Aylesbury Vale Area

VALP Further Main Modifications

Search Representations

Results for Whaddon Parish Council search

New search New search

Object

VALP Further Main Modifications

Sustainability Appraisal Addendum

Representation ID: 3749

Received: 08/02/2021

Respondent: Whaddon Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Whilst understanding this SAA primarily responds to identifying C2 elderly accommodation, para 2 stating 'What is the plan seeking to achieve', especially para 2.3.1. should have been spelled out in earlier iterations, when fundamental plan issues were being considered.
When considering some relatively minor issues in the 12 point SA Framework, it seems unfair, unsafe and unreasonable to exclude the impact of traffic volumes, safety of residents, impact on amenity, conservation areas, recreation grounds etc. which are not considered important enough and are thus delegated to resolve at planning application stage, post Local Plan adoption which leads to unsatisfactory compromise.

Change suggested by respondent:

Consideration of important traffic and related safety issues, especially those that impact on settled rural communities, should be revisited by the Inspector if the hearing sessions are reopened - especially on FMM058 -(MM076) WHA001 Shenley Park . It should be made clear that the omission of important transport issues should not be left until the planning application stage, when it will often be too late to plan for and instigate appropriate, and often essential infrastructure needed to 'sustain and enhance existing and new communities transport infrastructure' - to quote part of bullet point 3 in para 2.2.1. The plan should say that those elements of highway planning on Strategic sites must not ignore those communities that the development directly impacts on. Accordingly early solutions should be found, especially on long standing and known problems such as over capacity on the A421 and rural road rat-running.

Full text:

Whilst understanding this SAA primarily responds to identifying C2 elderly accommodation, para 2 stating 'What is the plan seeking to achieve', especially para 2.3.1. should have been spelled out in earlier iterations, when fundamental plan issues were being considered.
When considering some relatively minor issues in the 12 point SA Framework, it seems unfair, unsafe and unreasonable to exclude the impact of traffic volumes, safety of residents, impact on amenity, conservation areas, recreation grounds etc. which are not considered important enough and are thus delegated to resolve at planning application stage, post Local Plan adoption which leads to unsatisfactory compromise.

Object

VALP Further Main Modifications

FMM058

Representation ID: 3750

Received: 08/02/2021

Respondent: Whaddon Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Serious doubts are raised, and reasons given as to why and how the projected house completion rate - stating that 50 new homes will be delivered between 2020 to 2025 - is unrealistic, wildly optimistic and wide of the mark.
Clarification of WPC’s position on the Objection or Support to the six criteria points, which would change depending on the final conclusion of proper process being followed.

Change suggested by respondent:

FMM058 should be changed to read that 1150 homes will be delivered between 2025 and 2033 ...... and not before.

Full text:

These comments are made on the understanding that WPC have legitimate objections to this site being included in the VALP, and elected councillors expect and hope the Inspector will reopen the hearing sessions to properly examine Shenley Park’s inclusion, after comparison with the alternative sites.
PHASING.
It is totally unrealistic for Buckinghamshire Council (BC) to predict delivery of 50 homes on this site within 2020 - 2025 - a period end date which is already under 4 years away.
AECOM are wrong to say in the SAA (bullet 3, para.5.3.8) that Salden Chase is a committed site - it is not yet, and it's access is dependent on an appeal that does not open until May 2021. Realistically a decision will not be made till later this year, and that decision may or may not pave the way for FMM058 to follow because it's access is fundamentally the same, being dependent upon existing over capacity on the A421 being resolved (at peak times). Only if the Salden Chase site is finally approved can Shenley Park be considered safe to include in the emerging VALP, which realistically will not be adopted until end 2021, if the further Hearing Sessions are required. Thereafter BC have made it abundantly clear that further traffic and transport investigations are required , both for potential dualling to the A421 and rat-running through Whaddon village which, depending on monitoring results, may require lengthy consultation with third parties including residents - especially if road closures are anticipated - which would appear to be the case. Before a reserved matter/detailed planning application can be submitted, Whaddon and others have been assured that a detailed Development Design Brief will be submitted for consultation. These are not simple or straightforward issues, involving many specialist subjects, some of which may have commenced (archaeological investigations?), but others not. The question of road connections into Milton Keynes has yet to be agreed, as have the detailed discussions on CIL/Section 106 payments, which are yet to be finally negotiated - a tricky and difficult subject that has already put elected members of both local authorities 'on their serious guard', so as not to be left 'out of financial pocket'..... not forgetting the agreement to be reached on the ownership and maintenance agreements, in perpetuity on POS etc. Once all these issues have been approved and adopted, the planning application process can realistically commence. Approval will inevitably follow some months later and only thereafter can the advance infrastructure commence leading to the construction of drainage, roads, balancing lakes, biodiversity areas, etc. Thereafter the first houses will begin to rise - a process in itself that will take a full year to complete 50 homes.
CRITERIA : h : f : o : p : q & v
Until the outstanding Objection to this site is finally determined, preferably following proper debate and examination at a future 'Hearing Session', WPC believes their Objection on these points must remain in place.
However it should be said that if FMM058, Shenley Park remains within the VALP after proper process has been followed, then the suggested revisions to the site specific requirements, as detailed in these six criteria make absolute sense, and would be fully supported by this council on the understanding that the community is fully involved in the shaping of future planning decisions both through consultation on both the design brief and detailed planning application.

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