pennandtylersgreen.org.uk - Ashwells Development

Ashwells Development – Penn and Tylers Green Residents Society

Pennandtylersgreen.org.uk Spined HTML

AshwellsMinutiae– Penn and TylersUntriedResidents Society Penn and TylersUntriedRS HomeAbout Us Residents Society GrantsVillage VoiceVillage Pre SchoolCommon Wood LocationPenn and Tylers GreenHistory Village Life Education and ChildcarePlanning and Conservation Ashwells DevelopmentLocal Plans ( WDC & CDC)Stirring in the undergrowth …. a Penn School updateVillage developments Clubs, Societies, ServicesWalksPlaces to VisitTravelPoliceCouncilJointPolitySafety Latest News News and Views ContactGallery Churches and ChapelsCommonsCommon WoodFarmsGaragesGeneralGomm ValleyHallsHouses and CottagesKingswoodPenn Parish CouncilPenn TilesPharmacy, Surgery, Care HomePubsRayners (Penn School)SchoolsShops EtcWar Memorial Village Life » Planning and Conservation » AshwellsMinutiaeAshwellsMinutiae  Gomm Valley  –  “The Greenest New Place in England”  This is how the developers described their aspirations for Gomm Valley at their ‘Community Engagement and Design’ event held in the fields overdue the Perigrine Business Park over the weekend of 30 June/2 July.  This took the form of an exhibition illustrating the minutiae objectives, together with explanatory talks and Q&A.  The developer selected by Aviva (as landowner), is known as ‘Human + Nature’(H+N), which has assembled a team with strong credentials in the planning and diamond of sustainable communities. Proposals are still at pre-planning stage, and the aim was to present themes that would form the understructure for development, and share thoughts on these with the local community, inviting scuttlebutt that could then be taken into worth as the planning and diamond move forward.  The overarching themes are intended to enhance Gomm Valley’s special characteristics, through respect for landscape and ecology, sustainability, and untried transport, delivered through standing polity engagement in the diamond and wordage process.  The plans covered the valley zone south of Ashwells (which is to be ripened by a variegated team), incorporating some important deviations from WDC’sMinutiaeBrief, particularly with regard to the configuration of the Gomm Valley spine road and its connection with Cock Lane. In terms of impact on P&TG, H+N’s preference is to leave Cock Lane as single track, with the spine road reconfigured to join Cock Lane much remoter lanugo (opposite the Christmas tree yard).  The structuring of the spine road would respond to the topography, creating a slowly winding and tangled path through the valley.  The intention is to make the spine road an unattractive option for drivers looking for a rat-run lanugo to the A40. The contribution of GV&A to Wycombe’s future housing needs (as specified by the new Local Plan) is 520 new homes, of which 100 are on the Ashwells site.  This leaves 420 in Gomm Valley.  H+N propose a significant increase in this, to a icon potentially between 700 and 1,000 units, citing the megacosm of weightier value from the developable zone and a hair-trigger mass worldly-wise to support their proposed polity facilities.  They believe that this need not necessarily occupy a much worthier footprint than WDC’s plan,, as there will be increasingly flats (providing an increased number of smaller, increasingly affordable, homes).  This increase will place widow pressure on traffic volumes.  To mitigate this, H+N hopes to reduce car dependency by providing a small squadron of electric buses running a service to HW station at peak times. The focus of the new polity will be a village square with a mix of uses, including primary school, supported living, coffee shop, restaurant, bakery and convenience store. They moreover envisage co-working facilities such as ‘makerspaces’ and studios, car club/bike club, and a GP practice.  The square will unshut out to the valley to its north where there will be mindfulness grassland and play areas for children. The firsthand impression was that H+N seems to have a very variegated idea of how they want to unhook the project compared with that of WDC, but this needs to be tested for feasibility and deliverability.  It is expected that the Liaison Group will meet soon, for H+N to explain how they intend to move forward and for WDC to indicate their response.  All stuff well, an outline planning using could be submitted at the end of September, with the minutiae taking 7-9 years to complete. For remoter information, visit www.gommvalley.com (where there is an informative video). Ken Cooke Ashwells Forum comments on PlanningUsing18/05002/R9OUTE submitted on 23 February 2018 Pt 1 Illustrative Masterplan Please note Ashwells Forum includes members of the P&TGRS, CWPC and the three surrounding residents groups from Ashwells, Sandpits Lane, and Carter Walk/Wheeler Avenue) An outline using The Planning Statement makes it well-spoken that this outline planning using covers wangle and landscaping only, as ‘submitted matters’. All other aspects of the using are to be considered later as ‘reserved matters’ and so we make no scuttlebutt on them. A