Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60632

Received: 29/12/2013

Respondent: Mr Frank Morley-Brown

Representation Summary:

Supportive of some development on two sites in Hatton Station, providing certain conditions are met and benefit to the community is achieved. The numbers proposed for the former goods yard are too large. The large plot of land at Oakslade should be outside the redrawn village boundary.

Full text:

I believe some limited development is suitable within Hatton Station, on the proviso that any new housing is accompanied by the provision of amenities and facilities for the benefit of local residents, including:

- abatement of noise from the M40
- provision of a play area for children, with equipment suitable for a relatively wide age range
- provision of allotments for local residents
- improvements to pedestrian access from the principal residential area to the railway station
- upgrade to sewerage system in the event that further properties are to be connected to it

Development should be limited in numbers, whichever (if any) potential sites are recommended. The vehicular ingress and egress to the site at the rear of Oakdene Crescent is constrained by on-road parking and this site is therefore not suitable for the number of dwellings being proposed.

The site to the west of the old Station Road is in my opinion suitable for a ribbon of housing along the road frontage, provided of course the road itself is brought back to sufficient width for two vehicles to pass and is resurfaced.

The site at The Dell is not suitable for the numbers of houses being proposed and the landowner should be obliged to restore the trees, wild flowers and natural habitat which has been consciously removed during recent months to reduce the potential barriers to obtaining consent for development on this site.

The boundary of the village settlement to the north of the railway station should be drawn much closer to the buildings at Oakslade Farm. The plot of the farm and "garden" is far too large and would I believe risk a very large number of houses being built if approved. The land is currently not used in the manner of a domestic garden.