<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>The following is the text of a objection letter sent by our president on behalf of the Society:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;color:black'>Closure of Mill Lane</span></b><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>The Supplementary Planning document included the closure of Mill Lane after public consultations, together with a new junction on the A4 when Barratt was deeply involved with the writing of it. At that time the main concern was in keeping the number of units down to a reasonable level and making sure that the important fish spawning grounds just off the bank at the north end of the site were not ruined. Everyone was relieved that something was being done about the longstanding derelict eyesore which Skindles had become. </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>At the time of the Berkeley Homes application, criticism focussed on changing the traffic lights to a roundabout, directly influencing and muting any criticism of the closure in support of lower traffic volumes to permit TfB to approve the roundabout. So at the time of planning approval, there was no concerted objection to the closure, although there were a substantial but unknown number of individual objections. The closure of Mill Lane was put forward in the public exhibition by Barratt after which they had 125 feedback forms, not all of them commenting on the closure. 59% of those that did comment, a maximum of only 73 people said they wanted it. Of these 73 people many were concerned about the poor exit onto the Bath Road. At the moment the petition against closure stands at over 400! </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>We believe that TfB has been wholly inadequate in their handling of the matter. At both application hearings TfB did not make their response until the day of the meeting, depriving the public (and the Society) of any opportunity to digest their submissions. In particular, the closure condition was not even presented when overall approval was given and only submitted later. TfB did not, to public knowledge, offer any justification for the condition beyond a formulaic sentence. This meant that the closure has not been subject to sufficient public scrutiny since its inclusion in the SPD. Not only that the SPD was written with a very different development in mind, and was substantially written by someone in Barratt’s pay.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>The notice for closure was issued on 16<sup>th</sup> September. Although It is on the BCC web at: </span><span style='color:#0563C1'><a href="https://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/mgConsultationDisplay.aspx?ID=3193">https://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/mgConsultationDisplay.aspx?ID=3193</a></span><span style='color:black'> it is pretty well hidden and you have to be quite determined and alert to find it so cannot think that this is the correct way of letting the general public know when the clock is actually ticking. BCC did send a notice to Taplow Parish Council but they sent it to an address that is no longer in use. The Parish Council only found out about it because one of our Parish Councillors read the article that a reporter from the Maidenhead Advertiser wrote about the petition for closure and included the information. This only happened a couple of days ago. This cannot be a correct way to go about things.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>This petition against the closure of Mill Lane has 400 signatures and rising, containing names addresses and reasons. This is a reflection of the very strong feeling which the local people have against closure and completely dwarfs the number of people giving their opinions when the SPD was drawn up.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Bucks CC advised SBDC that there were no significant risks hereabouts so why is closure necessary at all? </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>If there were a problem, why was the SPD short-sighted in requiring the developer to spend a substantial amount minimising risk by creating a new southern junction but neglected to require a much less significant sum to be spent to make the bend safer? At the moment there are temporary traffic lights so that part of Mill Lane becomes one way and this works very satisfactorily. That could be a solution to the perceived bend problem. If the foliage were to be cut back it would help enormously. There are many other roads in our vicinity which are just as narrow with a lack of sight lines so why close Mill Lane and not the others? </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>The whole of the development is in a flood risk area and the evacuation of the new large development in case of flood in an emergency would be made more difficult by the Road being normally closed. The SDP states that these gate would open automatically in case of flood. How this would happen quickly in that event is not clear. Everyone would need to be aware that this is the only safe way out. Any emergency vehicle coming from the north in the rush hour during term time would either have to add approx. 15mins to the journey time or the individual driving the vehicle would have to know a code or have a key to open the barrier.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>One of the reasons people might have wanted the closure of Mill Lane was the inadequate junction on the A4, but the roundabout is working very well indeed and sight lines are open and now that the roundabout is in place instead of traffic lights that reason no longer exists.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>There should be substantial and transparent reasons for closing an ancient road which has been in use for well over a thousand years and possibly dates back to Roman times. It is just as vital today as in times past because as the petition shows it is used by many locals on a regular basis. It will have serious repercussions in delays because of traffic congestion on other roads, especially Berry Hill which leads down to the Bath Road. The A4 is already almost at a standstill at certain times of day. </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>The threat of closure is already causing a long standing tenant of an office in Mill Lane to wish to move because of the increased journey time required to reach those offices from the north, and another office building is standing empty almost certainly because of the threat of closure. The owner is now thinking of selling up. The SPD is supposed to encourage employment in the area not hinder it.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Eva Lipman<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>President <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Hitcham and Taplow Society<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='color:black'>If you wish to make your own objection</span></b><span style='color:black'>, signing the petition is not enough because the petition only counts as one objection (as does the Society’s). You need to write to </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><a href="mailto:peastham@buckscc.gov.uk">peastham@buckscc.gov.uk</a> with copies to planning@southbucks and <a href="mailto:taplow.pc@googlemail.com">taplow.pc@googlemail.com</a> We have until the 7th October to send our objections in.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>This mail has been sent to you from the Hitcham and Taplow Society. If has been sent to you in error or you do not wish to receive such communications, please reply to <a href="mailto:secretary@taplowsociety.org.uk">secretary@taplowsociety.org.uk</a> and we will remove you.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>