20 July 2026
I object to the scale and size of the development in its current form. I do not believe I have been adequately consulted. Developers are required to consider local input and demonstrate how community feedback has influenced their final proposal before submittng their application. The developer has failed to do this in the following areas 1. Sharing with the public the opportunities and risks associated with the site. Specifically, the known risk that the complexity of the site may lead to an increased volume of housing to deal with the financial viability gap created by the complex level changes on the site . This now leading to overdevelopment of the site. 2. Giving the impression that all elements of the river wye would be 'opened up'. This is now not true as the additional housing need maintains existing culverts as evidenced in the response to the Environment Agency 3. The risk to parking on the site created by the additional housing subsequent to the last point of consultation and the risk presented by assuming that the residents will only require 50% parking provision per property when the Buxton average is 82%. There is no information from the developer about car ownership amongst residents who elect not to hire a car parking space in their other developments. The assumption appears to be that they do not have cars. This developer has not delivered a development in a small market town with a reliance on tourism to support its economy. 4. Changes to the road layout on Station Road as a result of a new entrance opposite McDonalds that have occurred after the end of the public consultation. Additionally, the purchase of land for an additional car park. which will requirement of a more complex road junction at the junction of Palace Road and Station Road. [Page 2] 5. The increase from 250 homes to 322 representing a significant increase in the layout and density of housing on the site. 6. Information from parking surveys which appear to have only been undertaken since the developer and HPBC concluded that the number of homes on the site would need to increase to close a known funding gap. 7. Design, Appearance and materials associated with the development which have changed sign significantly because of the increase in the homes proposed to be built as part of the development. 8. The potential loss of the residents parking scheme to manage down peak period demand. 9. The proposal to over-ride nature conservation through the development of an alternative parking site and loss of trees with TPO orders. 10. Has not consulted with the Licenced premises trade in Buxton who may be directly impacted by the assertion that the development will contain new bars and restaurants. Officers were requested to ensure this consultation occurred. 11. The nature of the development being a 'rental only ' scheme with no properties for sale on the open market. Immediately prior to the application for this development being submitted the plans posted in the Springs Shopping centre stated the 250 homes ambition and have not been replaced with updated plans and information since that time. Given that parking is such a crucial issue the planning committee should consider either scaling back the development or if minded to support the application, set conditions that need to be met before any construction/demolition work can commence.. 1. No development to commence until alternative parking capacity has planning permission and is functional. Land known as 'DB shenker'. 2. Development of the West end of the site and new multi story car park to be completed before the East end deck car park (waitrose) can be developed. 3. The development to contain restrictions on the residential units being used for short term lets (AirBNB) due to the additional parking required by this type of accommodation 4. The development to contain restrictions on commercial units being converted into flats