Slapton residents protest against new housing development

Slapton residents are standing together to protest against new homes which could be built in their village.
The posters were put up for the protestThe posters were put up for the protest
The posters were put up for the protest

Residents from Horton Road and Rectory Close are opposing the construction of two detached houses on land adjacent to Rectory Close.

Homes on Horton Road back out onto the site where the development is planned.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The planning application has already been rejected by Aylesbury Vale District Council but Chasehart Limited has now appealed the decision.

Robert Kennedy joined other residents to protestRobert Kennedy joined other residents to protest
Robert Kennedy joined other residents to protest

While the appeal is being determined, residents have put up posters on the site outlining their objections to the plans.

Robert Kennedy, of Rectory Close, lives opposite the land where the development is planned for.

He said: “We do not want them to build the homes there, this is our village and we are against it.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“It is the countryside, it is beautiful, we do not want to see houses there.

The residents protested against a planning application for homes being built on land opposite their homesThe residents protested against a planning application for homes being built on land opposite their homes
The residents protested against a planning application for homes being built on land opposite their homes

“Children play out because it is safe, if that development goes ahead and more homes a built, it will no longer be a quiet village, the children will not be able to play out there.”

Chasehart told the LBO it could not comment while the appeal progress was ongoing.

This is the third planning application the company has made for the area of land.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

In 2011 an application for three detached dwellings and detached double garage was refused.

A year later an application for one detached dwelling and detached double garage with associated new access, parking and landscaping was refused.

Both were appealed but Chasehart lost.

Related topics: