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 - 1.21
OBJECT Newton Longville Parish Council (Mr Mike Galloway)
The details in paragraphs 1.20 and 1.21 are not in compliance with government policy and guidance. The text requires modification to be sound and ensure it is positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy.
SUPPORT Mr & Ms David & Marianne Mr David Finch & Ms Marianne Faux
In respect of the Cheddington Neighbourhood Plan, the area already designated for development within the boundary of Cheddington is the only area which the residents of Cheddington have voted should be developed. Extra capacity is available on this site and therefore no other site in Cheddington should be considered for development.
OBJECT AOTRA (Mr Adrian Harford)
Redefine Town Centre boundary to comply with NPPF.
OBJECT Mr Martin Richmond
My objection to the plan is that it is not consistent with national policy. It actively discourages and undermines neighbourhood planning, a direct result of the way housing has been allocated. This is both because of the numbers allocated to different areas and to the fact that specific sites are imposed, the latter not being a strategic matter. I set out in my objection in more detail why I believe the plan is not consistent with national policy and give two amendments which will go part of the way to rectifying this.
OBJECT Cllr Warren Whyte
The proposals for further housing growth in areas of made neighbourhood plans is disappointing but the VALP goes beyond just allocating housing numbers to these areas - it takes over the authority of local parishes and town councils to update their plans and to locate this growth where they see most appropriate. While this is in Background section, this is also relevant to the site specific policies later in the VALP.