20 July 2026
I very strongly object to planning application HPK/2026/0228. This proposal is overdevelopment. It appears to have shifted from a town-centre regeneration scheme into a large residential-led development dominated by around 332 homes for rent, with a substantial increase in residential floorspace. That scale is far beyond what many residents were led to expect, and it risks overwhelming the town centre rather than supporting it. I am also very concerned about the loss of parking. The scheme removes a large amount of centrally located parking and replaces it with much less, with some parking apparently dependent on separate applications or future infrastructure. As a disabled person, I rely on convenient town-centre parking to live independently, and I have recently found that all disabled bays were full in every town car park I reviewed. Reducing parking further would make access much worse for disabled people, older people, visitors and local residents. Buxton also serves a wide rural catchment, so convenient parking is essential. The proposed buildings are not in keeping with Buxton's heritage and conservation character. Buxton is a historic spa town with a distinctive Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian townscape, and large contemporary buildings of up to five storeys in the historic core would not respect or enhance that settng. The architecture does not appear sympathetic to the town's heritage, unlike other newer developments that sit more comfortably within the existing character. In my view, this would harm the appearance and identity of the town. I am also worried about traffic and access. The changes to Station Road, Palace Road and access across existing parking areas appear significant, and the cumulative highway impacts need very careful scrutiny. The proposal also seems to create access difficulties for people reaching the shops, including those with mobility issues. [Page 2] The public realm and landscape impacts also concern me. The scheme should deliver clear and substantial public realm benefits, but instead it appears to prioritise large-scale residential development over genuinely improving the town centre. The loss of trees, the excavation of land near a steep embankment, and the creation of new vehicle routes where pedestrian access currently exists all raise further concerns. I am not convinced the housing mix is right for town-centre living. A scheme of this scale, dominated by rental apartments, risks changing the character of the town centre without properly meeting local needs or supporting existing businesses. During construction, local businesses could be badly affected by disruption and the need to find alternative accommodation. Finally, I am concerned about the timing of this decision given Local Government Reorganisation. This is a major long-term scheme that could bind successor authorities for decades, so it should not be rushed through before the wider implications have been properly considered. For all these reasons, I strongly object to this application.