useful meeting with the applicants dealt with several detailed concerns which need not be repeated but for interested readers the summary Q? As are unelevated this editorial. The overall quality and comprehensive make-up of the information submitted with the using are to be commended. The proposal to reduce the number of dwellings from 125 to 102 is to be welcomed, and it is requested that this should wilt a ‘not-to-exceed’ figure. Need for aDiamondCode It is noted that the masterplan is only illustrative at this stage and that detailed proposals will be submitted in due course. In this context, the reputation of the planning and diamond proposals can be considered in unstipulated terms only. TheDiamond&WangleStatement indicates that proposals will be subject to aDiamondCode to be prepared during 2018. It is essential therefore that thisDiamondCode should be subject to a remoter public consultation process and tried prior to the prelude of detailed planning and design. Housing mix and ‘Affordable’ Homes The November 2016 scheme for Ashwells personal that the minutiae would “go some way to addressing the chronic shortage of new dwellings for first time buyers, families, and younger people”. In the public consultation response that followed, it was noted that the minutiae needed to provide a range of tenures and typologies that responded to local needs and provide decent homes of the right quality and at prices, people could afford. It was suggested that this might be achieved by the provision of ‘market’ dwellings of a size and price that will indulge younger locals to wilt part of the Ashwells community. The ‘Proving Layout’ submitted with the using provides a dispersal of the proposed housing mix. This is useful, but it fails to write the question of affordability. In an email mart with WDC’s Head of Major Projects & Estates Executive on 10 December 2017, it was stated that there was in existence a schedule of ‘estimated end values’, in other words, a projection of the likely selling prices of the houses as proposed in the masterplan. This needs to be made misogynist so that the local polity may scuttlebutt on how this responds to local needs. There has been no consultation with the local polity to establish what would be an towardly housing mix, and on this basis, the dispersal of housing numbers as proposed in the using can only be regarded as assumptions by the write-in for the purposes of infrastructure planning and needs to be re-visited through remoter public consultation. In this respect, it should be noted that the NPPF states that one of its key objectives is to “assist in empowering local people to shape, improve, and enhance their surroundings”. The Planning Statement proposes a multi-site tideway to the affordable housing provision, wideness Ashwells, Bellfield Road, and Desborough Road. It is proposed overall affordable housing provision for these 3 sites is to be achieved by allocating 100% of the bed spaces proposed for each of the Bellfield Road and Desborough Road sites, and zero% to Ashwells. The implication is that any clearance of Ashwells using is dependent on parallel approvals moreover for Bellfield Road and Desborough Avenue. This needs to be the subject of a review by the Planning Committee to ensure that the correct protocols for multi-site affordable housing provisions have been observed. Parking standards Visitor parking will be needed not just for the visitors to the new houses, but moreover for walkers and cyclists wishing to use the new wangle to the main valley and for the children’s play area. The 0.2 visitor space per household will not be sufficient. Footpath resurgence The FPs to Carter Walk and to the Horse and Groom need considerable improvement. Street Lighting We reiterate that residents have unceasingly voted versus street lighting and would not like to see it on the new development. Car Parking for the Middle School We are enlightened of the views of CWPC and the Middle School and support their unstipulated approach. Parking for the school on Cock Lane opposite the end of Kingswood Avenue results in a veiling bend. Yellow lines may be needed to prevent parking. ———————————————————————————————————— Ashwells Forum comments on PlanningUsing18/05002/R9OUTE su8bmitted by the Chairman Ashwells Forum, on 23 February 2018 Pt 2 Transport matters Widening Cock Lane We have unchangingly wonted that Cock Lane would need to be widened for the short northern stretch lanugo to the new Ashwells entrance. We understand from the applicants that widening withal the whole length of the Ashwells site has been included in this using considering of BCC’s insistence on the eventual remoter widening and the connection to the Spine Rd. We do not see that there is any understructure for agreeing, at this point in time, to any remoter widening of Cock Lane vastitude the new Ashwells junction. Transport ImpactTowage(TIA) At a meeting with Penelope Tollitt and David Anderson on 7 Nov 2017, Penelope Tollitt well-set with our interjection that the visualization to remoter widen Cock Lane and join it to the Spine Road must be contingent upon Traffic Impact Assessments for both the Ashwells and Gomm Valley developments. She well-set that, while only the Ashwells PlanningUsingwas available, it was not towardly to do any remoter widening. Christine Urry’s letter to Penelope Tollitt of 20 Sep 17 (penultimate para.) says much the same thing – that the TIAs are needed to demonstrate the impact on the local highway network in terms of topics and safety. We remoter note that there is once significant vestige in the Ashwells Planning Application’s TIA that supports our specimen for no remoter widening of Cock Lane and for no connection to the Spine Road. The TIA provides data that undermines the specimen stuff made by BCC and shows that it is unnecessary. 