You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.
Representations on VALP Proposed Submission - 1.13
OBJECT Coda Planning (Mr Adam Murray)
Alongside the above discussion, it is further evident that there remains some
doubt as to the accuracy of the overall level of dwellings targeted to be
delivered within Aylesbury Vale over the plan period.
OBJECT South West Milton Keynes Consortium represented by Carter Jonas - Associate SWMK Consortium (Mr Brian Flynn)
We accept that Aylesbury should be the focus for development and do not object to this part of the housing strategy, albeit the rate at which the town will be able to deliver housing, given the scale of growth and the number of outlets will, in our view, require careful examination. However, for clarity and consistency, the summary of the housing strategy should also refer to the other development locations identified in Policy S2: Spatial Strategy for Growth, which includes the other strategic settlements and land on the edge of Milton Keynes
OBJECT September Properties represented by DLP Planning Limited (Ed Norris)
For the reasons outlined above, DLP submit that the housing strategy and
requirement as set out in Policy S2 is not sound in its current format. The VALP:
PS is not using the most up do date population figures to establish net migration
in Aylesbury and is not preparing for an appropriate level of market uplift. The
HEDNA is treating Aylesbury Vale differently to the rest of the HMA whereas it
should be subject to at least a similar 20% uplift.
OBJECT Bellway Homes represented by Turley Associates (Mr Christopher Roberts)
trajectories associated with the strategic allocations envisaged appear optimistic. This is particularly the case where there are a number of pre-requisite steps that must take place before an application can be fully planned for, let alone built out.
The strategy of relying on large allocations creates an associated requirement for significant new infrastructure, including new highway investments and strategic flood defences. Planning (in a coordinated manner) for such infrastructure will invariably be time-consuming and be contingent on complex technical studies. However, there is also marked uncertainty as to how the expense of providing the proposed infrastructure will be met.
OBJECT Newton Longville Parish Council (Mr Mike Galloway)
Whilst a new settlement is not currently proposed it is clear that a new
settlement near Haddenham would be a far better solution to the housing
need in the south of Aylesbury Vale and unmet need from the districts to the
OBJECT DIO represented by Jones Lang LaSalle (Mr Tim Byrne)
Paragraph 1.13 Housing states: "Some new homes are expected to be delivered at RAF Halton once the site closes".
This should be amended to reflect that 'The Council will work with the MOD and other stakeholders to prepare a master plan/SPD for the site to enable the full residential development potential of the site to be realised'.
OBJECT West Haddenham Landowners represented by Stina Hokby
In light of the increased requirement for housing in the Oxford Cambridge Corridor, the New Settlement Policy (D2) should be reinstated in the current VALP rather than being deferred to a later plan period.
SUPPORT Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Conservation Board (Dr Lucy Murfett)
The Chilterns Conservation Board supports the capacity-based approach.
This is better than imposing a mathematically-derived percentage growth on settlements, blind to their constraints. It allows for a distinction to be made between AONB and AONB-villages. It demonstrates regard to conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB; a legal requirement under Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
OBJECT Mr Alan Sherwell
I object to the inclusion of RAF Halton in the plan. The Council should be doing everything that it can to oppose the closure of Halton not using it as a convenient dump for housin.
SUPPORT Whaddon Parish Council (Ms Suzanne Lindsey)
WPC have strong views about proposed development adjoining Milton Keynes, which once built can only support that district's economy, rather than Aylesbury Vale, which should be the fundamental purpose of this plan. This response seeks to help the Inspector understand the Whaddon village position.
OBJECT Marrons Planning (Jane Gardner)
Specific reference has not been made to those major settlements, notably Milton Keynes and Bletchley, which adjoin the District. It should be recognised that land in this location (over and above that which is allocated) provides the opportunity for a sustainable approach to meeting housing need in the District in the form of one or more larger Sustainable Urban Extensions.
The suitability of these locations to accommodate development is acknowledged elsewhere in the Plan and it is therefore appropriate to include a similar statement in Paragraph 1.13
SUPPORT Pitstone Parish Council (Laurie Eagling)
1. Settlement Hierarchy and Development
The parish council would like to thank AVDC for now respecting made Neighbourhood Plans, and for amending their method of calculation for residential development in the villages to a fairer approach.
OBJECT Carmel Traynor
The plan repeatedly refers to "affordable " housing. Affordable to who? Elsewhere in the plan it refers to THE AVERAGE HOUSE PRICE IS TEN TIMES THE AVERAGE INCOME OF 2016 !!! I can see what the plan suggests doing about this.
SUPPORT Stewkley Parish Council (Dr Gill Morgan)
Stewkley Parish Council recognises that AVDC have responded to the issues concerning the fixed % presented in the earlier version of VALP as the mechanism to assign required number of new houses to large, medium and small villages and support the solution based upon sustainability that is presented in this VALP.
OBJECT Brocksmoor Projects Ltd (Mr Martin Wilkinson)
The comment about "some new housing" could be delivered at RAF Halton is particularly vague and troubling as without some set limit, this site could grow incrementaly without considering and dealing with adverse impacts to the infrastructure of Wendover, eg roads, parking, utilities, schools, health centre etc.
OBJECT The University of Buckingham represented by Delta Planning (Maria Sheridan)
Objection is raised to this approach to meeting housing need. It is considered that the approach adopted in earlier iterations of the Plan is a more sensible approach to providing sustainable patterns of development. The current approach means that some villages that were previously identified as suitable for providing housing development are now not identified