Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Ms Carol Garrett search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC1 Land at Duncots Close
Representation ID: 1902
Received: 22/11/2016
Respondent: Ms Carol Garrett
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC3:
- Scale of development
- Building on Green Belt
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt
- Village character
- Open Space
- Sewerage & Flooding
- Lack of Proper Consultation
- Highway infrastructure and congestion
- Air Quality
- Relocation of the School
- Historic Character
- Heritage assets
- No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities (Central Bedfordshire Local Plan)
I am a resident of Ickleford Village in Hertfordshire and would like to lodge my own personal objections to the planned additional housing in Ickleford:
IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes.
Which I feel strongly is an amount of housing that the infrastructure of Ickleford and the surrounding area of Hitchin where we have our G.P. surgeries and secondary schools will not be able to sustain.
1. Building on Green Belt
For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework.
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
Ickleford is a beautiful village surrounded by green fields on the borders of Lower Stondon/Arlesey - Befordshire. This is enjoyed by many families and groups as a countryside area for walking/running and exercise, also walking their pets. The removal of this Green Belt area and adding additional housing will be against our hopes to keep green belt countryside free.
2. Sewerage & Flooding
For sites IC1 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Evidence shows that the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden.
- Conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
With the current difficulties the whole country is experiencing with flooding issues, which then require already stretched services who have to rescue elderly and vulnerable people, requires the use of many government departments to clear the devastation that flooding causes to properties is already a massive burden in this country, and problem that appears to be becoming more and more of a difficult issue. I feel to add to this knowingly is totally unacceptable.
3. Lack of Proper Consultation
For sites IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for the following reason:
- NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
I feel the above comment is self-explanatory and disgraceful if it is 'Not Legally Compliant'. I do wonder why this happened as I am sure there would have been many objections, which I assume for planning purposes is easier to avoid.
4. Traffic
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'not Sound' for the following reasons:
- NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
I have lived in the village for 21 years and brought up our three children here. It already has an excessive amount of traffic driving through the village each day. When taking our children through the village to the local school we often took our lives in our hands because of the narrow pavements and excessive speed of the cars going through the main road. The addition of traffic slowing measures has helped, but I cannot see that adding the amount of housing suggested will help this situation at all. Most people have at least one car per household if not two, and sometimes more. They will all add to the congestion around the school when they leave their premises each day and compromise further the safety of the children trying to access the school.
5. Air Quality
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- Increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
I feel although I am not an expert on Air Pollution, it is blatantly obvious more housing and added car use in the village must add to Air Pollution which is a worldwide issue, if this conflicts with the NHDC policy on air quality surely this is inappropriate.
6. Relocation of the School
For site IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- The consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages.
The village of Ickleford has an amazing historical background and I have always thought that the local school is part of this and situated next to our beautiful church. There are links between the school and the church, and other organizations like the local Scouting and Brownie and Guides Groups. If the school were to be relocated purely because of the building of a new 150 home housing estate this would be devastating to the community of Ickleford. It is also blatantly obvious that the current school would never be able to cope with such an increase in the population of Ickleford.
OUR MAJOR CONCERN: If the school is relocated could you tell me would the existing school field then be granted permission for another huge amount of housing as our back garden is adjoined to the current school field?
7. No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
I am not sure why this has not happened but surely it should have been considered.
I would like to say as a resident I am really concerned about the impact the planned housing will have on the village of Ickleford, its school, the traffic increase, we currently use G.P. surgeries in Hitchin and they struggle to cope with their patient numbers. I am worried how much the situation will deteriorate with 319 additional homes in the village. The local secondary schools in Hitchin are highly in demand and surely also will struggle to accommodate the planned new housing. I feel there is currently no increase in supporting community infrastructure, if anything just financial cut backs, closures of school etc. - how can this current suggested additional housing be appropriate?
I look forward to hearing from you with your comments on the above. If there is any way this concern can be forwarded to the relevant committees I would be more than grateful.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC2 Burford Grange, Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1903
Received: 22/11/2016
Respondent: Ms Carol Garrett
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC3:
- Scale of development
- Building on Green Belt
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt
- Village character
- Open Space
- Sewerage & Flooding
- Lack of Proper Consultation
- Highway infrastructure and congestion
- Air Quality
- Relocation of the School
- Historic Character
- Heritage assets
- No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities (Central Bedfordshire Local Plan)
I am a resident of Ickleford Village in Hertfordshire and would like to lodge my own personal objections to the planned additional housing in Ickleford:
IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes.
Which I feel strongly is an amount of housing that the infrastructure of Ickleford and the surrounding area of Hitchin where we have our G.P. surgeries and secondary schools will not be able to sustain.
1. Building on Green Belt
For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework.
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
Ickleford is a beautiful village surrounded by green fields on the borders of Lower Stondon/Arlesey - Befordshire. This is enjoyed by many families and groups as a countryside area for walking/running and exercise, also walking their pets. The removal of this Green Belt area and adding additional housing will be against our hopes to keep green belt countryside free.
2. Sewerage & Flooding
For sites IC1 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Evidence shows that the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden.
- Conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
With the current difficulties the whole country is experiencing with flooding issues, which then require already stretched services who have to rescue elderly and vulnerable people, requires the use of many government departments to clear the devastation that flooding causes to properties is already a massive burden in this country, and problem that appears to be becoming more and more of a difficult issue. I feel to add to this knowingly is totally unacceptable.
