Forum Home Forum Home > Chalfont St Peter > Holy Cross Development
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Possible Plans to scrap Housing Scheme
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Possible Plans to scrap Housing Scheme

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
PCSO Brennan View Drop Down
TVP
TVP
Avatar

Joined: 29 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote PCSO Brennan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Possible Plans to scrap Housing Scheme
    Posted: 26 July 2010 at 9:02am

Unpopular housing plans for Chalfont St Peter to be scrapped?

Jul 20 2010 By Jack Abell

CHILTERN District Council (CDC) has come under pressure to scrap its controversial plans to build hundreds of new homes in Chalfont St Peter after the new government announced that it wants to scrap Labour housing targets.

Eric Pickles, the new secretary of state for communities, has written to all local authorities in England, informing them of his intention to ditch regional strategies.

This in theory frees councils from central government housing targets placed on them by Gordon Brown's Labour government.

Chalfont St Peter had been threatened with having hundreds of new homes built in the village, many of which would likely have been built on the historic Holy Cross site.

This has caused huge concern in the village and there was fear that it would end up altering the character of the village beyond all recognition.

Action groups have been set up to fight the plans, and the parish council has produced a Village Design Statement to present to CDC, which they feel offers a viable alternative to building hundreds of homes on the former site of the Holy Cross convent school.

CDC has always maintained that the hugely unpopular plans have been forced upon them by Labour, but now that the new government has told of its wish to scrap them, campaigners say that CDC should follow the government's lead and ditch the plans for good.

Richard Allen, chairman of Chalfont St Peter parish council, said: "I strongly welcome the letter that the secretary of state sent to councils, but there is some doubt as to its legal status.

"All of the excuses that the Conservative run CDC have put forward about oppressive Labour housing numbers are just a smoke screen for the fact that they have chosen Chalfont St Peter as an area that will take houses for the District.

"It’s obvious from the Core Strategy that CDC have as a policy objective the building of houses in Little Chalfont and Chalfont St Peter.

"Now that the Labour policies have been scrapped they won’t be able to hide behind them”

“I know from speaking to residents that Chalfont St Peter expects to see our local Conservative District Councillors oppose the current housing plans.”

 
 


Edited by PCSO Brennan - 26 July 2010 at 9:03am
Chalfont Common & Central | Goldhill & Austenwood
Chiltern South NHPT
Non Emergency Number: 08458 505 505

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Number42 View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 11 August 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Number42 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 July 2010 at 1:12pm
Good article.
 
But the information we have is that CDC plan to go ahead ANYWAY, including intending to accept the proposals for Holy Cross at the planning meeting on 5th August!. 
 
This is despite hunderds of objections being sent by their deadline of 21st July - none of which have been replied to let alone the points answered or countered.  What's the rush?  It smacks of a deal with the developer - especially now the new government is insiting, quite rightly, that all local developments must be accepted only after full and proper local consultation. 
 
And we should take time to investigate the other options, particularly a school land swap, to make best use of the resources and improve the village.
 
You might hear Nick Rose, CDC Leader, (he lives in Great Missenden, where NO new houses are proposed!) claim that they "have" to build a lot of houses here because otherwise they will be "forced" to accept all planning applications - what a load of tosh!
 
Naturally the objections will intensify, including a Judicial Review if they do proceed, because they have not followed proper proceedure in many ways. Angry
 
That's the answer - what's the question?
Back to Top
oldchris View Drop Down
Chalfont Oracle
Chalfont Oracle
Avatar

Joined: 09 December 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldchris Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 July 2010 at 2:21pm
swampy and his mate's at the ready, tree houses anyone, but i think you need planning permission for them now.
Back to Top
Eric View Drop Down
Sandbox
Sandbox
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eric Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 July 2010 at 12:48pm
I notice that Cheryl Gillan has gone silent on this since the election. Complete silence since the pre-election meeting at the Community College when she said "just vote Tory and it will never happen". So much for her form of NIMBYism.
Back to Top
phisch21 View Drop Down
Chalfont Oracle
Chalfont Oracle
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1712
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote phisch21 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 July 2010 at 3:19pm
NEVER trust a politician

Edited by phisch21 - 28 July 2010 at 3:19pm
Back to Top
oldchris View Drop Down
Chalfont Oracle
Chalfont Oracle
Avatar

Joined: 09 December 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldchris Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 July 2010 at 4:01pm
this goverment is no better than the last one.
Back to Top
J.R. View Drop Down
Chalfontonian
Chalfontonian
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 553
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote J.R. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 July 2010 at 9:01am
Originally posted by oldchris oldchris wrote:

swampy and his mate's at the ready, tree houses anyone, but i think you need planning permission for them now.
 
Might not be a bad idea - he grew up in Hazlemere and his parents still live there....
JR was ere
Back to Top
Number42 View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 11 August 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Number42 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 July 2010 at 6:04pm
Originally posted by oldchris oldchris wrote:

swampy and his mate's at the ready, tree houses anyone, but i think you need planning permission for them now.
 
Very funny - except the latest application includes chopping down 100 trees to make way for all those new 'dwellings' - seriously!
 
Perhaps you could get Swampy along to the CDC Council offices before (or for) the planning meeting at 6pm 5th August - and indicate his intention to take protests seriously?
 
As many people as possible should go to that meeting to show their annoyance.  SENSE are organising a 'peaceful' protest.
That's the answer - what's the question?
Back to Top
Number42 View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 11 August 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Number42 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 July 2010 at 6:14pm
Originally posted by Eric Eric wrote:

I notice that Cheryl Gillan has gone silent on this since the election. Complete silence since the pre-election meeting at the Community College when she said "just vote Tory and it will never happen". So much for her form of NIMBYism.
 
 
I'm no fan of politicians, but tjis time it should be clear: she delivered what she said she would.
 
Actually she delivered exactly and completely on what she promised: a complete change of policy whereby the imposition of high volume housing was being imposed from central government, replaced by a policy where developments would be decided by local people.
 
It is the planners at CDC who are blithely ignoring the change of policy and ploughing ahead despite the overwhelming protests and despite the fact that they have no evidence for need or desire.
 
Did you see the article in the Advertiser (page 3)?  CDC planners must be made to block this, or at very least defer a decision until there has been time to consider other options.  Apart from the schoold land swap, the most favoured one, there are other options.  There is no rush, unless maybe the CDC planning people are waiting to get their back-handers before Christmas.
 
Everyone, go to the planning meeting at 6pm on 5th August at CDC's offices in King George V Road, Amersham.  Let them know your objections by being there and waving a flag - or something.  SENSE may even be producing some placards.  Now's the time! 
 
Or you could just stay at home.
 
 
 
 
That's the answer - what's the question?
Back to Top
Number42 View Drop Down
Villager
Villager
Avatar

Joined: 11 August 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Number42 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 August 2010 at 11:14pm
Latest news is that Sport England, which insisted on protecting the playing field at the  Holy Cross site, has pointed out to the developers and to CDC's planners that they have not allowed a proper amount of space - they have only allowed for a hockey pitch size, but the definition of playing fields includes the grassy areas around it - AND there are two play areas, taking up 1.2 hectares in total, about 20% of the site, which will have to be preserved as amenity space under ANY plan. 
 
This is a significant development and will mean that even fewer houses can be built there.  It certainly means that CDC should not be able to approve the planning application as it currently stands come this Thursday.  Indeed, the planning department have once again demonstrated their incompetence by not checking the size - apparently they just asked the nuns!
 
That's the answer - what's the question?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.05
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.