Housing plan backed despite objections

The Edlesborough land
The Edlesborough land
0
Have your say

Plans to build 30 new homes in Edlesborough have been conditionally approved by Aylesbury Vale District Council.

During a debate held by the council, outlying permission was granted for the new estate, to be built on land off Cow Lane, subject to three extra conditions.

Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Chris Poll said: “I’m disappointed. The site is in the lower point of the village, the road is narrow and it will have to be widened. There’s another site the parish council identified that would be much more suitable.”

Proposals for the development had met with fierce opposition from Edlesborough Parish Council, who had argued the site was inappropriate and that the new estate would be too big to incorporate into the village

Their comments in the report had stated: “Our parish council has consistently raised objections to the use of the site for housing.

“It is a large extension of the village beyond the established settlement and encroaches on to open countryside. Any development on this site and of this magnitude would create a precedent for other such developments on the outskirts of our village.”

They also argued that the village would lose its boundaries leading to “unfettered” development.

In the past, a number of housing projects on the site (in addition to one for a new dental surgery) have been refused, often on the grounds that it would become difficult to reject similar applications.

Under the current proposal, it is planned to build a new estate of 30 detatched and semi-detatched houses with road access from Cow Lane, which will be widened.

The estate will include areas of open green space, with some of the mature hedging on site to be kept where possible.

One of the strongest selling points of the development is the creation of affordable housing – of which there is a shortage in the area. Ten of the houses have been earmarked for shared ownership or affordable rent.

Consultations with the Environment Agency and other departments have generally been favourable, with opposition coming from the Drainage Board who stated the proposal lacked essential details.