MM 166 / FM 100

Showing comments and forms 1 to 13 of 13

Support

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 8560

Received: 07/06/2021

Respondent: Green Party

Representation Summary:

"All development should deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity and geodiversity, contribute to ecological networks and the water environment, and/or restore degraded or isolated habitats where possible."

Replace with

"All development must deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity and geodiversity, contribute to ecological networks and the water environment, and/or restore degraded or isolated habitats where possible, where that biodiversity considers a broad range of flora and fauna and is implemented in such a manner that the gains can not be easily destroyed, such as using covenants to protect against damaging development. Consider the wellbeing of future generations."

Full text:

"All development should deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity and geodiversity, contribute to ecological networks and the water environment, and/or restore degraded or isolated habitats where possible."

Replace with

"All development must deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity and geodiversity, contribute to ecological networks and the water environment, and/or restore degraded or isolated habitats where possible, where that biodiversity considers a broad range of flora and fauna and is implemented in such a manner that the gains can not be easily destroyed, such as using covenants to protect against damaging development. Consider the wellbeing of future generations."

Support

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 8734

Received: 21/06/2021

Respondent: Preston Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Preston Parish Council supports this modification which gives protection to specific sites including Sites of Special Scientific Interest. NHDC must ensure that this policy is strictly adhered to throughout the life of the Local Plan.

Full text:

Preston Parish Council supports this modification which gives protection to specific sites including Sites of Special Scientific Interest. NHDC must ensure that this policy is strictly adhered to throughout the life of the Local Plan.

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9217

Received: 04/06/2021

Respondent: Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation

Representation Summary:

See attached representation

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9342

Received: 13/06/2021

Respondent: Warden Developments Ltd

Agent: Phillips Planning Services Ltd

Representation Summary:

See attached representation

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9703

Received: 22/06/2021

Respondent: Miss Hayley Ward

Representation Summary:

See attached - Destruction of Green Belt cannot result in biodiversity gains

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9717

Received: 24/06/2021

Respondent: Landhold Capital on behalf of Southern & Regional Developments

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Representation Summary:

See attached - 12m buffer is arbitrary and will sterilise development; buffers should be appropriate on a site-by-site basis

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9772

Received: 24/06/2021

Respondent: Countryside Properties PLC

Agent: Barker Parry Town Planning

Representation Summary:

See attached; detailed commentary on policy and tests of soundness, object to 12m buffer

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Support

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9779

Received: 11/06/2021

Respondent: Chiltern Society

Representation Summary:

See attached; support all the changes

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9800

Received: 17/06/2021

Respondent: Save The Worlds First Garden City

Representation Summary:

See attached; lacks definition and detail of implementation

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 9900

Received: 23/06/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jill Saunders

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

See attached representation

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Comment

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 10009

Received: 23/06/2021

Respondent: Herts WithOut Waste

Representation Summary:

See attached; typo require / required

Full text:

See Attached

The attached document identifies points in the text that in our view need to be clarified for soundness of the Local Plan. These points are offered as comments rather than by way of objection or approval. As required, the comments apply to the proposed changes shown in bold, red style and the immediate contexts that affect, and are affected by, the meanings of the proposed modifications.

The document is in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) and each comment is marked via two kinds of annotation:
• highlighting of the words referred to, unless that's an entire paragraph, and
• a 'speech bubble' to state our suggestion or query about the item.

Attachments:

Support

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 10032

Received: 24/06/2021

Respondent: Herts and Middlesex Badger Group

Number of people: 3

Representation Summary:

See attached representation

Full text:

In regards to the latest modifications of the NHDC Local Plan; we would like to advise that overall we are in support of the modifications with regard to biodiversity. and very pleased that amendments have been made, These amendments include the addition to SP12 a x and NEx 11 xx of non-designated sites that include important habitats and species,

There are numerous sites within Hertfordshire that are very important in regards to habitat/species which have not been formally designated.

