Housing Needs Survey 2012

Residents Comments

Opposed to development west of A417

Development on western side of A417 should be a "no go"

Infrastructure requirements must be in place before any building, no-one takes responsibility after

Any increase in housing will require an increase in the infrastructure of the village also, i.e. Shops and other public amenities. Also parking.

A survey should not be full of leading questions! I presume David Wilson Homes provoked this survey for the council to present! The proposed site is inappropriate for many reasons that you are well aware of. No matter how you dress it up as a way of providing "affordable homes"

I understand the need for more housing but think the land used needs looking into more, to keep it with the village boundaries, also school places are full so unable to accommodate more children.

Development should be in keeping with the existing local housing & sites should be in locations that will become part of the village & not remain "islands", cut off from the rest of the village

The proposed development of 77 houses to the south of the A417 is far too big and out of the village. It would be far better to have several small developments either on that side of the main road or on many other possible sites around the village. That way the community would be kept together within the village & not out on a limb. These could be a mix of affordable and other houses and would not have such an impact on traffic on the A417.

The infrastructure should be looked at: First sewerage (to prevent problem caused by the last development), Electric (to eliminate the problems with power cuts), size of school (more houses mean more children).

More street lamps down Hunters Field to the Village Hall

Some developments in the past have not been compatible with the character of the village. The inclusion of green space in any development is vital. We feel the village has enough affordable housing.

Good infrastructure must be developed to support any building. Better facilities: gas, electricity, water, street lighting, speed calming, expand school, scout hut needed.

Would like to see more council houses built in Stanford so Stanford people could have instead of outsiders coming in, or people who have previously lived in Stanford and want to move back.

Keep the main road as a green belt. We suggest you either fill the house that has been empty for several months which is supposed to be for a vicar, or you could knock that house down and build several council houses on that piece of land. One big empty house could house several people.

The cost of private rented property in Stanford is too high compared with social housing rents. Something must be done to help, and of course private renting does not give you the sense of belonging as it is never classed as permanent.

I have no problems with additional housing in the village as long as facilities and infrastructure are upgraded to accommodate the increases in population.

You need to measure anticipated need. Q1 is irrelevant to this survey. What you should be asking is what each household anticipates in 5 or 10 years time. E.g. Age of children likely to be forming new households - the are the people we need to be housing.

What is the point of more houses when we have only one shop? Years ago there was eight shops, with less population

Do not allow the large development by DWH on other side of A417. Fractures the village and not enough amenities.

I think affordable homes and flats would be more acceptable for the younger people who want to leave their parents' homes and be independent and not cost a fortune, they can't afford.

Keep the housing affordable for Stanford people not outsiders

We feel that there is a need for the village to grow otherwise our children will eventually have to leave to find housing elsewhere and present amenities will close down. Please think for the future.

We do NOT approve of the D. Wilson proposal for the west side of the A417, as it is a commercial development on a green-field site outside the present village boundary.

I am in favour of welcoming more people to our village. My greatest concern is that there should be a good infrastructure to support more residents, i.e. School places, bus service, shopping facilities & sports facilities.

I am in favour of small scale development, providing that this is supported with additional infrastructure i.e leisure facilities, improvement to roads (re surfacing), cable tv & gas supplies to the whole village.

The village should be protected against mass development which would change feel of the village. We don't want it turning into Grove for example. Plus facilities & infrastructure can't support mass development.

The present usual 40% requirement on commercial housing development is too high (suggest 20%). There doesn't appear to be provision for pensioners who own property but whose income is under pressure to sell-up and be provided with Housing Association property. The Co-op is an asset but parking is a problem + a potential small accident zone (which is increasing with additional usage).

I am in agreement that we need more affordable houses in Stanford for our young first time buyers and there is plenty of space in and around the village. What we don't want is a huge 77 house development as proposed by David Wilson homes. We know that there isn't enough room in the school and families already in the village may end up having to take their children to other schools by car - which is unfair!
Also, it will be outside the village and therefore another "them & us" situation (as I live on the "new estate" and it is still regarded in some cases as "them & us" even though I ave lived here all my life.
Also regarding the DW site having to have 40% affordable housing - some of these will be "Council houses" and given to people that are not from the village - I am in favour of more part rent/part buy instead - offering to those who would like to stay in the village, not who are "put" here.