1) For Safety Reasons: BCC have stated that Cock Lane needs to be widened for reasons of highway safety (Para 3 of Christine Urry’s letter to Penelope Tollitt of 20 S5-year, but this TIA examines the 5-year history of reported accidents in Cock Lane and states the pursuit in section 3.7.8 : Given the fairly minimal number of incidents, the low severity and sparsity of recurring trends it is reasonable to conclude that there is not a significant highway safety problem within the vicinity of the site. It should moreover be noted that none of the 5 incidents recorded over the past five years occurred within the narrow section of Cock Lane. This TIA supports our contention that Cock Lane is a natural traffic calming route that is inherently safe. 2) Traffic Volumes: The TIA (Section 7.2.3) puts the increased traffic volumes resulting from the proposed minutiae into perspective Based on the results of the whilom exercise, the proposals can be expected to result in the pursuit vehicle trips, 60 (two-way) trips during the AM peak hour, and 64 (two-way) trips during the PM peak hour. It is considered that the predictable increase in vehicular traffic will not result in a material impact on the local highway network. Furthermore, Appendix E of the same report forecasts that out of the 60 trips only 26 will be through the single lane section that BCC wants to widen. However, it may be plane less since this forecast is based on a Wycombe-wide travel to work survey. Perhaps of increasingly relevance, is vestige from the existing Ashwells site where only 12% of the AM peak traffic goes through that part of Cock Lane, so the volume from the new minutiae could be increasingly like 7 vehicles/hour (12% of 60, 2 way basis). This TIA moreover supports (Sections 7.2.3 and 8.3.4) our view that there is no planning need for the Spine Road connection and widening of Cock Lane vastitude the new Ashwells junction. The figures presented support our unceasingly stated view based on Jacobs reports, vicarious by BCC and WDC, that the traffic movements from the developments themselves do not justify this since the TIA figures are plane lower (at 26 vehicles/hour max, quite probably just 7 vehs./hr.) than expected. Traffic calming in Cock Lane Christine Urry’s letter to Penelope Tollitt of 20 Sep 17 (Pg. 2, para 3) reveals a doubling of AM peak hour traffic withal Cock Lane by 2026, from 647 to 1,317 vehs/hr, as a result of connecting a widened Cock Lane to a new Spine Road. She moreover repeats the wording of WDC’sMinutiaeBrief in saying It is however important that this highway resurgence does not lead to a significant increase in traffic using Cock Lane and the new Spine Road, considering of the detrimental impact that would have on the village of Tylers Green. The widened section of Cock Lane will therefore be fitted with traffic calming to alimony traffic speeds low and limit the sexiness of the Spine Road to new traffic from remoter unsuitably whilst achieving a safer road with towardly onward visibility. No details of traffic calming in Cock lane have been proposed, but since both authorities towards to stipulate that traffic calming would unzip the aim of theMinutiaeBrief, we have to ask whether it is possible to produce inveigling vestige that it would be effective. We have retained the services of an experienced Traffic Consultant who confirms that there is scant vestige that traffic calming reduces the volume of traffic. It merely slows it lanugo and makes a contribution to road safety. To quote our consultant: ‘Traffic calming should unchangingly show a positive goody in terms of safety and that is the usual target for a TC scheme. I think there was some vestige in the 90’s re reduced flows but often highway authorities are less worried well-nigh traffic flows now so TC schemes are geared to reducing speeds.’ (Dermot McCaffery is a Member of the Institute of Highway Engineers and a Member of the Institute of Road Safety Officers. He has over 29 years’ wits in highway and transportation minutiae control). Traffic calming in New Road Many, though not all Forum members, had significant concerns over the proposed traffic calming measures in New Road by the use of chicanes. They can and will be circumvented by traffic taking slightly variegated routes (either siphon on withal B494 then turn when past the swimming and the First School to reach Cock Lane, or simply cut through the housing estates north of New Road, withal Rose Ave, Ashley Drive, Kings Ride and St John’s Rd). In both specimen this will create greater dangerous spare flows past and through sensitive areas used by young children going to school. In wing they will create noise and air pollution by making vehicles stop and start /accelerate. This is in nonobservance of Policy T13, referred to in section 2.2.1 of the TIA which says that traffic calming should enhance the environmental quality of the area. Moreover, they will be extremely dangerous road obstacles on an unlit road, and BCC have a policy that specifically forbids any speed bumps or other obstructions without street lighting. Residents have unceasingly voted versus street lighting in the village and will have to be consulted again, both on chicanes and lighting, if traffic calming is intended, Summary In summary, BCC and WDC have not demonstrated that they have a viable method of reducing the doubling of traffic volume that their Cock Lane widening linked to a Spine Road scheme is forecast to vamp past the Middle School, and so cannot unzip the aim of theMinutiaeBrief which is that there should be no significant increase in traffic using Cock Lane. This Ashwells using does in fact weaken their specimen which is based on three assertions that are not supported by factual data, namely: a) that Cock Lane needs to be widened for reasons of Highway safety b) that increased traffic from the developments provides the justification c) that traffic calming measures can prevent a significant increase in traffic In the light of this evidence, we urge WDC to ask BCC either to withdraw their insistence on the need for widening Cock Lane and connecting it to the Spine Road, or to provide evidence-based justification for it. We are ready to provide any detail required to justify our arguments well-nigh traffic flow. ————————————————————————————————————– This paper reports the meeting with Wycombe DistrictSteeringheld recently, with representatives from the Residents Society and Ashwells Forum. The discussion was based on the detailed planning using and the concerns raised by these Groups. (please note this is a long document!!) 1.Why does using show Bucks County Highways as the owner? Is it legally valid? CB said there was no problem considering using involves infrastructure work and Cock Lane widening so BCC is one of the owners. 2.Warrantysought that Cock Lane will not be widened south of the new lower wangle until without the Transport ImpactTowagefor the main Gomm Valley minutiae has been assessed. Widening is not their choice, but it is a Highways Authority requirement so they themselves can’t requite any assurance. Their Highways contacts are via Christine Urry and Mark Shaw. They would not do remoter widening unelevated the new wangle if they don’t have to since it would both save them money and stave Cock Lane stuff sealed for 3 months, but Planners may not want to lose the opportunity to get them to pay for widening slantingly all their land. On this basis, CB said that the inclusion of Cock Lane widening was simply what they thought they needed to do to obtain planning permission. We pointed out that the Ashwells TIA was well-spoken that there would be no problem from Ashwells for traffic volume or safety. We had been unpreventable by Penelope Tollitt that no visualization on widening would take place until the Gomm Valley TIA had been considered and then only if WDC’s aim that there should be no significant increase in traffic through the village was performable with traffic calming CB said Chinese walls had not permitted any special rundown from the Planners. He is happy to report the unveiled mismatch in intention between Planners and Highways, and if this could not be resolved at this time, it might be possible to create a reserve strip of the Ashwells land for use when and if the visualization is taken to widen the lane. 3. Similarly for any traffic calming measures remoter up Cock Lane and in New Road. Chicanes were their response to public feedback at the exhibitions, not a requirement from Highways. They were unaware of BCC regulations requiring street lights for chicanes, build-outs etc. We said no need for these measures if Cock Lane is not widened. Chicanes could encourage traffic to divert through other areas of the village.Well-setpublic consultation required.Upperspeeds lanugo New Road. Flashing speed warning signs could be useful. f 4. Why has the new lower wangle moved 50m remoter south, thus requiring widening of a longer stretch of Cock Lane? It was not washed-up to fit in a seventh self-build house, but to unzip vision splay to the north as well as to reduce the gradient at the start of the new wangle route. The infiltration swimming fits in there and is necessary to reservation run-off from the site. Savills will provide the Highway engineering drawing of that area. 5. Initial construction phase – entry should be via new lower wangle not through existing Ashwells They intend to use existing Ashwells entry as little as possible, only for initial construction traffic, plant, equipment, portacabins, which are required on site to construct the start of the new access. As soon as possible they will use the lower access. Cut and fill will be kept to a minimum although some needed to level the playing area. They will produce a hair-trigger path timing. 