‘Ruinous’ Cheddington housing development proposal thrown out

Gladman Homes' plan was rejected by Aylesbury Vale District Council
Gladman Homes' plan was rejected by Aylesbury Vale District Council
0
Have your say

A 110 home development that campaigners claimed would have ‘ruined’ a small village has been thrown out.

Gladman Homes’ application for a 5.87 hectare site off Leeches Way, Cheddington, would have seen the creation of a new estate of two, three, four and five bedroom homes.

More than 300 residents wrote to Aylesbury Vale District Council to oppose the plans, which they claimed were disproportionate to the size of the village.

Vale MP and Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow backed those who campaigned against the proposal, as he said that it “would threaten to destroy (Cheddington) entirely.”

Those concerns were heeded by AVDC, which has chosen to reject the plans.

In a statement of its decision the council contends that the plan was not a ‘sustainable development’.

It adds: “The development is of a scale and nature on a greenfield site in the open countryside...which would cause significant harm by the significant adverse visual and landscape character impact on this special and valued landscape.

“The proposals would also fail to respect and complement the physical characteristics of the site and surroundings and the effect on important public views and fails to satisfactorily incorporate good design and opportunities to design out crime within the development.”

Mr Bercow’s original opposition to the proposal included his fears that the village’s ‘overstretched infrastructure’ would be further burdened by an additional 110 homes.

Gladman Homes said that 30% of the site would have been made available as affordable housing and that the development could have generated £1million through the New Homes Bonus in six years.

However AVDC has said that if the application was successful it would ahve still required a 35% affordable housing rate.

The decision statement added: “In the absence of such a provision and the absence of adequate primary school capacity or expansion proposals with a realistic chance of delivery, the local planning authority is not satisfied that the proposal will constitute sustainable development that fulfils a social economic and environmental role.”