Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Search representations
Results for Royal Court Developments Ltd search
New searchObject
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
12.38
Representation ID: 20737
Received: 28/10/2011
Respondent: Royal Court Developments Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Policy RA1: Villages
Representation ID: 20738
Received: 28/10/2011
Respondent: Royal Court Developments Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy
Figure 12: Distribution of Rural Housing Allocations
Representation ID: 20739
Received: 28/10/2011
Respondent: Royal Court Developments Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
My objection is two-fold:
1. I do not believe it is necessary to have a range of housing requirements for each village in Figure 12.
2. I believe the figures should be described as "up to" a certain level and for that level to be tested at the Site Allocation Stage in terms of the availability of further information in viability and sustainability factors.
3. I believe the Ticehurst housing figures are low.
