Mr Stephen Gee Planning Manager Milton Keynes Council Stephen.Gee@milton-keynes.gov.uk
Oxley Park Milton Keynes 22/11/2013
Dear Stephen, RE: 13/00621/FUL | Completion of Oxley Woods estate We understand that the above application will shortly be considered by MKC Development Control Committee. Given the passage of time we would like to draw attention to some additional points that we believe should be considered by the Committee in any site visit and / or formal consideration of the application. We would be grateful if this letter could be provided to Committee members. As residents of Oxley Woods we are extremely keen to see our estate completed and the neighbouring vacant sites developed. To this end we have always sought to give constructive input to MKC, Homes and Communities Agency and the applicant. However we remain concerned that the current application is inappropriate in the context of the existing awardwinning Oxley Woods estate, and would have significant negative impacts on Milton Keynes’ reputation for innovative design and its ability to deliver this via the planning process. We therefore reaffirm our previous objections to the above application, and hope that the following matters will be considered by the Committee. 1. Treatment of the High Street Character Area Despite the inclusion of a number of design changes following comments from officers we remain concerned that the currently proposed scheme fails to engage appropriately with the immediate context of the High Street frontage of both the existing Oxley Woods estate and the approach taken through the rest of the grid square. We would suggest that any site visit to review the application should be informed by consideration of the High Street elsewhere in Oxley Park. Our view remains that the proposed inclusion of 8 narrow-fronted detached properties is out of keeping, and thereby provides a relevant reason for refusal on design and layout grounds including in respect to massing, continuity of built form, and the failure to provide the necessary strong transition into the neighbouring site in Oxley Park West. Indeed, we note that the most recent comments from MKC Urban Design (of 04/09/13) state that the proposed scheme is contrary to the design code. However it then states that: An alternative to create a more continuous frontage would be to incorporate wider front housing as this would then require a reduced amount of gaps for parking. This would however be contrary to the design code in terms of meeting the highest density on the site along the high street. We believe that this assessment is incorrect. As discussed in our analysis of the High Street Character Area, we see no impediment to the 8 detached properties being alternatively 1
grouped as 4 sets of semi-detached properties with on-plot car parking inbetween. This would be in keeping with the existing properties to the northern side of the street and examples found elsewhere in the Oxley Park High Street character area. Additionally, we would underline that the applicant is seeking to increase the density of the site overall through the inclusion of 3 additional units over the originally approved scheme. We would suggest that this should only be considered appropriate if it can be demonstrated that the layout proposed is in keeping with the existing context. It seems illogical to suggest that an increase in density can be used to justify a change in design and layout that is detrimental to the existing award-winning estate. 2. Homes and Communities Agency plans for Oxley Park combined sites 4b and 4c On 12 November 2013, the Department for Communities and Local Government and the HCA announced that Sites 4b and 4c at Oxley Park have been designated for development as part of the government’s efforts to support the accelerated construction of Custom Build properties nationwide.1 These two small land parcels sit directly alongside the entrance to the existing award-winning Oxley Woods estate. The HCA describe the new combined site as: Oxley Park, Milton Keynes This 0.42ha-site has been identified as having potential for up to 14 units, subject to planning. The site adjoins one of the most distinctive modern developments in Milton Keynes.2 We have discussed this possibility with HCA over the past year and warmly welcome the designation of this land for the development of Custom Build properties. We now look forward to working with prospective developers to secure an approach and design that appropriately engages with the existing Oxley Woods context and Milton Keynes’ reputation for innovation. We note however that planning guidance is critical to shaping how Custom Build developments can offer both flexibility for purchasers and appropriate designs in keeping with local surroundings. In this light, we believe that the consideration of the above application will set an important precedent for how any subsequent application for sites 4b and 4c will be developed and proposed. We therefore suggest that councillors should be briefed on the intended development approach for this neighbouring site and the potential for innovative approaches to be supported, as part of their consideration of the above proposal. 3. Homes and Communities Agency plans for Oxley Park combined sites 5 and 4a In a similar vein, HCA is now tendering for developers to come forward with proposals for the last remaining large site in Oxley Park. Site 5 is separated from Oxley Woods by the linear park, and will be in close proximity to the land parcels under consideration in the current planning application. Site 4a is adjacent to Sites 4b and 4c mentioned above, and marks the end of the High Street Character Area. Earlier in 2013 residents Oxley Woods drafted our own Outline Context Appraisal of the 1 2
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/second-wave-of-government-land-to-be-released-for-self-build-housing http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/custom-build
2
