Consultation on the emerging Local Plan 19th January 2016 -14th March 2016
The Hitcham and Taplow Society comments as follows. The Society has been in existence for over 50 years. It has a main objective to ensure that all development within the district is of the highest standard and preserves the quality of the environment. It represents a significant proportion of the residents of Taplow.
Our comments are limited to matters directly affecting the immediate areas of Hitcham and Taplow.
Identified Opportunity sites:
The two areas of Mill Lane and Institute Road are developments that are already under way and as such need no further comment in this context. The housing numbers involved show that Taplow is already making a disproportionate contribution to the projected Local Plan housing need.
SB0063 Land South of Taplow Station
We assume that this is bounded to the south by the A4. Although this is part of Green Belt parcel 90, it is heavily affected by its location between the railway and the A4. As such we are not opposed to its further evaluation. If the description is meant to encompass land south of the A4 we are in complete opposition to any re-evaluation. This land is an essential barrier to the merging of Slough and Maidenhead conurbations and must be strongly protected. (See comments below on Green Belt parcel evaluations).
SB0296 Bishop's Gate, Station Road, Taplow
Again, the definition is weakly made. We assume that it refers only to the land south of the railway, north of the A4 and east of Station Road. This land is already industrialised and we have no objection to its further evaluation.
SB0297 Marsh Lane, Taplow
This opportunity area is very poorly defined. However, it sits completely within Green Belt parcel 90 and has no industrial or commercial activities other than some agriculture related business, together with a classic collection of cottages and modest houses and the Thames Valley Adventure Playground. We consider it totally unsuitable for any form of development. It is a classic barrier keeping Maidenhead and Slough apart. It should be removed from the list.
Green Belt Parcel Evaluations
We have significant concerns over the published evaluations of the Green Belt parcels within the Taplow and Hitcham areas.
It is fundamentally wrong to publish a set of evaluations without the criteria and methodologies used to produce them. The criteria must have been in existence before the studies could have been made. It raises the concern that these ratings may have been influenced by anticipated planning intentions. Of most particular concern in this matter is the evaluation of parcel 90. In the view of our Society (and we believe the Parish Council) this parcel is fundamental to the prime Green Belt function of separating towns. As such, we have seen it for some time as most under threat of creeping erosion. To see it only given a score of 3 for this function (in the absence of published criteria) can only lead to the suspicion that it is targeted for change. The adjacent parcel 73 is given 5 although fairly clearly under no such threat. Parcel 90 should be elevated to a score of 5.
The absence of published criteria means that our criticism is qualitative, whereas to be properly effective it should have a quantitative component for the parcel evaluations.
To our understanding, the next public consultation on the Plan in autumn 2016 is likely to contain the actual full plan for approval and therefore contain many decisions based on the parcel scores. This is quite wrong. We accept that HM Government pressures in effect require councils to re-evaluate the Green Belt. This is always going to be a contentious issue and the developers of the Local Plan should have taken much firmer steps to ensure that the debate is as transparent as possible. The present consultation does not achieve this.
--
RogerWorthington - 08 Mar 2016
