Category Archives: Cherwell Council

Send a letter to oppose the developments on Southam Road (BAN2)

BAN2, Banbury Local Plan, CDC Localism Act, Cherwell Council, Cherwell District Council, HFDAG, Rapleys

To send a letter this letter to Cherwell District Council to oppose the development of 880 houses around Southam Road simply fill in a few details and press send

    Dear Tracey Morrissey

    Ref: 13/00158/OUT & 13/00159/OUT

    I strongly OBJECT to these plans. They breach the councils original agreement for the development of Hanwell Fields that were implemented by the developers at the time of building.
    The Hanwell Fields design brief 2007 stipulated the following:
    “P2. point 1.3.1 Location.
    The land allocated for development at Hanwell Fields is located on the northern extremity of Banbury and will form the new urban edge to this side of town. The objective is to create an urban form and new urban edge which appears organic in character, relating to land form and local colour and therefore specifically distinctive as Banbury”

    “P2. point 1.3.2 Prospect.
    The topography of the site affords extensive views generally northerly over the Area of High Landscape Value. From the proposed westerly neighbourhood park a 270 degree panorama may be enjoyed. Development should be located so as to enable as many people as possible enjoy these views.”

    My house was purchased on the strong understanding that the Northern Boundary of Dukes Meadow Drive would not be built upon. This countryside is enjoyed by many people and it is what enticed us to the area in the first place. If these plans persist then we will no longer be an 'edge of town' development as again we have been assured in the past. I have a right to open space. The previous Cherwell plans, Draft Core Strategy 2010, Options for Growth Document 2008 and the Banbury and North Cherwell Site Allocations – Issues and Options 2006 all state this right to open space. By allowing this development infringes that right.
    Cherwell Council should be supporting the principle of the Northern Boundary as they are to the South with developments at Saltway. If this is given the green light then so should the proposed southern developments.

    This site is designated an Area of High Visual Impact, the impact of such prominent housing will have a negative effect on both house prices and saleability in an already declining market. Demand for housing in Cherwell is being grossly over judged by CDC. If such a demand was evident then why are so many houses still for sale in and around Banbury. Many on Hanwell Fields for 12 months or more. Also given that Bankside and Canalside have been granted permission to develop housing for nearly 5 years and yet not one brick has been laid. I object to the spoiling of a perfectly good environmental landscape to be replaced by urban sprawl.

    The site is unsustainable as it is too far from many aspects of Banbury, it encourages car use on what is considered a very over congested route. Allowing this development does not address or indeed fix this problem. There is a distinct lack of infrastructure to support such a number of houses.

    The manner in which this area has been selected has no bearing on the sustainability of the site, there are far better sites to develop housing around Banbury that have been selectively removed from the Cherwell Local Plan, these areas include Land West of Warwick Road and Saltway.

    The Traffic Assessment is out of date and unrealistic. Again the placement of the development only supports a greater dependency on car use.
    The employment listed in the TA document is Pro Drive. A specialist car engineering company, that employs specialist staff. The TA is therefore suggesting that any potential home owners on the development will also just happen to have the specialist skills required to obtain employment at Pro Drive. If they don't, then car use is required. Saltway would have the largest employment catchment area with both the first (Horton Hospital) and third (CDC) largest employers in Banbury within metres of the site and yet it's ignored and not listed on the CDC Local Plan.

    In reality, school pupils will not walk from the Eastern edge of the development to the Academy School on Warwick Road. It is too far, yes I understand their bold and noble view that we must encourage more exercise. However simply look at the traffic congestion at the Hanwell Fields Primary School for guidance on the real world. The primary school location on the planned development encourages car use from parents who won't be living on the estate. Many parents drop the children off at school on the way to work. Children will be dropped off in the lay-by opposite the planned location, whereby they will have to cross a very busy main road. Any accidents on this site will be the responsibility of the developers and the council.

    Hanwell Fields is still un-adopted, as a resident I have not received my full requirement of services. Cherwell Council have had 10 years to sort out this site. I have no confidence in them being able to effectively manage or deliver housing and services any better than the appalling treatment we get now.

