Object
Publication
Representation ID: 23697
Received: 15/03/2021
Respondent: Deborah van Oosterom
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Last year I looked very carefully at the Reg 18 consultation documents proposing a plan for 300 new homes in Aylsham. I commented then that while I fully appreciated the need for more housing it was vitally important that this should meet reasonable criteria of good quality and design, and be supported with appropriate infrastructure, in order to give its inhabitants a decent quality of life while being happily and successfully assimilated into the existing town, and with due respect for the environment. On this basis - and only on this basis - it seemed reasonable to agree a plan for 300 new houses.
(Unfortunately much of the new housing built recently around Aylsham does not inspire confidence that these criteria are a priority for developers and planners.)
Now, with no further consultation, you are sweeping in with a proposed change to this plan, which adds another site and nearly doubles the number of houses. There seems to have been no proper consideration or appreciation of the impact of this on the town, or on the environment.
I would like to add my voice to those, including the Town Council, who find the new stage of the plan to be neither legal, nor sound, nor justified. The reasons for this are itemised in the Town Council's response.
Last year I looked very carefully at the Reg 18 consultation documents proposing a plan for 300 new homes in Aylsham. I commented then that while I fully appreciated the need for more housing it was vitally important that this should meet reasonable criteria of good quality and design, and be supported with appropriate infrastructure, in order to give its inhabitants a decent quality of life while being happily and successfully assimilated into the existing town, and with due respect for the environment. On this basis - and only on this basis - it seemed reasonable to agree a plan for 300 new houses.
(Unfortunately much of the new housing built recently around Aylsham does not inspire confidence that these criteria are a priority for developers and planners.)
Now, with no further consultation, you are sweeping in with a proposed change to this plan, which adds another site and nearly doubles the number of houses. There seems to have been no proper consideration or appreciation of the impact of this on the town, or on the environment.
I would like to add my voice to those, including the Town Council, who find the new stage of the plan to be neither legal, nor sound, nor justified. The reasons for this are itemised in the Town Council's response.