<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pye Homes planning application back before the Planning Committee</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kscr.org.uk/blog/pye-homes-planning-application-back-before-the-planning-committee/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kscr.org.uk/blog/pye-homes-planning-application-back-before-the-planning-committee/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:48:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wiseman</title>
		<link>http://www.kscr.org.uk/blog/pye-homes-planning-application-back-before-the-planning-committee/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>Wiseman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kscr.org.uk/blog/?p=372#comment-53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The committee generally approached this application very carefully and realised they were being given some dubious statements by both the planning department and the developer.

“Pepper Potting” or even distribution of affordable homes was not suitable as they had only moved a block from one road to another and there was still little integration.  We commented that this was convenient for the developer and SOHA but not what the council had actually asked for!

The KSCR funded “Traffic Report” had not been considered at all, and that surprised the committee, especially as this was a prerequisite. Planners just kept on saying that the previous data was sufficient to make a decision.  When pressed as to why he had not received KSCR sponsored Capita Symonds report he just said that he hadn’t received it and neither had his colleague at OCC.  The real reason is because of absolutely no response from planners, despite repeated emails. David Rothery used to be the planning officer, he is now off work on sick leave, since then no one has informed us who our new planning officer is; in fact they had not even replied to any of our emails until Monday 17th June!  This reason was not even mentioned by planners and KSCR were being presented as unreasonable, but some councillors realised they were not getting the whole story.  One comment from the audience was “why don’t you ever reply to our emails”!

Hydrology was an issue, as we all agree of course.  One councillor has an MSC in Hydrology so is an expert, he asked about the depth of gravel over clay on the site as this could be a few inches or many feet, this makes a massive difference to drainage.  He stated that the proposed 30cm of extra earth on this site is totally unsuitable. He commented on a site in Oxford that has 100com extra and they still have problems with drainage now.

The council have very wisely refused planning permission.

Warmest congratulations to the KSCR committee and everyone who has helped, you have worked tirelessly to defend our Rural Village with logical and professional arguments, very well done everyone!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The committee generally approached this application very carefully and realised they were being given some dubious statements by both the planning department and the developer.</p>
<p>“Pepper Potting” or even distribution of affordable homes was not suitable as they had only moved a block from one road to another and there was still little integration.  We commented that this was convenient for the developer and SOHA but not what the council had actually asked for!</p>
<p>The KSCR funded “Traffic Report” had not been considered at all, and that surprised the committee, especially as this was a prerequisite. Planners just kept on saying that the previous data was sufficient to make a decision.  When pressed as to why he had not received KSCR sponsored Capita Symonds report he just said that he hadn’t received it and neither had his colleague at OCC.  The real reason is because of absolutely no response from planners, despite repeated emails. David Rothery used to be the planning officer, he is now off work on sick leave, since then no one has informed us who our new planning officer is; in fact they had not even replied to any of our emails until Monday 17th June!  This reason was not even mentioned by planners and KSCR were being presented as unreasonable, but some councillors realised they were not getting the whole story.  One comment from the audience was “why don’t you ever reply to our emails”!</p>
<p>Hydrology was an issue, as we all agree of course.  One councillor has an MSC in Hydrology so is an expert, he asked about the depth of gravel over clay on the site as this could be a few inches or many feet, this makes a massive difference to drainage.  He stated that the proposed 30cm of extra earth on this site is totally unsuitable. He commented on a site in Oxford that has 100com extra and they still have problems with drainage now.</p>
<p>The council have very wisely refused planning permission.</p>
<p>Warmest congratulations to the KSCR committee and everyone who has helped, you have worked tirelessly to defend our Rural Village with logical and professional arguments, very well done everyone!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
