13 days to shape Shiplake

Thank you to the 40+ residents who attended yesterday's virtual meeting to discuss the Neighbourhood Plan. There was lots of good input.

A specific question arose we'd like your feedback on. Do we still want to have objectives and policies related to infill development and smaller, affordable homes given the recent large developments on the Reading Road in Harpsden and Shiplake? Please let us know your thoughts directly in the Forum. 

13 days left to respond to the NP. More details HERE

Posted by: Chris Penrose | 02/07/2020 11:50 am

The Survey in 2017 required 33 houses.Since then planning for 223 granted thus 700% of target delivered 15 years ahead of 2032. Affordable housing increased from circa 13 to 38. NP dominated by even more affordable housing which are not needed. NP should define affordable housing as per NPPF's definition.Unprecedented level of new housing approvals means the NP does not reflect where we are today. The 2017 survey was based on the circumstances prevailing at the time.The draft NP is out of date

Posted by: windsor richards | 06/07/2020 12:03 pm

South Oxfordshire District Council requires that ‘Affordable Housing’ has a tenure mix of 75% social rented and 25% intermediate (shared-ownership) housing. Affordable housing is allocated by Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) on the basis of need. Current Shiplake owner-occupiers would not normally qualify and no preference is given to other residents of Shiplake or their families.

Posted by: David Bartholomew | 03/07/2020 3:32 pm

Stephen- Commons Library Briefing,23 December 2019 ...subsidised housing that meets the needs of those who cannot afford secure decent housing on the open market either to rent or buy.Historically, the term affordable housing tended to be interchangeable with references to social housing, i.e. housing developed with an element of government subsidy (grant) and let at sub-market rents by local authorities or housing associations. Social housing rents are generally around half of market rents.

Posted by: Chris Penrose | 03/07/2020 10:01 am

I cannot get my mind around the term "affordable" housing. Does it mean small, poorly constructed or subsidised. To whom is it affordable. I feel that the number of homes available under the approved planning more than meets any needs. As to building flats that have an attractive/sympathetic look then Michael and Sue would do well to consider just how many "plans" have been submitted for the "Gables" site and how many have come to fruition & how long construction has been taking place there.

Posted by: Stephen Swiatek | 02/07/2020 5:24 pm

The replacement of family homes and gardens with apartment blocks, fronted by congested car parks spilling visitors onto the surrounding limited road space, scarcely preserves the character of the village. Anyone wanting to downsize into a flat should go for Station Road, HENLEY - where the urban environment can better cope with the traffic generated by high density development and residents can walk to the doctor, chemist.....!

Posted by: tim green | 02/07/2020 5:23 pm

Having lived in the village since 1966, I have seen so many changes that the core is unrecognisable, however i have in past accepted change because without it you "die". I believe we have now reached a point where Shiplake is in danger of no longer being a village and the final nail being the 250 odd houses that have been approved in the last 12 months. We need to stop before we become part of Henley. Neither the community or the infrastructure will survive the strain

Posted by: Guy & Virginia van Zwanenberg | 02/07/2020 4:05 pm

Chris, as stated last night I believe the recent consent for more than 200 dwellings on either side of the Reading Road fundamentally changes the context for the Plan, and that the new developments will provide plentiful opportunity for people who want to move in to the village, downsize, and/or look for affordable housing. I therefore think there is no need for infill in the main village, which would put yet further strain on infrastructure and change the character of the village core.

Posted by: Alan Giles | 02/07/2020 12:05 pm

Chris's point above is critical. The original resident survey in 2017 identified a need for smaller/retirement properties but this was done before planning permission was granted along the A4155 for over 200 homes, many smaller and affordable. In my view the previously identified need has been met many times over and we need to preserve what is left of the character of central Shiplake and resist the sub-division of existing plots and conversion of existing properties to flats or smaller units.

Posted by: David Bartholomew | 02/07/2020 12:04 pm