    I would like to discuss these plans with the planning inspector or at least have some sort of representation, I have a right to do this. I also have a right to be supported by the council as ultimately they SHOULD have my concerns in mind and represent me and other Hanwell Fields residents and not the developers. It appears the council have collaborated with the developers to try and get this plan pushed through no matter what the implications or the thoughts of those most affected.

    Regards

    Your Name (required)

    Address 1

    Address 2

    Town

    Postcode

    Your Email (required)

    Enter the answer below

    Just to prove we are not scaremongering…

    BAN2, BAN5, Banbury Local Plan, CDC Localism Act, Cherwell Council, Cherwell District Council, HFDAG, Housing, Persimmon Homes

    I know I don’t have to, but this just proves how we are right with our facts, and that we are not scaremongering as we have been accused.

    This is an extract from the official Thames Valley Police response to the Persimmon Developments.

    Directly related to the proposed development
    There is a functional link between the new development and the contributions requested. Put simply without the development taking place and the subsequent population growth there would be no requirement for the additional infrastructure. The additional population growth will lead to an increase in incidents, which will require a Police response.

    The infrastructure identified above has been specifically identified as infrastructure required to deal with the likely form, scale and intensity of incidents that the development will generate.

    The Police are also requesting money for ANPR cameras, Remote IT facilities and Bicycles to provide adequate policing for the area.

    Send a letter to object to the Persimmon Homes plan for 350 homes North of Hanwell Fields

    BAN5, Banbury Local Plan, Cherwell Council, Cherwell District Council, HFDAG, Persimmon Homes, Uncategorized, , ,

      Your Name (required)

      Address 1

      Address 2

      Town

      Postcode

      Your Email (required)

      Enter the answer below

      To send the following letter to Cherwell Council to object to the Persimmon Plan simply fill in your details and press send.

      Dear Jane Dunkin

      Ref: 12/01789/OUT

      I strongly OBJECT to these plans. They breach the councils original requirement for the development of Hanwell Fields that was agreed by the developers at the time of building. Furthermore and for this reason my house was purchased on the strong understanding that the Northern Boundary of Dukes Meadow Drive would not be built upon.

      This countryside is enjoyed by many people and it is what enticed us to the area in the first place. If these plans persist then we will no longer be an 'edge of town' development as again we have been assured in the past. Cherwell Council have fought this development once before, it went to appeal and lost. Nothing has changed from that previous attempt.
      Cherwell Council should be supporting the principle of the Northern Boundary as they are to the South with developments at Saltway. If this is given the green light then so should the proposed southern developments.

      The proposed height of the buildings by persimmon implies condensed, overbearing and claustrophobic living. We have a right to green, open space, by allowing this development infringes that right. I object to the spoiling of a perfectly good environmental landscape to be replaced by urban sprawl.

      The visual impact of such prominent housing will have a negative effect on both house prices and saleability in an already declining market. Demand for housing in Cherwell is being grossly over judged by CDC. If such a demand was evident then why are so many houses still for sale in and around Banbury. Many on Hanwell Fields for 12 months or more. Also given that other areas of Banbury have been granted permission to develop housing for nearly 5 years and yet not One brick has been laid.

      I would like to discuss these plans with the planning inspector or at least have some sort of representation, I have a right to do this. I also have a right to be supported by the council as ultimately they SHOULD have my concerns in mind and represent me and other Hanwell Fields residents and not the developers. It appears the council have collaborated with the developers to try and get this plan pushed through no matter what the implications or the thoughts of those most affected.

      The site is unsustainable as it is too far from many aspects of Banbury, and it encourages car use on what is considered a very over congested route. Allowing this development does not address or indeed fix this problem. There is a distinct lack of infrastructure to support such a number of houses.

      The manner in which this area has been selected has no bearing on the sustainability of the site, there are far better sites to develop housing around Banbury that have been selectively removed from the Cherwell Local Plan, these areas include Land West of Warwick Road and Saltway.