6. How can later exit-only via existing Ashwells be enforced? No easy answer. BCC require unimpeded wangle for emergency vehicles to the site. GK suggested traffic spritz the other way virtually would work better. 7. Phase minutiae – How to coordinate 5 (?) variegated builders. They are confident that this will be achieved. 8. House sizes too small for future changes in living patterns. This is up to the developers. Could be in theDiamondCode. 9.DiamondCode must be tried surpassing any detailed applications Yes, it will be. 10. Construction parking – concerns well-nigh effect on local roads and untried spaces surpassing parking on site is organised No need for any parking on local roads, eg. Carter Walk etc. We will have the phone no. of the Site Manager who should be contacted if any contractors start parking in local roads. 11 No pumped sewage route (and its 6m wide easement) on the usingStipulateit is an omission. A revised plan will be issued. Will probably follow the route suggested by GK [run round top of build site on the field side of Copse] – just need to be enlightened of tree root preservation needs. [Aerial view shows tree trunks often 3m to 4m from line of fence.] Noted the volitional straight line but longer route suggested by Bill Sadler. CB was worried well-nigh topics of pipe to meet needs. 12. Measures to prevent self-build house from over-looking existing Ashwells houses. Split-level trendy houses built into the hill, oriented to squatter downhill (south) with no windows towards existing houses. We asked for cross-section plans. They may be tailor-made rather than self-built. i.e several owners using the same builder. 13. Parking standards – we prefer Wiltshire County Council’s higher figure. Parking is needed not just for visitors to new houses, but moreover walkers/cyclists on the new FPs and untried space lanugo to the railway line. CB noted our snooping that the 0.2 visitor space typecasting would not meet the need. 14. Management of the untried space on site They have not got that far, but the Ashwells untried space would probably be managed separately from the main Gomm valley. A management visitor financed by new residents was possible or responsibility unsupportable by CWPC. Surrounding residents would like to see the involvement of CWPC in some capacity. 15. Why put the electricity sub-station at the NE corner of the site, rather than near the site entrance? Technical translating from SSE, but may be wrong. They will investigate. GK will moreover contact SSE. 16. The oak trees at the ends of the Sandpits gardens vest to the private owners and are not on the Ashwells land as shown on various plans.Stipulateplans are wrong and will be amended. 17. Parcel 9? No word from Aviva. Ransom strip so can impose some standards. Bridging the gas main may be a problem. 18. Policy for achieving long-term lower forfeit homes/shared probity housing specifically for locals. There is currently a big debate over the viability of shared ownership schemes. Social rented houses will be off-site but CB would like to provide some increasingly affordable starter homes for younger people with local connections and will push for WDC to forego some profit to indulge an towardly scheme on some of the 20x 2-bed houses. The inclusion of some ‘rural exception’ affordable homes need not be ruled out. To unzip off-site provision, CB aimed to run parallel planning consents for the Bellfield Road and Desborough road schemes. We need to zestful Katrina Wood and David Shakespeare. It was well-set that with prices likely to be very upper on the site (CB will provide a reprinting of the model figures for house values), we need a scheme that lasts in perpetuity, not just the initial purchase. CB would welcome precedents. KC, GK, and KB undertook to research. 19. Footpath work needed at Carter Walk end and at Horse & Jockey end. They will modernize these FPs and may work with CWPC to get some fences put back/ intruding trees cut back. We moreover need barriers that will indulge wangle for pushchairs but not motorcycles. 20. FP through wood or to one side? There were varying views well-nigh whether the path should run through the centre of the wood or between the fences of the new houses and the copse. The matter may well be decided by pursuit the route of the main sewer which requires a 6 m wide unshut space whilom it. An warranty was sought that no trees would be removed, but would be reduced in height, and an evergreen hedge planted on the northern whet of the copse. 21. There is a no street lighting policy on site and for any traffic calming, but is a BCC requirement for any traffic calming. (BCC Traffic Calming Portfolio 2007, p.5). No lighting is proposed for the new estate. 22. Car parking for Middle School. The School would like to have both the drop-off and car park schemes, but they are not uniform since the diamond has exits opposite each other. The drop-off scheme requires significant engineering and removal of trees and would not work as a pick-up point. CB is visiting the school then soon. CWPC owns the car park and has identified several changes needed. 