Aylesbury Vale Area

VALP Proposed Submission

Search Representations

Results for Context in Development search

New search New search


VALP Proposed Submission

D-MMO006 Land east of Walnut Drive and west of Foscote Road

Representation ID: 983

Received: 11/12/2017

Respondent: Context in Development

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

1. The increase of 61% population is over the average of 16% for medium villages and Maids Moreton should be classified as a small village.
2. The development is north of the village while job opportunities etc. are to the south. Traffic will move through the village and Buckingham causing further congestion and pollution.
3. The woodland area between Foscote Road and The Pightle will be destroyed along with the fauna and flora found there. Possible contamination of Foscote Reservoir.
4. The local amenities (Public House, school and childrens' park) will be overstretched.

Full text:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to object to the VALP, a proposal for building of 171 houses between Maids Moreton and Akeley villages. Please find below my objections and suggestions for further research before a final decision is made.

1. I object on the grounds that Maids Moreton is being classified as a medium rather than a small village. I have lived in both Maids Moreton, where I currently jointly own a property, and Akeley. Both villages have exactly the same amenities. A children's park with swings etc., a primary school and one Public House. It takes only five minutes longer to travel from Akeley to Buckingham by car.
2. I object on the grounds that the development would result in Maids Moreton, even when it is wrongly classified as a medium village, having a population increase of 61%. The average for medium villages in the area is only 14% with the majority well below 10%. This increase would be detrimental to the village in terms of village community, amenities and traffic (see below)
3. I object to the boundary of Maids Moreton, direction Akeley to the north of Maids Morton, being expanded. The extension of the village boundary is not in line with other decisions NOT to extend boundaries. Buckingham town boundary is not being moved, even though the vast majority of movement from new houses will be in the direction of Buckingham, Milton Keynes and Aylesbury. This is particularly relevant since bus routes to Milton Keynes (linking with London trains) and train connections to Winslow are expected to become more developed in the future. I also note that the Maids Moreton /Buckingham boundary is not evident at all. Residential buildings are already back to back down the Moreton Road.
4. I object to the addition of 171 residential properties being developed to the north of the village on the grounds that the additional traffic, potentially 340 extra cars on the basis of two cars per family, will be moving out of the village southwards during rush hour. This will cause too much congestion for the existing residents who already use this route. Furthermore additional pollution from the vehicles will affect not only existing residents but the birdlife over the Fostcote reservoir. I suggest a full assessment is made, both on traffic congestion and potential pollution. The last Manual Classified Counts were made in July 2014 these should be updated and projections for the extra vehicles made.
5. I object to the planning permission for these proposed 171 additional houses based on the inability of the village school being able to accommodate the potential 300+ children that would be granted access. The nature of the school would be changed irrevocably if it was to be expanded to accommodate the extra pupils.
6. I object because the local Public House is already brimming full at weekends. This Public House is a listed property of historical relevance. There would be no room for an 340 additional customers. The pub is the centre of village life and allows for a great sense of community. It is an all welcoming community in which a few additional 'outsiders' are currently easily absorbed. This is likely to change with a potential additional 200+ customers within a very short time span.
7. I object to this development, north of the existing village boundary based on the likelihood that, in the absence of opportunities and amenities north of the village, the additional inhabitants will be taking up jobs and places in secondary schools to the south of the village. Development south of the village is therefore more appropriate. Traffic will increase and a sense of community likely to decrease when 'life' is centred outside the village for so many additional inhabitants.
8. I object to this development since the woodland areas with public footpaths between the Pightle and the Foscote road will be destroyed completely. This destruction will chase several species of animal and birds away from the village as well as the wild flowers and bushes. I would suggest a full environmental survey of this area, including the potential contamination/destruction to the Foscote Reservoir is conducted before any decision is made.
9. I object to the new development beyond the northern boundary of the village based on the increased thoroughfare of pedestrians to the existing park and football field. This additional pedestrian traffic will change the insular sense of village life and compromise security. Currently Neighbourhood Watch can easily identify a person walking through the village, especially around the time children walk home from school, as a 'stranger'. This would no longer be possible if an additional 171 houses were built and filled in a short space of time.
10. I object to the potential increase of houses in the village since we already have very long waiting times for doctor and dentist appointments as well as the pharmacies for prescriptions. These will be exacerbated with 3-500 additional clients.
11. I object to the position of the new development since it will change the view of the village on entrance. Currently it is a clear compact settlement. The new development will appear as an appendage to the current village rather than part of the village. It will appear more of an extension of Buckingham Town with a 'village' in between.

Thank you for taking my objections seriously in the decision-making for this very inappropriate residential housing development proposal.

Mary Hadley PhD.

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