Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22718
Received: 20/02/2017
Respondent: Brenda Simpson
I do not agree that BEX5 should be 'preferred' for housing at all as this site is not 'previously developed land' according to PPG3 (1992-2006), PPS3 (2006-2010) and now NPPF (2010-Present). Previously failed planning applications/appeals/High Court cases (nearly all of which I have attended) on this site, have highlighted increased risk to flooding, subsidence, loss of light, loss of public view, highway problems, loss of protected flora and forna, and harm to the setting of a Listed terrace of buildings. I would like BEX5 removed from list and for protection be designated as an open space site for recreation.
I do not agree that BEX5 should be 'preferred' for housing at all as this site is not 'previously developed land' according to PPG3 (1992-2006), PPS3 (2006-2010) and now NPPF (2010-Present). Previously failed planning applications/appeals/High Court cases (nearly all of which I have attended) on this site, have highlighted increased risk to flooding, subsidence, loss of light, loss of public view, highway problems, loss of protected flora and forna, and harm to the setting of a Listed terrace of buildings. I would like BEX5 removed from list and for protection be designated as an open space site for recreation.