More small apartments for Senior Citizens

Fresh life is introduced to small villages by the building of new smaller developments. Rural communities cannot survive now without "incomers" and hopefully people will not be narrow minded enough to completely veto any new families!

Our concern is the school is at maximum capacity + if we allow building the opposite side of A417 or Cottage Road the existing boundary will be broken and nothing to stop building spreading to Shellingford & Hatford

Oxfordshire must have its share of new housing using unused land on outskirts of village sensible. There must be affordable housing for children to be able to afford to stay in the village. Use new developments to slow down speeding drivers using traffic calming measures.

If you're in arrears with rent would you be considered for an affordable home? If you're a Stanford Resident you should be offered a home first.

People have to relocate for jobs - you are in an area of economic growth so you need an openess to new people. Infrastructure needs to be in place - but school catchment of 3 miles may mean Shellingford is the school that need to grow!
Give Millennium Green to school & then it has room to grow by moving the playing field.

More shops/facilities i.e. Greengrocer / clothes shop

The school & facilities in SITV are limited to allow further expansion/building of developments. The clubs & pubs are already either full or insufficient to cope with the current population in Stanford as are the shops. Recent shops & pubs closing does not help.

Consideration of schooling - can the school cope. Drains do not seem to cope with heavy rain.

Believe village should rise in size to 4000-5000 people.

Comments received relate to the way in which the survey was constructed, and do not directly relate to housing needs

Any housing must consider 2 car households a "norm". Parking congestion around High St./Co-Op. What steps to ensure the village still feels like a village?

As we live past the garage on the A417, which has always had a problem with surface water flooding for the last 10 years, are there any measures to be taken to ensure this does not happen before the houses are built?

The Parish Council need to take (more of) a lead in helping to decide future housing plans. This form is a good start :-)

We need to arrange maintenance of what we already have: broken road surfaces, rampant weeds, footway surfaces that look as though they've been carpet bombed.

We feel that the David Wilson proposals are for too many houses in the wrong place i.e. Over the A417. Some "affordable" homes are probably necessary though.

Any additional housing requires significant improvements in services - more buses, especially evening and weekend included, plus park, open spaces, trees and systems to reduce road traffic, plus shops, doctors etc.
The A417 is a dangerous road with frequent accidents best to have no development across the road. There are NO safe crossing points.
The industrial estate threatens much increase in traffic inc. HGV. This is dangerous on existing roads. Any new development should require avoiding many private car journeys & require alternatives.

As long as they are affordable for younger couples

Keep all development village side of A417

The village bus service is inadequate to Wantage & Faringdon to Oxford, especially in the evening. People are stuck in the village, with more housing, more people, please push for us to have a regular transport system. You can't get to Stanford after work @ 6pm!

We need to upsize due to a growing family but because of the large deposit needed now, affordable housing is our only option

Essential that the character of the village is maintained e.g. No more David Wilson "Toytowns" and no building on open spaces and Farmland within the current heart and boundaries of the village.

1. Any development west of A417 raises serious safety issues.
2. Any development should take into account whether the capacity of the primary school can be increased appropriately.

If larger developments are to be contemplated, then serious consideration must be given to improving village amenities - school, public transport, public houses

I moved here for the "village experience" similar to where I grew up - fresh air, country walks, small school, village community, separated from local towns by green countryside where we spent our holidays.
If you are now proposing to allow development in the Greenbelt by invoking a Rural Exception Site we will soon end up as a suburb of Faringdon.
There comes a point (I think we have already reached it here) where development is to the detriment of the village. There is only so much capacity which can be created in the existing facilities. There is no work and no public transport operating at to times to allow commuting which just means more traffic!
There are few things to do for the youngsters which just means they get bored and cause trouble.
Until you can look at the fundamentals and get them right there is no point in bringing more people here.

