Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Profressor Patrick Holmes search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
AS1 Land west of Claybush Road
Representation ID: 2081
Received: 25/11/2016
Respondent: Profressor Patrick Holmes
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to proposed changes to the village boundary to include AS1 on the grounds of:
- extension of boundary to include AS1 is contrary to NPPF and NHDC planning policy
- previous planning application outcomes
- landscape
- heritage
- highway safety - pedestrians and vehicles
- distance to amenities
- accessibility due to elevated position, especially to the elderly and children going to school
- greenfield site
- biodiversity
- archaeology
- lack of accessible bus and train services
- would increase vehicular traffic
- Ashwell Neighbourhood Plan identifies alternative sites within village boundary (including housing needs and accessibility considerations)
I write in relation to the proposed changes to Ashwell village boundary in the Local Plan.
The extension of the village boundary to include site AS1 as a potential building site is contrary to NPPF and NHDC's own planning policy. Applications for building on this site have been rejected on at least three previous occasions based on ".....impact on an important landscape in an historic area....." Nothing has changed!
In relation to NHDC's policy on Highway Safety building on the site would create very high risks to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. It is not within a safe walking distance of village amenities and is elevated above the village by such an amount as to pose serious accessibility problems for the elderly and those taking children to the local school.
The site is a greenfield, bio-diverse area of archaeological interest. It has no readily accessible bus or train services and would create a significant increase in vehicular traffic.
The village is not opposed to housing development in principle. Alternative sites have been identified within the village boundary in the imminent Neighbourhood Plan, matching identified housing needs including, importantly, accessibility for people with mobility difficulties to village amenities.
For these reasons I consider that site AS1 as a potential building site is inappropriate - it is in the wrong place and, given the record and outlook for housing development in Ashwell, it is not necessary.
