Name:

Address:

Feedback on Cookham Society response 2008

Yes                    No

Comments

Agree      Disagree

2.   HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT

2.1  In the Society’s view any additional land required for new housing should be located at the principal towns of Windsor and Maidenhead.

 Agree / Disagree 

2.2  Within the Cookhams new housing should only be constructed on previously developed land.  In Cookham Village and Cookham Rise this means land within existing built-up areas.

     Agree / Disagree 

2.3  We support the proposition there should be future provision for more sheltered housing.

  Agree / Disagree 

2.4  We believe there should be a greater emphasis on the provision of smaller accommodation, if necessary with its occupation restricted by planning conditions to ensure continuing availability for older people.

Agree / Disagree 

2.5  We consider all residential planning applications should be supported by an illustrated Design and Access Statement, which should clearly demonstrate how proposed new buildings will integrate with their surroundings without significant loss of green space.

Agree / Disagree 

3.      ENVIRONMENT AND LAND

            3.1 The Society will make representations to the Royal Borough to seek the restoration of the Green Belt in the Poundfield area to the full extent shown on the original version of the Adopted Local Plan of July 1999.

 Agree / Disagree 

            3.2 Any proposal in the Plan must have regard to its impact on the villages’ Conservation Areas.

Agree / Disagree 

            3.3 We consider the proposals in the Plan will have a deleterious effect on each of the three interests of acknowledged importance for Poundfield.

Agree / Disagree 

            3.4 It is therefore our suggestion that if an acceptable alternative cannot be secured within a reasonable period the present car park on the Moor should be enlarged up to the boundary with Marsh Meadow and should be substantially upgraded rather than to be replaced by a Car Park in Marsh Meadow

Agree / Disagree 

            3.5 We are concerned about the proliferation of horse-related buildings, which have the effect of bringing development into what would otherwise be considered open countryside.

Agree / Disagree 

            3.6 We support the preparation of a Village Design Statement.

Agree / Disagree 

4.      TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT

            4.1.1 The Society does not consider our roads in general are unacceptably congested

Agree / Disagree 

            4.1.2 road traffic whose origins and destinations are not within the Cookhams should be actively discouraged from entering the Village

Agree / Disagree 

            4.1.3 We believe re-opening Cookham Bridge to two-way traffic would have the detrimental effect of encouraging more traffic to use the Village.

Agree / Disagree 

            4.2 One-way traffic around The Pound.  

            4.2.1 Based upon the information currently available to us, we object to this proposal.   We would support a full-scale Traffic Assessment for the Cookhams, to include public transport, with the view to giving local people a more informed choice of alternative means of traffic amelioration.

Agree / Disagree 

            4.3. School traffic.  

            4.3.1 We have no objection in principle to the creation of new car parks at Holy Trinity and Cookham Rise schools, provided there are adequate safeguards to ensure they have no damaging environmental effects, but we believe they would only offer a partial solution.  In our view a much more pro-active and integrated approach needs to be taken by the Local Education Authority, school governors and parents to ensure more children walk to school safely, cars are shared, school buses are provided, etc.  The congestion is caused by the users of the schools and it is they who should be asked to alleviate it in the first instance.

Agree / Disagree 

            4.4 Safety.  

            4.4.1 We support a general reduction in vehicle size to 7½ tonnes, but we feel this will be insufficient to remove large trucks and buses from this road. 

Agree / Disagree 

            4.4.2 We do not support measures to remove on street parking. 

Agree / Disagree 

            4.5 Public transport

            4.5.1 Any Transport Assessment, as per our Observation in para. 4.2.1 above, should include the role to be played by public transport.

 Agree / Disagree 

5.      BUSINESS AND THE ECONOMY

            5.1Station Parade.  

            We suggest the services of an expert in regeneration should be employed with the view to advising how best to resolve the interaction of cost, land ownerships and obligations, and value and to suggest a practical way forward.

Agree / Disagree 

            5.2 Tourism Support for Tourism needs to be improved; for example, through better public toilets and improved signage, but this needs to be carried out in a co-ordinated, discreet and sensitive manner.

Agree / Disagree 

            5.3 Networking Centre.   

            We find the idea of a venue where people who work from home can meet each other and exchange ideas and support is an attractive proposal,

Agree / Disagree 

6.      PEOPLE AND PLACES

            6.1 Healthcare.  

            if expansion of the Medical Centre is necessary, this should take place on the current site or adjacent to it; an incursion into the Green Belt to enable the Centre to expand could well amount to ‘exceptional circumstances’ as envisaged by national Green Belt policy.

Agree / Disagree 

            6.2 Crime and disorder.  

            Crime impacts on the whole community.  We are of the view there needs to be a much more positive ‘strategy’ for dealing with crime in the Cookhams.

Agree / Disagree 

            6.3 Sport and recreation

            We are of the view the Plan has not enough to say about the needs of young people or the provision of youth activities and facilities.

Agree / Disagree 

7.      ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

            7.1 Flooding 

            The Environment Agency should be pressed to afford the areas in South Cookham the same protection as the rest of the Village.

Agree / Disagree 

            7.2 Raising the B4447 across the Moor

            A very comprehensive environmental assessment would need to be prepared before we could look favourably on this proposal.

Agree / Disagree