However, there is one point of the policy with which we wish to raise as a concern: 11.xx Sites allocated in this Plan have the potential to impact on designated biodiversity sites are required to provide an ecological survey and provide mitigation and/or off-setting measures as necessary. We would ask that it is amended to read ‘sites allocated in this plan that have the potential to impact on biodiversity are required to provide an ecological survey’ – the words ‘designated and sites’ should surely be removed as firstly there are many important biodiversity habitats that have not been designated and secondly, surely a site that has been designated as a biodiversity site shouldn’t actually be developed?

Although we are in support of the biodiversity modifications for this local plan - we need to reiterate that this does not include GA2 in which as you are aware, we have fully objected to HMNG advised earlier this year that to go ahead would be in breach of the law as it would be contravening the Badger Act 1992. We stand by our previous submission in requesting that GA2 is removed from the Local Plan as the situation regarding the protected species has increased since previous submissions and feel that a meeting on the GA2 site would give us the opportunity to be able to highlight the seriousness of the situation to the Planning Department.

In accordance with the modifications to Policy Nex - ‘Planning permission will only be granted for development proposals that appropriately protect, enhance and manage biodiversity’ which cannot be adhered to in this respect; it then goes on to state all development should deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity - again, this would not be the case in regards to GA2, it would in fact have a detrimental impact on biodiversity including the protected species. We, therefore, request that this site is reconsidered so that it can be withdrawn from the local plan saving any further action needing to be taken.

HMBG have worked with a number of LPA’s within Hertfordshire and we would like to be able to work with NHDC, in regards to the current local plan as well as future sites/plans, preferably at the Regulation 18 stage in the future.

Object

Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

Representation ID: 10033

Received: 24/06/2021

Respondent: Herts and Middlesex Badger Group

Number of people: 3

Representation Summary:

See attached representation in respect of supporting text to new policy NEx: Biodiversity and geological sites

Full text:

In regards to the latest modifications of the NHDC Local Plan; we would like to advise that overall we are in support of the modifications with regard to biodiversity. and very pleased that amendments have been made, These amendments include the addition to SP12 a x and NEx 11 xx of non-designated sites that include important habitats and species,

There are numerous sites within Hertfordshire that are very important in regards to habitat/species which have not been formally designated.

However, there is one point of the policy with which we wish to raise as a concern: 11.xx Sites allocated in this Plan have the potential to impact on designated biodiversity sites are required to provide an ecological survey and provide mitigation and/or off-setting measures as necessary. We would ask that it is amended to read ‘sites allocated in this plan that have the potential to impact on biodiversity are required to provide an ecological survey’ – the words ‘designated and sites’ should surely be removed as firstly there are many important biodiversity habitats that have not been designated and secondly, surely a site that has been designated as a biodiversity site shouldn’t actually be developed?

Although we are in support of the biodiversity modifications for this local plan - we need to reiterate that this does not include GA2 in which as you are aware, we have fully objected to HMNG advised earlier this year that to go ahead would be in breach of the law as it would be contravening the Badger Act 1992. We stand by our previous submission in requesting that GA2 is removed from the Local Plan as the situation regarding the protected species has increased since previous submissions and feel that a meeting on the GA2 site would give us the opportunity to be able to highlight the seriousness of the situation to the Planning Department.

In accordance with the modifications to Policy Nex - ‘Planning permission will only be granted for development proposals that appropriately protect, enhance and manage biodiversity’ which cannot be adhered to in this respect; it then goes on to state all development should deliver measurable net gains for biodiversity - again, this would not be the case in regards to GA2, it would in fact have a detrimental impact on biodiversity including the protected species. We, therefore, request that this site is reconsidered so that it can be withdrawn from the local plan saving any further action needing to be taken.

HMBG have worked with a number of LPA’s within Hertfordshire and we would like to be able to work with NHDC, in regards to the current local plan as well as future sites/plans, preferably at the Regulation 18 stage in the future.