Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options

Search representations

Results for Elmsmead Protection Group search

New search New search

Comment

Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options

QUESTION 75: Do you agree with the preferred site for development at Iden? If not, which site(s) should be preferred?

Representation ID: 22221

Received: 10/02/2017

Respondent: Elmsmead Protection Group

Number of people: 42

Representation Summary:

We strongly disagree with the preferred site as detailed in our answer to Q76 .The site that we prefer is ID6 which is a Brown Field Site, which also has good access on a straight section of road.

Comment

Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options

QUESTION 76: Do you agree with the requirements of Policy IDE1? If not, how would you wish to see it amended?

Representation ID: 22222

Received: 10/02/2017

Respondent: Elmsmead Protection Group

Number of people: 42

Representation Summary:

1/ The listed status of Rose Cottage, Main St has been ignored. The setting of Rose cottage would be materially affected by this development.
2/ Access via Elmsmead is totally inadequate and development on this site has been turned down four times in the past for this reason. Development site ID1a will detrimentally affect more people than any other site.

Comment

Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options

QUESTION 77: Do you agree with the proposed development boundary? If not, how would you like to see it amended?

Representation ID: 22223

Received: 10/02/2017

Respondent: Elmsmead Protection Group

Number of people: 42

Representation Summary:

We do not agree with the proposed development boundary and believe it should remain as it is but with the addition of an Exception Site at ID6.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.