Agenda item

Mr Boulter addressed Council and stated that he was in favour of the recommendations in the report - Position Statement on the adoption of West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Part 1 Local Plan and commented that Northampton South was an unsuitable area for a Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE) and would exacerbate existing traffic problems and congestion around the East Hunsbury area.

Dr Leads addressed Council and questioned whether it was ethical to develop and sell houses in an area where there are existing problems and stated that Councillors had a duty of care and could not chose to ignore problems. He further stated that the Planning Inspectors report had air-brushed over a number of concerns that had been raised and asked that they consider redistributing the builds in other areas.

Mr Johnson addressed Council and, referring to Item 11 on the agenda, stated that the allocation of the site for 1000 dwellings in Northampton south SUE was inconceivable and would cause traffic chaos. He stated that there had been numerous problems with flooding in Collingtree Park and near-flooding in Hunsbury and the nature of the brook was unknown and therefore dangerous to develop on.

Mr Sellers addressed Council and noted that the Joint Core Strategy needed to be fit for purpose and expressed concern about the current pollution levels in the area and stated that he was unable to find any site more likely to encourage car use an and thus potentially increasing air pollution.

Mr Brice, as the Chair of Collintgtree Parish Council, addressed Council and stated that the Parish Council had been assured that expert advice had been received but noted that the area had been subject to flooding 5 times in 16 years and many residents had been left with flood related issues and insurance concerns.

Mr Cross (Chairman of Whitehills and Spring Park Residents Association – WASPRA) stated that they were not opposed to development but that residents had ongoing problems with traffic and whilst a Relief Road would help alleviate problems in surrounding areas and villages, but have a major impact on Whitehills and Spring Park. He further expressed concern that there was little joined up thinking with regards to modal shifts.

Ms Kelk (Hardingstone Parish Councillor) thanked the Members of the Planning Committee for rejecting the Planning Application and commented that over 1500 letters of objection had been sent. She commented that those she spoke on behalf of were not against development of houses, but that the proposed location was not the correct one.

Mr Pease addressed Council and commented that there had been much involvement form Action Groups who supported the stance of the Council reports recommendations. He noted that there was a 1.3km strech of road between the Queen Eleanor Roundabout and the Newport Pagnell Road that had not been analysed and further reported that the projected figure for that length of road would be an over capacity of 21% by 2026 and that further development would only make the situation worse.

Mr Bell addressed Council and explained that Hardingstone Action Group were please when the Planning Committee refused the Sustainable Urban Extension and noted that there was real concern from residents about the increased flood risks and traffic problems and that local people had put their trust in the Planning Committee and thus supported the report’s recommendations.