23. Legal settlement of the existing boundaries of the Carter Walk/Wheeler Ave houses valuables on to the site. This is for prescriptive rights for Carter Walk houses who incorporated a strip of land over 30 years ago. It will be washed-up in due course. 24. Will the Noise-Sensitive Receptors R2 & R3 unquestionably be located in the gardens / on the houses in Wheeler Ave and Sandpits Lane, and R4 on top of the Middle School, as depicted inIcon10.1 [page 228] of the Environmental Statement (the Main Statement)? Do we/they have any nomination in this? These are notional depictions of points from which to assess noise levels on site. 25. Section 7.6 of the Environment Statement states that a “capture, rescue and translocation exercise will be required” to move snakes, toads, lizards, etc. from the construction zone to the surrounding habitat [which would include theWoodas the largest such proximal area], followed by the installation of reptile proof fencing to prevent such creatures from returning to the construction site. This would imply that theWoodshould be fenced off in order to meet site ecological needs. Does WDC intend to siphon out this obligation?Well-setthat the wood was the weightier place for this temporary fenced refuge during the infrastructure phase. 26. Traffic problems at the end of Kingswood Avenue from cars parking on the wrench outside Pightle Cottage between Barnes Corner crossroads and the Middle School. CB said that if there was a strong demand via the public consultation for yellow lines, they will add them. Timings At least a year until towers starts; 9 months for infrastructure; House towers 2/3 years. ——————————————————————————————————————- The outline planning using for the Ashwells development,  has now been submitted to Wycombe District Council. The using (Ref. 18/05002/R9OUT) can be viewed by going to www.wycombe.gov.uk and clicking on ‘Find a planning application’.   The Site Notice confirms the deadline for submitting comments is 26 Feb 2018. The Residents Society has prepared an overview, a detailed map of the proposed plan and a comprehensive list of all the documents that are misogynist on the WDC website. The pursuit vendible is to be published in the next edition of Village Voice. Please alimony returning to this page as we will add increasingly information as it becomes available. The Masterplan The using for Ashwells has been prepared and submitted by Savills on behalf of WDC, who own the land, for the erection of up to 102 dwellings (fewer than the 120  proposed in the Local Plan) and the Masterplan shows the proposed wangle roads, housing layout and public unshut space and landscaping.   The former chalk pit will moreover be retained and landscaped to add to the public unshut space.  Existing footpath wangle through the site will be retained or realigned.  The plan allows for the extension of the new road through the site to the south to connect with the neighboring minutiae zone of 6 houses (Parcel 9) of the Gomm Valley development. Houses The 102 houses will be made up of 16 x 4-bed, 59 x 3-bed, 20 x 2-bed and 7 self-build houses, in a combination of uninfluenced houses, semi-detached houses, and terraces, with a density on 4ha (10 acres) of 25.5 dwellings per hectare.  Parking standards will be 2 spaces per 2/3 bed dwelling, and 2.5 per 4-bed dwelling.  The visualisations show mostly traditional-looking 2-storey houses with a few of  2 1/2 stories.  The 7 self-build houses will be encouraged to prefer increasingly trendy designs.    The steering is looking at ways to include some starter homes/shared probity houses for first-time buyers with local connections.   It is an Outline using so no detail diamond is shown for the dwellings, but it is the Council’s stated aim to unzip good quality diamond and materials. Cock Lane The first thing completed will be the widening of Cock Lane between the pumping station/cemetery archway and the phone mast, from approx. 3.7 m to 6.0 m.    A new wangle road connects into the minutiae at the mid-point, well-nigh 50 metres remoter lanugo Cock Lane than previously illustrated.  A pedestrian crossing doubles as the only proposal for traffic calming on this section. Once the minutiae is completed the existing Ashwells exit will only be used for vehicles leaving the site.   All ingoing traffic will be via the new wangle road. Widening of Cock Lane south of the Ashwells site is not included in this application. Remoterdetails of any connection of Cock Lane to the proposed new spine road through to Gomm Road will be included in the Gomm Valley minutiae application.   Documents in this using make it well-spoken that there is no current safety issue with Cock Lane with only 5 slight injuries over 5 years, and none in the section we wish to retain as a single track.We are strongly opposing any such through-road connection or widening of Cock Lane south of the new wangle road. Construction The enabling works, towers the new wangle road and putting in groundworks and infrastructure, will all be carried out as Phase 1 of the development.  