For those interested in responding to the Infrastructure, Traffic and Over-development ( vs Wycombe Council's own Local Plan), you will have seen the official KBEG posting of Draft Development Brief and their guidance/ suggestions.
In case the following might help, here are some of my observations-- but I know you will assess Hollands DDB, make up your own mind, using your own words, in any response.
As a reminder for Cookham residents, all comments MUST link back to Hollands Farm site and be as SITE SPECIFIC as you can in what suggestions you are making to Council/ asking them to do, please.
Given just over 2 working days to deadline, the easiest way to get your response in is by email
planningpolicyteam.bc@buckinghamshire.gov.ukI hope this helps.
Visit:
https://yourvoicebucks.citizenspace.com/planning/hollands-farm-consultation/ Email:
planningpolicyteam.bc@buckinghamshire.gov.ukMail: Charlotte Morris, Wycombe Area Office, Queen Victoria Road, High Wycombe, HP11 1BB
INFRASTRUCTURE CANNOT COPEThe initial planning application needs to be made in FULL, not OUTLINE, to ensure that all associated infrastructure matters are considered before any planning approval is given.
Part of the access point to Hollands Farm is in flood plain, which creates access problems ( as witnessed locally in several areas during recent floods).
Sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) associated with Hollands Farm hardstanding have not been assessed. The immediately adjacent area clearly showed flooding and associated road closures in last few weeks and even more-so in floods of 2013/4.
Where is all the rain water supposed to go? Issue is expected to worsen with Climate change: unpredictable weather and wetter winters.
Issues of foul water, surface water run-off, water supply, gas and electricity services, pavements have not been addressed, particularly relative to such a large scale 467 house development.
The same infrastructure questions apply to the proposed flood plain development for 150 houses at Slate Meadow ( partial flood plain site). Sewage issues (for example) arose during recent flood events, causing Thames Water alerts to residents, without either 150 houses at Slate Meadow or 467 houses at Hollands Farm developments at all.
The 7.5 ton weight limits at Hawks Hill and Cookham bridge are currently not enforced.
Flood plain issues matter and are only likely to get worse with Climate change, unpredictable weather and wetter winters.
Bourne End does not have basic infrastructure of schooling, doctors surgeries, a police station, or any banks to cope with an additional 150 houses at Slate Meadow and 467 houses at Hollands Farm..
TRAFFIC GRIDLOCKThere needs to be a full and detailed transport study on all roads and access points, including all the mitigation requirements as part of the final Development Brief/Supplementary Planning Document (as per Terriers Farm).
Severe congestion already occurs at peak traffic and such large scale developments can only make things worse.
with several hundred additional traffic movements per day towards Cookham bridge ( and same in other direction from over 600 homes planned by RBWM), this traffic level is only going to get significantly worse.
Cookham bridge cannot handle 2x 600-650 housing developments & associated traffic movements of several hundred/ day vehicle movements, from either side of this listed bridge.
The 'bridge over the River Wye at Cores End Road roundabout is especially challenging. No solution/ mitigations have yet been tabled, yet this is definitely needed.
In the Council’s own words, ‘unless a viable solution to access points is proposed, this puts the whole plan at risk’
The current S bend/ bridge over the River Wye on Hedsor road ( adjacent to Hollands Farm current entrance) is also very difficult and tight, with the main Hollands Farm entrance within yards ( Sadly, there have been fatal accidents over several years, including a recent one).
Any bridges over the River Wye and the immediately adjacent access provisions to Hollands Farm site need solutions( including land ownership issues and agreements)
Wycombe Council have recent initiated pollution warnings because of stationary traffic sitting/ idling in Marlow, including a huge street banner advertising same. WBE Parish Council has also undertaken an air quality study, which already shows pollution issues at both Woburn Green and Bourne End Parade. The significant incremental movements/ day in each direction ( from combined housing total/ resultant traffic from either side of Cookham bridge will only exacerbate this matter significantly ( no doubt RBWM will be also be addressing such issues for Cookham High St and Councils will be expected to cooperate fully).
Have the 2 Councils consulted and cooperated, specifically in a combined full detailed transport study that is deemed neccessary?
No detailed traffic mitigation possibilities have been tabled, or addressed to assess the whole picture, yet Cookham bridge is within just 1/2 mile of Hollands Farm site, currently in question.
MASSIVE OVER-DEVELOPMENTThe sustainable level of housing over the Local Plan period 2013-33 for Bourne End and Wooburn was set at 800.
467 houses at HF would take this total to well over 1000 houses and is in excess of the sustainable level set by the Planning Inspector. Why is this?
Furthermore, the proposed level of housing density at 467 houses on the net land available is way in excess of the Bourne End average and hence totally out of density and character.
Coupled with the numbers, housing density needs to reflect the overall levels for Bourne End and the immediate adjoining settlements
( 9 Bridgestone Drive houses directly facing HF site are at 11 dph (density per hectare), rather than 40 dph being suggested--- a factor difference of 3.6, in 2 immediately facing areas). Given the numbers of houses is excessive ( beyond plan, can this higher density area not be modified to be more in keeping with rest of Bourne End?
The housing proposals are for >200 more houses than the number deemed suitable and sustainable in the Council’s own plan. Why is this?
How can such Overdevelopment excessive numbers be deemed sustainable, considerably beyond the Council’s own stated plan limits?
Surely the Council must tailor this Draft Development Brief to fall within it’s own, sustainably set limits?
The only permissible reason to remove HF from green belt designation is when Government states exceptional circumstances— surely this cannot now include over 200 homes over the Council’s own Plan limits, which have been clearly published/ set?
With 150 houses at Slate Meadow ( partly in a flood plain site) now planned, AND several other Brownfield or garden sites started in Bourne End & Woburn Green since the Council Local Plan numbers were actually set, the Holland’s Farm development level has not been either fully re-assessed in total, or modified—so as to fall within Local Plan levels. Why?
467 houses are just not needed to meet the Council’s own Local Plan levels.
Discounting any other houses from any other sources for next 12 years ( an extremely unlikely scenario, especially given likely changes to office practices, post pandemic) would equate to approx 1/2 of the proposed level at Hollands Farm to fully meet Local Plan.
No one envisaged World pandemic when this process started: what about all large offices on established industrial estates, where conversion to offices could easily be accelerated? Surely this is preferable to high density, out of character development at HF?
