Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

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 - D-HAD007 Land north of Rosemary Lane

Representation ID: 2656

OBJECT FCC Environment represented by Sirius Yorkshire (Joanna Berlyn)

Summary:

With regard to further education, Haddenham is identified as a problem area with 700 homes required to secure a S106 for a whole school. It is therefore questionable whether the allocation at this settlement is deliverable given the obligations that may be placed on it with regard to infrastructure provision, particularly in relation to schools.

More details about Rep ID: 2656

Representation ID: 2599

OBJECT Natural England (Ms Kirsty Macpherson)

Summary:

Section of these sites contain BMV
land. In order to preserve as much
BMV land as possible and use
areas of poorer quality agricultural
land these areas should the focus of
strategic GI.

More details about Rep ID: 2599

Representation ID: 2125

SUPPORT Historic England (Mr Martin Small)

Summary:

we welcome criterion g as part of the positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of, and the clear strategy for enhancing, the historic environment required by paragraphs 126 and 157 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

More details about Rep ID: 2125

Representation ID: 1750

OBJECT Persimmon Homes Ltd., and CALA homes Ltd represented by Turley Associates (Mr Christopher Roberts)

Summary:

The Proposed Submission Local Plan now envisages that 315 dwellings can be
delivered on the southernmost land parcel. This has increased from 210 dwelling as
previously envisaged and as supported in the HELAA (2016). The proposal to increase
quantum of development at the southern extent of the site, has the potential to cause
harm to the setting of the Haddenham Conservation Area and the listed buildings
denoted in Figure 3 below. There is nothing in the Council's evidence base to suggest
that this matter has been considered.

More details about Rep ID: 1750

Representation ID: 1747

OBJECT Persimmon Homes Ltd., and CALA homes Ltd represented by Turley Associates (Mr Christopher Roberts)

Summary:

The site is currently allocated for 315 dwellings. The allocation is supported, however it
is considered that it should being extended further to the north

More details about Rep ID: 1747

Representation ID: 1696

OBJECT Richborough Estates represented by RPS Planning & Development (Mr Cameron Austin-Fell)

Summary:

HAD007 had been increased northwards and the yield increased by 200 dwellings, concerned about this increase, this doesn't appear to be justified and contradicts previous conclusions in the 2016 HELAA. This extended boundary does not utilise existing field boundaries and there is presently no certainty over how the site will fit into the setting of the village. The northern boundary of the village was something that featured in the application of Richborough Estates land at Haddenham, which recognised the need for appropriate landscape buffering, however RPS remains unconvinced that this has been factored into the Council's considerations.

More details about Rep ID: 1696

Representation ID: 1484

OBJECT Thames Water (Sir/ Madam )

Summary:

The supply required for the proposed scale of development is a significant additional demand in the Water Resource area. Currently the mains that feed the Water Resource area are running close to capacity. So a development will be required to provide an impact study of the existing infrastructure. Also wastewater network capacity in this area is unlikely to be able to support demand anticipated from this development. Strategic drainage infrastructure is likely to be required.

More details about Rep ID: 1484

Representation ID: 965

OBJECT Mrs Alysoun Glasspool

Summary:

Insufficient assessment of the site has been undertaken and of alternative sites. VALP Assessment of Reasonable Alternatives refers to the proximity of HAD007 to a conservation area; the development ''may affect the setting of the conservation area''. The VALP SA Report, p 89, 10.7.3. includes this note: ''It is . . . at Haddenham where the decision to support higher growth leads to concerns. This on the basis that the proposed expansion north of the village (315 homes) borders the northern edge of the conservation area, with a number of grade 2 listed buildings in proximity.'' We share these concerns.

More details about Rep ID: 965

Representation ID: 955

OBJECT Thame Town Council (Mr Graeme Markland)

Summary:

No evidence exists of cooperation between the Vale, Buckinghamshire County Council, South Oxfordshire District Council and Oxfordshire County Council on the matter of secondary education provision. Allocations and commitments in the catchment area, including from windfall, are considerable.

More details about Rep ID: 955

Representation ID: 918

SUPPORT Jake Collinge Planning Consultancy Ltd (Mr Jake Collinge)

Summary:

This representation is distinct from 780 and 917 that have been submitted on behalf of the owner of land to rear of 14 Townsend, Haddenham and also forming part of D-HAD007.

This representation is on behalf of Aston Hill Land Ltd, who have an interest in the remainder of the site and who support the principle of the allocation of the site for residential development and can confirm (as evidenced by the current outline planning application) that the site is suitable, available and deliverable for residential development.

More details about Rep ID: 918

Representation ID: 780

OBJECT Jake Collinge Planning Consultancy Ltd (Mr Jake Collinge)

Summary:

Objection is raised to the details of D-HAD007 on the basis that the identification of land to the rear of 14 Townsend as a 'not built development' area is unjustified and irrational in planning terms, and reduces the efficiency and effectiveness of housing delivery on D-HAD007.

More details about Rep ID: 780

Representation ID: 620

OBJECT Rosemary Lane Action Group represented by Rosemary Lane Action Group (Mr Peter Weatherhead)

Summary:

The proposed allocation is unsound because it is not adequately justified, not effective and is inconsistent with national policy. It is inconsistent with national policy relating to heritage and agricultural land, has adverse landscape impact and is unsustainable. There are also deliverability issues relating to water supply infrastructure and flooding.
The site was thoroughly assessed as part of the Neighbourhood Plan site selection exercise and was found to be unsuitable for development, poorly related to community facilities and amenities and would have significant impact on the setting of the conservation area. This judgement remains sound.

More details about Rep ID: 620

Representation ID: 550

OBJECT Haddenham Village Society (Mr Graham Tyack)

Summary:

The 'Site Criteria' for HAD007 para h on page 124 requires 'further provision of pedestrian and cycle linkages through the site and into the village including along Churchway, to the train station and with connections with the adjoining approved airfield development if appropriate and possible'. If these connections cannot be provided, the selection of this site is unsound. Many of the residents on this site are likely to use the train station for commuting to work and, without the link, they would need to use cars for access to the station, aggravating existing parking problems near the station.

More details about Rep ID: 550

Representation ID: 409

OBJECT Mr & Mrs Richard Hirst

Summary:

Many of the residents on this site are likely to use the train station for commuting to work. Without a direct road link to the station, and with a pedestrian and cycle link which may not be provided, the development is unsustainable and its inclusion in the Plan is unsound.

More details about Rep ID: 409

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult