Object

Proposed Submission Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan

Representation ID: 24201

Received: 07/12/2018

Respondent: Lisa Partridge

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Spindlewood Development is simply not a suitable site for housing at this location. It would have major and possible irreparable adverse effects on the adjacent RAMSAR, SAC, SSSI & Ancient woodland site, as well as the overwhelming addition of traffic on Barnhorn Rd (A259) and the direct centre/heart of Little Common Village, not to mention, having a negative affect on the way people live, work, travel and take leisure.

I am aware that the NPPF14 states 'Local planning authorities should positively see opportunities to meet the development needs of their area.' However it also states -'Unless: any adverse impacts of doing so, would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.'

As this proposed development site may, adversely affect a Special Area of Conservation NPPF119 comes into effect and the development be restricted. Therefore, this development should not be considered under NPPF14 as - NPPF 119 states: The presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply where development requiring appropriate assessment under the Birds or Habitats Directives in being considered, planned or determined.

Full text:

The Spindlewood Development is simply not a suitable site for housing at this location. It would have major and possible irreparable adverse effects on the adjacent RAMSAR, SAC, SSSI & Ancient woodland site, as well as the overwhelming addition of traffic on Barnhorn Rd (A259) and the direct centre/heart of Little Common Village, not to mention, having a negative affect on the way people live, work, travel and take leisure.

I am aware that the NPPF14 states 'Local planning authorities should positively see opportunities to meet the development needs of their area.' However it also states -'Unless: any adverse impacts of doing so, would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.'

As this proposed development site may, adversely affect a Special Area of Conservation NPPF119 comes into effect and the development be restricted. Therefore, this development should not be considered under NPPF14 as - NPPF 119 states: The presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply where development requiring appropriate assessment under the Birds or Habitats Directives in being considered, planned or determined.