My concern about any more housing is that the school is unable to cope with more children & in its location cannot expand. If it were relocated the only place is onto the business park and all the objections raised for building there would be the same as for the new pre-school building. Affordable housing is in short supply and without it young people cannot get onto the property ladder. This doesn't affect me directly yet but may do in the future as my children are older. All this said, I love the village and would hate to leave.

I am very worried about Stanford being increased in size with no improvement to school & local amenities. I feel the road to Wantage and Faringdon needs a calming measure i.e. Roundabouts at either end, or bollards and the removal of local business i.e. The Anchor is a mistake. I fear Stanford will become a huge housing estate with nothing to offer any age of resident let alone young people who everyone sees as "a problem" already. I would say no to houses unless the improvements are made in advance of them being built.

Any housing development must take account of infrastructure, school parking, traffic etc. Space is short. New housing should be integrated, not isolated.

The pressure on school places must be a factor to be considered prior to planning approval for larger developments

There are some affordable housing currently for sale already in SITV but I am for the new housing development.

I believe that the designs of any housing must be appropriate to THIS village. Bland, inappropriate designs will merely turn the village into a copy of everywhere else.

Assessment of other services such as school, shops, doctors etc. Also needs to be encompassed within any larger housing development within SITV.

Three bed houses which are affordable for second time buyers which have gardens + garages. NOT flats.

We were told that there would be no more significant developments following the development at Forest Grove for the foreseeable future for a variety of reasons including lack of infrastructure.

Concerned about over crowding, specially children. School is full now. More traffic on the road and roundabout

There shouldn't be any building of houses on the H&J side of the road.
Flooding?
Traffic?

Stanford is the size of a small town, yet retains its character as an English village. Further expansion on the scale envisaged may well alter its status + character, proving to be the tipping point.

Previous new build in Stanford was supposed to be enough. It is incorrect to prorate from that level of build to future need. Also Stanford does not need to expand.

1. Many of our old pipes in sewage system cannot cope with more users
2. School is virtually full + has no room for expansion
3. Village facilities are shrinking - we are in danger of becoming a mere "dormitory"
4. Housing Association houses can be altered to give more flexible types of accommodation. E.g. Traditional house = 2 "starter" properties for village youngsters

Don't think the village facilities/groups can cope with any more families such as the school, pre-school, cubs/scouts etc. Very little facilities for older children with poor public transport to allow them to access Youth Groups in the towns.

Keep Stanford small we don't want any more homes as there is no school, shopping, dentists or doctors available or bus routes. Roads are in a bad way

At present Stanford is still an attractive village. Anymore housing and it will become suburbia

The reason for the answer no is because the services in the village are not adequate

Please look after and preserve our lovely village

The village should keep the defined boundary without further infill development to prevent uncontrolled urbanisation. Infrastructure, as is, may not be adequate to serve increased population

Not enough amenities to support more houses being built. SITV is a village and we would like it kept that way!

Would consider leaving the village if gets any bigger - already lost the village feeling which was why we came to live here.

Our objections to any further building in Stanford is due to the fact that the existing facilities - Electricity, water and telephones are overstretched already. Security with the present suggestion is very important for those wishing to cross the busy A417

This council should do its utmost to protect the conservation area within the village lest you ruin what makes people want to live here

Stanford is currently a large village. If any further housing developments are created it risks becoming a town and is likely to lose its identity.

Was any of the affordable housing on previous new estate purchased by families of Stanford??

Reason for "No" More houses mean more cars, often 2 per house, whether "affordable" or not. In a village without adequate public transport this is not a good thing (young people call our village "Stranded in the Vale"!)

Small infill development only tends to be large 4-5 bedroom houses, which is not what the village requires.

Please consider the effects on the infrastructure especially the local school which is already at capacity

No objection to social housing. This village is already big enough, doesn't have the facilities or transport links needed - people wouldn't be able to travel have to sign on & look for work, keeping them in poverty

Consideration to local school numbers - school is full already

There is too little infrastructure to support the number of houses already in the village. The school is too small to accommodate a significant number of extra children. The basic village drainage system can hardly cope as it is without more homes adding pressure on it.