The Council’s aim is to well-constructed the infrastructure then dispose of serviced sites to housebuilders, with 7 serviced plots to self-builders. Construction traffic for the Phase 1 infrastructure works will use the existing Ashwells cul-de-sac access.  Construction traffic for subsequent phases will use only new wangle road.  Middle School & New Road Sensible proposals have been included for improvements to the pick-up and drop-off arrangements for Middle School. using the existing car park, with a inside island to navigate the lane to an improved footpath through the trees.    Another inside island is proposed for Barnes Corner where the children cross, with two chicanes to slow traffic remoter lanugo New Road each with illuminated bollards and signage. Documents &ScuttlebuttThere is a mass of 63 documents including a transport towage and construction management.   A useful list describing the content of all the 63 documents has been drawn up by Gerry King and can be found below.   Our initial impression is that the plans for the site itself are winning although we will have criticisms to make, and will vehemently oppose any suggestion of a widened through-route to the London Road. “The petition ‘Keep Cock Lane Single’ was sealed on 20th November with 539 signatures. Whilst many had predictable that this would be treated as a single-ward issue, causing a debate of the whole Council, WDC has decided it is a multi-ward issue that requires 8,000 signatures for a debate. We are in discussion with them well-nigh this decision.”             please click on the link unelevated to unshut the document. Ashwells Planning Applicn Doc Listing    ———————————————————————————————————————————— Gomm Valley & Ashwells Development Brief, meeting with Wycombe DistrictSteering20th June 2017 The full Report of the meeting and follow up with Penelope Tollitt, Head of Planning & Sustainability, is available. The final document will be presented to WDC Cabinet on 10th July and then to the Planning Inspector later in the year. ASHWELLS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS In November 2016 the pursuit comments well-set by the Ashwells Forum, which includes the PTG Residents Society, Chepping Wycombe Parish Council, County & District Councillors and neighbouring residents from Ashwells, Wheeler Avenue/Carter Walk, and Sandpits Lane, were submitted to Wycombe DistrictSteeringas there were real concerns well-nigh the proposed development. The full document is misogynist to read here. web-v-ashwells-development-proposals-18-nov-16 Gomm Valley & AshwellsMinutiaeBrief, July 2016 Comments well-set & submitted in October 2016, by the Ashwells Forum which includes the PTG Residents Society, Chepping Wycombe Parish Council, County & District Councillors and neighbouring residents from Ashwells, Wheeler Avenue/Carter Walk, and Sandpits Lane Overall scuttlebutt Wycombe DistrictSteeringissue theirMinutiaeBrief for the Gomm Valley & Ashwells developments, requesting residents submit comments by the end of October 2016. The Ashwells Forum well-set that the unenduring is well written, with spanking-new plans.  We particularly welcome the intention to set whispered in perpetuity the undeveloped land for a variety of uses and the proposed network of footpaths which we would like to see retain a rural finger rather than be given a tarmac surface. However, when we compare these proposals with those on which we were consulted in 2014 we find a dramatic increase in the scale of minutiae which alters the whole nature of the proposals. Parcel 9 has been widow without any justification. We note sadly that it isWeightierand Most Versatile agricultural land. Parcel 11, has been added, despite stuff shown on Fig 3.12 as stuff in a increasingly visible zone of the site when looking from outside.    It is moreover considerably higher ground than the existing Ashwells houses and so will overbear and overlook them. Parcels 7 & 8 have moreover been widow for minutiae and this reduces the separation between communities from the older 600m to less than 200m. This is not sufficient to unzip the ‘crucially important sense of separation’ required (5.4).the full document is misogynist to read here: web-v-ashwells-development-brief-oct-16-002                            Posted by admin at 3:53 pm Search Ashwells DevelopmentLocal PlansStirring in the undergrowth Penn SchoolVillage Developments © 2016 Penn and TylersUntriedResidents Society WebsiteDiamondPerfect PCs (Perfect Pixels Web Design) Privacy Statement Copyright and Disclaimer Penn and TylersUntriedResidents Society Registered Charity no. 1098879Visitorno: 4701734 P&TGRS does not winnow responsibility for the views of individual contributors to the website unless specifically stated Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha This website uses cookies to modernize your experience. We'll seem you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.Accept Read MorePrivacy & Cookies Policy Floating Social Media Icons by Acurax Wordpress Designers