Plans to increase housing in CSP |
Post Reply | Page <1 3233343536 37> |
Author | |
Blether
Sandbox Joined: 29 October 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 8 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi Barn Owl / Number 42. I've just looked at the Agenda on the VDS website http://www.villagedesignstatement.com/ & there is no time allocated to a Q&A session with the developer..... when will this be taking place please? Thanks? Edited by Blether - 05 November 2009 at 10:31am |
|
Sponsored Links | |
Number42
Villager Joined: 11 August 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Anyway, to introduce some balance: I'm sure that anyone who actually supports the developer's plans for Holy Cross (or all the CDC's development plans) will be welcome too. I'm sure we don't want a Nick Griffin type Question Time. Do we?
And whilst I'm on, a point to note is that CDC's original plans for Holy Cross had 400 new dwellings there - they have told us that if there are actually fewer then they would take up the difference at other sites in Chalfont St Peter, mainly Newlands Park. So this remains a fight against CDC's proposals for 700-800 new dwellings being imposed on the village (or support, if you prefer).
|
|
That's the answer - what's the question?
|
|
Barn Owl
Villager Joined: 12 August 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 336 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Apologies and clarification:
I am not a member of the Parish Council. I am merely a resident in CSP and I oppose the development. So my post was from my point of view.
If anyone wishes to campaign in favour of the development, they are of course free to do so.
The meeting on Saturday is to further the village design statement. Its central purpose is not to debate the pluses and minuses of the proposed development. Its focus is to put together a vision of the furture of our village, how we wish to see it develop, and to get as much feedback from local people as possible.
|
|
Number42
Villager Joined: 11 August 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
[/QUOTE]
I would suggest the use of slightly more realistic numbers. For example, Leachcroft is about 40 per hectare, Hill Farm 50 per hectare, Lovel Road, Nicol Road. The Vale, Fieldway area maybe 30 per hectare. This means that the developer could use any of these areas as existing practice in the village.
Art [/QUOTE]
I was trying to answer your question 'why so many flats?' - because after taking offf space for the new convent and new nun's homes and for the community use building and access and parking and for the proposed care home and access and parking ... to fit about 300 dwellings in the remaining space, including access and parking, would surely involve a lot of flats - I think.
Answering your comment about dwelling densities: yes, being realistic is good, but I am only stating the facts. These will be posted on the VDS and new parish council web sites shortly for everyone to reference.
Briefly, people can check the figures quoted and the maps on the CDC web site under Planning/ Population Information/ Parish Fact Sheets/ Chalfont St Peter:
The parish is 1,610 hectares and has 4,665 dwellings so that's under 3 dwellings per hecatare on average.
Of course, there are fields and green belt areas, but the built-up part is 30% of the parish, as you kindly confirmed, so that's 483 hectares for 4,665 dwellings (ignoring any outside the 30% area) so that's just under 10 dwellings per hectare on average in the village at the moment.
We need to understand that that figure is not simply the dwelling density of an area where there are only houses, but includes all the things that make up the village and make it work: schools, hospital, open spaces, access roads, shops, leisure centre etc. I would argue that if there is expansion then that's the target, to maintain the ratio of houses to resources to serve them.
As you say, another approach on dwelling density figures is to look only at houses. Using Google Map and the detailed maps available at the Bucks CC web site the housing density of properties immediately adjoining the Holy Cross site varies from under 10 (Meadowcroft) to just over 30 (Market Place) dwellings per hectare. There may well be other more dense areas of housing in the village, and there are certainly less dense areas too.
Let's be clear, we (well, most of us!) are not against expansion on some scale, provided it is in keeping with what exists OR improves it. Yes, let's have some more new homes and some more affordable housing if that's what residents want, but please, not the volume and density which CDC are trying to foist on us when the load should be more fairly and equitably spread across the whole district (which, by the way, is what the parish councils of Amersham and Chesham both voted for last year: more on their own patches!).
With apologies for the little rant at the end ... just my opinion. We'll see what others think.
|
|
That's the answer - what's the question?
|
|
Number42
Villager Joined: 11 August 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
[/QUOTE]
Hi Barn Owl / Number 42. I've just looked at the Agenda on the VDS website http://www.villagedesignstatement.com/ & there is no time allocated to a Q&A session with the developer..... when will this be taking place please? Thanks?[/QUOTE] I understand the plan is to do that within the first session - in the first hour.
We have a list of about 30 questions already - obviously, not enough time to go through them all even if it took all morning!
|
|
That's the answer - what's the question?
|
|
Flyboy
Villager Joined: 27 June 2009 Status: Offline Points: 346 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Any developments from the meeting today? Unfortunately, I was stuck at Tempelhof all morning and only just got back.
|
|
Number42
Villager Joined: 11 August 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
'Only' about 200 showed up, mainly, I imagine, to see the man from Gerald Eve, the HC developing agent. He faced some tricky questions and fielded most of them by saying that the detail isn't yet agreed, that questions will be addressed, but that outline planning application (expected December 24th!) doesn't require much detail, such as access points and traffic and environmental impact assessments, etc.
A possible new opposition action group along the lines of SENSE used to fighting the NSE development proposals - could be nunsense though.
And an interesting presentation from a 'green' group about options for a more sustainable environment in respect of new developments (see also the Global Warming film thread).
|
|
That's the answer - what's the question?
|
|
Chilternman
Villager Joined: 21 November 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 146 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have just joined this forum and don't know enough about this housing development although I have just received a questionaire which has several questions about it. Despite being born here for over 50 years ago I have not been in the grounds of the convent and don't know the size of it but 400 is a small village on it's own.
I read in todays news that across Britain there are 300,000 empty homes so why the need for any more, go back to my childhood and look at the pretty village we had and then look at the mess we have now, at busy times you cannot move for traffic and cars are parked on every road all day long. To allow any further housing is a wrong move so that we can stem the flow of destuction to the character of our village. If further development is allowed at the rate it has been over the last 50 years then what will it be like in another 50.
We need a government who will stop the flow of migrants into this country because it is not big enough to cope, we are quite capable of increasing the population on our own without hundreds of thousands of people pouring in from abroad. Maybe then we would not need to keep building, and there would be enough homes to go around.
Think of the huge increase in activity that the infrastucture would never cope with, our hospital is already threatened with closure and they are thinking of adding more to our population.
If any building is undertaken then it should enhance the village not help to destroy it, a few houses with maybe some retirement homes and some affordable housing is about it. Make the area a new little community if it has to be but no more than say 30 houses so that some space is left.
In my opinion it should be left as is and the buildings put to good use, is the old Grange building still in there??
|
|
Number42
Villager Joined: 11 August 2009 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Welcome to the Forum Chilternman.
If you have time to go back through this thread you will learn a lot, about the Forum, and about the development plans.
Many agree with you that the site should be developed but in a way that enhances the village, but of course this conflicts with the owners getting maximum financial return from developing the site, so it's a matter of how effectively we can fight it. The Parish Council are on the case (see the survey, and the web site:
And watch out for a new action group called SENSE, who successfully defended the development plans at NSE.
|
|
That's the answer - what's the question?
|
|
Barn Owl
Villager Joined: 12 August 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 336 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
http://www.sense4csp.org.uk/
If anyone wants the contact details of the guy heading up to opposition group, please send me a private message.
|
|
Post Reply | Page <1 3233343536 37> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |