30 June 2026
I strongly object to planning application HPK/2026/0228. My main concern is overdevelopment. The scheme appears to have become dominated by a very large number of homes, with a substantial increase in residential floorspace, rather than a balanced town centre regeneration scheme. This raises serious questions about whether the proposal still reflects the original aims of improving the town centre, supporting retail activity and making better use of underused buildings. I am also very concerned about the lack of car parking. Buxton serves a wide rural catchment and attracts many visitors, as well as residents, older people and those with mobility issues who rely on convenient town-centre parking. The proposal removes a large amount of centrally located parking and appears to replace it with much less, with some parking dependent on separate applications or future infrastructure. Replacement parking should be fully approved, deliverable and available before a scheme of this scale is allowed. The scale, massing and appearance of the proposed buildings are also inappropriate. Buildings of up to five storeys in Buxton's historic core would not respect the town's distinctive character. Buxton has a unique heritage, with Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian architecture and important conservation areas and listed buildings. I do not believe this development would conserve or enhance that heritage settng. I am further concerned about the housing mix and the move away from genuine town centre living. The proposal seems heavily weighted towards rental apartments, which may not meet local needs or provide the kind of mixed, sustainable development that was originally expected. [Page 2] There are also likely to be significant environmental impacts from a development of this size, including the loss of parking, increased pressure on town centre movement and the wider effect on the character and settng of the area. Finally, construction disruption would be substantial. Works of this scale are likely to cause major disturbance to access, traffic, pedestrian movement and nearby businesses for a prolonged period. These impacts need far more careful consideration. For these reasons, I strongly object to HPK/2026/0228.