Policy D4: Development in urban areas and inset villages
Planning permission for new development in the urban areas of Guildford, and Ash and Tongham, and inset villages will be granted provided that it:
In addition to the above, proposals for new development within inset village areas will have particular regard to:
|
Response: Object
There are effectively two separate parts to this policy, both are flawed, and in the case on insetting, fatally flawed. In the case of urban development there are numerous flaws, including:
- The plan envisages that 40% of homes built will be affordable, but this does not provide any accommodation for low paid workers, for example, those on the minimum wage, who cannot afford to buy “affordable” homes, nor can they pay the so-called “affordable” rent. There is a need for some expansion in social housing, especially in urban areas, where there is a greater concentration of low paid workers such as those employed in the retail, warehousing and distribution sectors.
- The number of homes planned in the urban area is too low – there is a need for regeneration in some areas, but this is ignored and instead the plan concentrates on building homes on green field sites, which does not meet the needs for housing within the town, especially with the centre. This is not a sustainable policy as building outside the town has a disproportionate effect on road traffic.
- The plan envisages a large expansion of the traditional “bricks and mortar” retail sector, but this is a sector in long term decline.
-
Bailes Lane: Temporary Article 4 Direction Made!
On 18 April, following numerous representations from members of the public, Normandy Parish Council, and Normandy's Borough Councillors, Guildford Borough Council (GBC) officers acting under their delegated powers issued an Article 4 Direction regarding the agricultural land lying to the west of Bailes Lane, Normandy, GU3 2BA.
Read more ... -
‘Limited Infilling’ in Normandy and Flexford
‘Limited Infilling’ is increasingly used by planning officers as a justification when approving applications in Normandy/Flexford, even where the site is outside the settlement area identified in the Local Plan and is therefore in the Green Belt. (It is worth recalling in this context that the Local Plan removed Normandy and Flexford, along with several other settlements, from the Green Belt, making then ‘inset’, rather than ‘washed over’; this meant that development within the settlement area would not need to accord with Green Belt policy.) We therefore thought it would be helpful to take a closer look at this concept of ‘limited infilling’ in the Green Belt.
Read more ...