existing estate, as a constructive input to the development of the neighbouring vacant sites and the consideration of options for the completion of Oxley Woods. We drew on the MKC New Residential Development Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document as the basis for our assessment. We have now been informed by HCA that our Context Appraisal analysis has been provided to developers as part of the tender documentation. We have again expressed our willingness to give positive and practical input to the development of any proposals for this site. As highlighted in point 2 above, we believe that the consideration of this current application will set an important precedent for how any new application for Sites 5 and 4a will be designed and approved. Given the willingness of HCA to include residents’ design input, and that developers will only now be starting the design process, we believe that this should not be undermined by the permitting of a sub-standard and incoherent design for the remaining land parcels of Oxley Woods, Site 6 under the above application. We would suggest that this issue is also considered by Councillors undertaking any site visit to review this application. 4. Applicant’s failure to provide a context appraisal and development brief Previous submissions from residents have highlighted the failure of the applicant to undertake an appropriate context appraisal for the site, and how the proposed development brief had also been abandoned. While we understand that the second of these is not strictly required under the planning process, we noted that this was a missed opportunity for constructive dialogue. More importantly, the need for appropriate context appraisal is included within the MKC New Residential Development Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (which even features an image of Oxley Woods on its front cover). However no mention of the Design Guide or the requirement for a context appraisal was included in the materials submitted by the applicant. Furthermore, subsequent to a recent Freedom of Information request to HCA, we have received copies of correspondence from both HCA and MKC regarding the request for the applicant to provide a context appraisal and development brief. In an email of 12th December 2012 you personally drew the applicant’s attention to the importance of this for securing an appropriate scheme, and strongly recommended that they should not proceed with the planned neighbourhood consultation unless these issues were addressed.3 As we understand it, the applicant has therefore sought to circumvent both formal guidance and professional advice from MKC officers in respect to both the process and content of their application, including by: • • • • •
3
Failing to undertake a context appraisal or agree an outline development brief; Proceeding with a public consultation against officer advice; Providing inaccurate and / or misleading information at the public consultation; Failing to reference the MKC New Residential Development Design Guide, nor follow its guidance on appropriate contextual appraisal and design; and Failing to submit the scheme for pre-application discussions with officers prior to formal submission.
Copy of the original email can be provided in case required.
3
Unfortunately, this leaves us again in the position of viewing the applicant’s approach as one determined to secure planning permission for a sub-standard scheme, at the expense of resident concerns and due planning process. We would therefore suggest that Councillors should be made aware of the approach taken by the applicant. Were this application to be approved, we are concerned that a precedent would be set which severely reduces the ability of MKC to require developers to follow formal planning guidance, and in particular the approach required under the New Residential Development Design Guide. We believe that this would have negative implications for both the potential development of the sites neighbouring Oxley Woods and the broader planning policy context for Milton Keynes as a whole. As evidenced by its use on the front cover of the MKC New Residential Development Design Guide, Oxley Woods is recognised as an important example of how Milton Keynes is a leading location for innovative urban planning, architecture, construction methods and building performance. If MKC guidance will not be followed to ensure the appropriate completion of a site featured on the front cover of its own policy documentation, where will it be required? We hope that these concerns will be relayed to Councillors. We will be pleased to present them in person at any consideration of this application by MKC Development Control Committee. Yours sincerely, Residents of Oxley Woods Submitted on behalf of: Adam Humphreys, 164 Holden Avenue
Alan and Fiona McIlroy, 1 Murphy Road
Christine Scott-Gordon, 162 Holden Avenue
Lauren Andres L'ecaros and Leo L'ecaros, 3 Murphy Road
Alex Ng, 160 Holden Avenue
Darren and Gemma Smith, 5 Murphy Road
Lekan Lijofi, 159 Holden Avenue
Jonathan and Lucy Picardo, 1 Swanson Drive
Paul Andrews, 153 Holden Avenue
Gavin Mills, 2 Swanson Drive
Shajeeya and Faisal Jafri, 141 Holden Avenue
Heidi and Stuart Burrows, 3 Swanson Drive
Richard Wall, 142 Holden Avenue
Richard Minns, 4 Swanson Drive
4
Anna Whittaker, 7 Swanson Drive
Paul and Abi Mullett, 22 Milland Way
Andrew and Kelsey Collins, 16 Swanson Drive
Dave and Patsy Richards, 24 Milland Way
Dan Sherwood, 23 Swanson Drive
Sharon Bridglalsingh and Navin Sankersingh, 26 Milland Way
Langton Wildman and Tina Wennstrom, 25 Swanson Drive
Luit Hazarika and Veanna Chan, 28 Milland Way
Del Smith & Tracey Cunningham 37 Swanson Drive
Joshua and Madusha Duckworth, 32 Milland Way
Hugh Gallagher & Louise Ellington, 41 Swanson Drive
James and Zinariya Skinner, 34 Milland Way
Pascal De Polla and Jo Newton, 1 Welles Lane
Barbara Swann, 38 Milland Way
Maria Barstow-Nazli and Mehmet Nazli, 2 Welles Lane
Gemma and Matt McCann, 44 Milland Way
Gill and Craig Matthews, 7 Lorre Mews
Colin Monk, 46 Milland Way
Mike Innes, 10 Lorre Mews
Robin and Donna Ladkin, 48 Milland Way
Ann Faithful and Olivia Quirke, 2 Milland Way
Andrew Earnshaw, 52 Milland Way
Chris Littlecott and Sandra Prado-Littlecott, 6 Milland Way
Marcus Olozulu, 58 Milland Way
Natalie and Peter Outram, 8 Milland Way
Jan Chan, 60 Milland Way
Lucy and Chris Bjork, 14 Milland Way Dave and Alison Richings, 16 Milland Way Richie and Maria Sayanthan, 18 Milland Way
5