes that the comments made on the earlier draft will be passed to the Inspector at the time of the Inspection, hence the GPC does not intend to repeat some of the comments it made in 2016.

2. The GPC fully recognises the need for the plan to be submitted early in 2018

3. The GPC is particularly pleased to note that in respect of Granborough and other smaller settlements/villages that the proposal to specify the number of properties to be built has been replaced with the concept that the growth in such smaller villages will be met through a combination of sites allocated in a neighbourhood plan (if one exists) and on sites coming forward as part of the development management process. The GPC does however still have some concerns about the cumulative impact of such development where smaller villages share limited infrastructure, in particular schools. The concern is that this may result in children in the smaller villages, without schools, being displaced from the normal catchment schools due them being filled by children from the development in the locality of the school.

4. The GPC is concerned as to the figures proposed of 25% for affordable housing as part of developments of over 11 properties (gross) or 0.3 ha. This figure would appear to be lower than that being proposed by other neighbouring local authorities. As the provision of affordable housing would appear to be essential to maintain existing communities due to the high price of housing, the GPC would wish to see consideration being given to increasing this percentage to 30%. GPC is concerned that there appears to be nothing in the VALP which will actively deliver affordable housing to smaller villages where the proposed (albeit welcomed) policies are aimed to prevent the development of sites of a scale to generate a need for affordable housing. We appear to be in a "catch 22" situation where a smaller village recognises the need for a small number of affordable housing to allow people to remain in the village, but these cannot be provided

5. The GPC is still concerned as to the overall impact on the plan of meeting the unmet need from the other Buckinghamshire Districts. Whilst GPC recognises the need to cooperate, it still believes that the apparent willingness of AVDC to accommodate some 8000 properties which are over and above the number identified as being needed in AVDC has an overall negative impact on the viability and acceptability of the VALP. It is the acceptance of this number of properties by AVDC which has meant that AVDC has had to identify sites which are, at the very least, unpopular with local communities and in some circumstances contrary to the declared wishes of local communities as contained in their approved neighbourhood plans.

One of the reasons why other authorities are claiming that they cannot meet their identified housing need is by proposing low housing densities, and thus not maximising the sites available to them even having regard to the constraints of green belt and AONB's. The proposed housing densities for Wycombe appear far lower than proposed by AVDC hence GPC believes that AVDC has at this time made over-provision for properties which the other DC's could accommodate, if they proposed higher densities. This must bring into question the soundness of neighbouring local plan proposals, whilst at the same time indicating that AVDC can accommodate them.

The GPC is extremely concerned about the need to review the VALP within a very short time of its adoption to accommodate further government requirements for housing. If the proposed unmet need figures from the other DC's are accepted, this could be taken as an acceptance that these authorities are "full" and will look for yet further development in AVDC to meet identified need in their areas which are in the main serving London and the Thames corridor. The GPC's concerns are further exacerbated by the proposals for the Oxford - Cambridge Express way which will generate the demand from Government for even more housing and commercial sites to be identified in the centre/north of AVDC on a scale which will potentially dwarf those required so far. Implicit in this is the prospect that AVDC could be seen as a prime area for massive scale development simply because it is currently rural and does not have the benefit of statutory protection.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.