The Council has no substantive objections to the Spring Chamber itself, acknowledging the expert advice that has informed both its necessity and location. However, there is significant local concern—particularly among directly affected residents—regarding the substantial and potentially avoidable increase in road traffic movements associated with the proposal.
As a result, Wendover Parish Council objects to the planning application and requests that it be called in for discussion at a public planning committee meeting
Key Concerns
Following extensive engagement with parishioners, we have identified the following key concerns, which we believe are material planning considerations under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF):
1. Failure to address traffic impacts in line with NPPF guidelines
The application does not include a complete traffic management plan covering all required aspects and they have not undertaken this plan as soon as possible in the planning application (NPPF – 9). While HGV movements have been considered, the proposal also includes 2,280 additional vehicle movements that have not been adequately addressed. Further, there appears to be significant mathematical errors in the Traffic Management Plan, which we firmly believe renders it inadmissible (see below for details)
The plans do not provide sufficient reassurance regarding safety measures for HGV traffic on narrow roads and at complex junctions. There is particular concern for wheelchair and mobility scooter users who must use the road for access in some areas.
The application indicates that a track will be constructed for access but does not specify where vehicles will park or turn before and after the track is built. Section 2.5 of the Traffic Management Plan mentions a laydown area but also states there will be no parking on site. This will push any casual parking onto Dobbins Lane/Bridleways.
2. Impact on the Chilterns National Landscape
The proposed permanent above-ground structure to power the valves will have a lasting visual impact on the landscape and could become a target for vandalism.
The construction of an access track capable of supporting the proposed vehicle movements will permanently alter the landscape, even if much of the route follows an existing farm track.
3. Lack of assessment of alternative routes
Despite verbal assurances during local consultations, there is no evidence that alternative routes have been fully explored.
A shorter, less disruptive route via a local farm appears viable, yet the landowner has confirmed that they have not been consulted.
Additional Observations
We also wish to bring the following matters to the planning committee’s attention:
The Parish Council has found that information provided by the applicant throughout the consultation process has not always been full, timely, or accurate. This was to such an extent we feel it should be considered in the planning decision.
A petition opposing the proposal has been signed by several hundred residents, demonstrating the strength of local opposition.
Wendover Parish Council urges the planning committee to give our objection and these concerns full consideration and to call in the application to planning committee for further scrutiny.
APPENDIX – Mathematical inconsistencies in the Transport Management Plan
Section 1.4 shows site working times - these are for a 6 day week
Section 2.4 shows number of vehicles/ trips
The first table in 2.4 shows in week 5-9 there will be 20 HGVs and 20 Trips – this should be either 10 HGVs for 20 trips or 20 HGVs with 40 Trips. Potentially there could be 140 trips, which is a figure beyond what has been publicly declared.
We cannot understand the second table displayed in 2.4
The working period is shown as 12 weeks and that the total support vehicle trips are an average 38 per day. 6 days x 12 weeks x 38 trips = 2736 trips not 2280 as stated
A leaflet circulated at the Tennis Club consultation event put the project timescales at 12-14 weeks
---
View the response from Wendover HS2 Mitigation Action Group below:
Comments