      Hanwell Fields is still un-adopted, as a resident I have not received my full requirement of services. Cherwell Council have had 10 years to sort out this site. I have no confidence in them being able to effectively manage or deliver housing and services any better than the appalling treatment we get now.

      These plans will be rejected if common sense prevails.

      Amber Development 160 houses

      Amber Developments, BAN5, Banbury Local Plan, CDC Localism Act, Cherwell Council, Cherwell District Council, HFDAG, Housing, Localism Act, Persimmon Homes, , ,

      Here are the proposed plans by Amber Developments for 160 (max) properties to be built, in conjunction with the 350 planned by Persimmon in the fields next to this area. This is worse than first proposed which was 400 homes on the BAN5 site. Instead we are now looking at a possible total of 510 houses. Click the image below for a more detailed view

      Amber_master_plan

      To view all of the Amber Developments / Framptons Exhibition boards please click here

       

      14th Jan 160 houses on BAN5 Exhibition

      BAN5, Banbury Local Plan, CDC Localism Act, Cherwell Council, HFDAG, Housing

      Just to remind everyone that an exhibition of planned houses for BAN5 area takes place today at the Hanwell Fields Community Centre between 2pm and 8pm
      According to the press, they are looking to merge this development with the proposed Persimmon Development (350 Houses)
      Framptons – the planning consultants are looking for feedback about their plans, so please go and tell them.

      Miller Homes Proposed Developments

      BAN5, Banbury Local Plan, Cherwell Council, Cherwell District Council, HFDAG, Housing, ,

      Antony, Maggie and I went to see the MIller homes exhibition at the town hall on Friday. They are proposing 300 homes on the land of West of Warwick Road. It was really quite informative, and their proposal has certainly been well thought out. We have a few minor issues with it, but overall I think we should support this proposal even though it is not listed on the Cherwell Local Plan. Firstly this site is slightly more sustainable than BAN5 and definitely more than BAN2. Secondly it would further enforce Dukes Meadow Drive (DMD) as the Northern Boundary. More Importantly It highlights our concerns with the council not assessing proposed sites around the town on equal terms.

      exhibition_panels-2

      For instance, there is a site planned for Bretch Hill (BAN3) which is to the West of Banbury and directly below this Miller site, yet the council is saying the Miller site breaches the Western Boundary, yet the Bretch Hill one doesn’t, If you notice on the map it is actually more Westerly than the Miller site. Furthermore CDC are saying the Miller Site will have impact upon the Drayton Conservation Area (marked in green)…Whooaa hang on a minute the proposed Bretch Hill site has a much greater impact on it.
      I’m really beginning to think CDC have published the wrong map in the Local Plan, they must have used the map where developments shouldn’t happen.

      What most impressed us was the very fact that they had thought about the plans and done their research. When asked about schooling and education, they could answer with certainty, they have already had a meeting with the Academy school. It transpires that the school is looking to expand within the next 5 years to integrate a primary school and nursery. At the recent Persimmon exhibition they just shrugged their shoulders and said we’d throw some money at the Hanwell Fields Primary school.

      Our biggest concern with this development would be traffic down Dukes Meadow Drive to gain access to the town and Motorway. The suggestion was we can propose solutions to them…traffic calming etc etc, Our preferred solution would be to use access on the Hardwick Island, but an issue with tree conservation is preventing that. In the big scheme of things cutting down a few trees would resolve this and would certainly reduce traffic down DMD.

      The thing that struck me the most was their attitude, they didn’t come across as money grabbers and seemed concerned about the welfare of Hanwell Fields residents as much as their own. It was almost you help us and we’ll help you. None of the other developers were like that. Who’s to say if that will be true, but at least it seemed sincere.

      There are plans for allotments which would be useful for those that wish to grow their own, I know a number of members already have one around the area. I really don’t think we need any more sports pitches.

      I’d like to ask you all if you could fill in the feedback form on their website to help support it but mention the issue with traffic on DMD. The more people we can get to fill in this form the greater the chance this development happens rather than the 2 we are fighting.
      [Miller Homes Feedback Form]

      I would also encourage you all to visit their site and have a look at the plans
      [Miller Homes Website]