3. Lack of Proper Consultation
For sites IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for the following reason:
- NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
I feel the above comment is self-explanatory and disgraceful if it is 'Not Legally Compliant'. I do wonder why this happened as I am sure there would have been many objections, which I assume for planning purposes is easier to avoid.
4. Traffic
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'not Sound' for the following reasons:
- NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
I have lived in the village for 21 years and brought up our three children here. It already has an excessive amount of traffic driving through the village each day. When taking our children through the village to the local school we often took our lives in our hands because of the narrow pavements and excessive speed of the cars going through the main road. The addition of traffic slowing measures has helped, but I cannot see that adding the amount of housing suggested will help this situation at all. Most people have at least one car per household if not two, and sometimes more. They will all add to the congestion around the school when they leave their premises each day and compromise further the safety of the children trying to access the school.
5. Air Quality
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- Increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
I feel although I am not an expert on Air Pollution, it is blatantly obvious more housing and added car use in the village must add to Air Pollution which is a worldwide issue, if this conflicts with the NHDC policy on air quality surely this is inappropriate.
6. Relocation of the School
For site IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- The consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages.
The village of Ickleford has an amazing historical background and I have always thought that the local school is part of this and situated next to our beautiful church. There are links between the school and the church, and other organizations like the local Scouting and Brownie and Guides Groups. If the school were to be relocated purely because of the building of a new 150 home housing estate this would be devastating to the community of Ickleford. It is also blatantly obvious that the current school would never be able to cope with such an increase in the population of Ickleford.
OUR MAJOR CONCERN: If the school is relocated could you tell me would the existing school field then be granted permission for another huge amount of housing as our back garden is adjoined to the current school field?
7. No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
I am not sure why this has not happened but surely it should have been considered.
I would like to say as a resident I am really concerned about the impact the planned housing will have on the village of Ickleford, its school, the traffic increase, we currently use G.P. surgeries in Hitchin and they struggle to cope with their patient numbers. I am worried how much the situation will deteriorate with 319 additional homes in the village. The local secondary schools in Hitchin are highly in demand and surely also will struggle to accommodate the planned new housing. I feel there is currently no increase in supporting community infrastructure, if anything just financial cut backs, closures of school etc. - how can this current suggested additional housing be appropriate?
I look forward to hearing from you with your comments on the above. If there is any way this concern can be forwarded to the relevant committees I would be more than grateful.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC3 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1904
Received: 22/11/2016
Respondent: Ms Carol Garrett
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC3:
- Scale of development
- Building on Green Belt
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt
- Village character
- Open Space
- Sewerage & Flooding
- Lack of Proper Consultation
- Highway infrastructure and congestion
- Air Quality
- Relocation of the School
- Historic Character
- Heritage assets
- No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities (Central Bedfordshire Local Plan)
I am a resident of Ickleford Village in Hertfordshire and would like to lodge my own personal objections to the planned additional housing in Ickleford:
IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes.
Which I feel strongly is an amount of housing that the infrastructure of Ickleford and the surrounding area of Hitchin where we have our G.P. surgeries and secondary schools will not be able to sustain.
1. Building on Green Belt
For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework.
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
Ickleford is a beautiful village surrounded by green fields on the borders of Lower Stondon/Arlesey - Befordshire. This is enjoyed by many families and groups as a countryside area for walking/running and exercise, also walking their pets. The removal of this Green Belt area and adding additional housing will be against our hopes to keep green belt countryside free.
2. Sewerage & Flooding
For sites IC1 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Evidence shows that the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden.
- Conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
With the current difficulties the whole country is experiencing with flooding issues, which then require already stretched services who have to rescue elderly and vulnerable people, requires the use of many government departments to clear the devastation that flooding causes to properties is already a massive burden in this country, and problem that appears to be becoming more and more of a difficult issue. I feel to add to this knowingly is totally unacceptable.
3. Lack of Proper Consultation
For sites IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for the following reason:
- NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
I feel the above comment is self-explanatory and disgraceful if it is 'Not Legally Compliant'. I do wonder why this happened as I am sure there would have been many objections, which I assume for planning purposes is easier to avoid.
4. Traffic
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'not Sound' for the following reasons:
- NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
I have lived in the village for 21 years and brought up our three children here. It already has an excessive amount of traffic driving through the village each day. When taking our children through the village to the local school we often took our lives in our hands because of the narrow pavements and excessive speed of the cars going through the main road. The addition of traffic slowing measures has helped, but I cannot see that adding the amount of housing suggested will help this situation at all. Most people have at least one car per household if not two, and sometimes more. They will all add to the congestion around the school when they leave their premises each day and compromise further the safety of the children trying to access the school.
5. Air Quality
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- Increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
I feel although I am not an expert on Air Pollution, it is blatantly obvious more housing and added car use in the village must add to Air Pollution which is a worldwide issue, if this conflicts with the NHDC policy on air quality surely this is inappropriate.
6. Relocation of the School
For site IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- The consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages.
The village of Ickleford has an amazing historical background and I have always thought that the local school is part of this and situated next to our beautiful church. There are links between the school and the church, and other organizations like the local Scouting and Brownie and Guides Groups. If the school were to be relocated purely because of the building of a new 150 home housing estate this would be devastating to the community of Ickleford. It is also blatantly obvious that the current school would never be able to cope with such an increase in the population of Ickleford.
OUR MAJOR CONCERN: If the school is relocated could you tell me would the existing school field then be granted permission for another huge amount of housing as our back garden is adjoined to the current school field?
7. No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
I am not sure why this has not happened but surely it should have been considered.
I would like to say as a resident I am really concerned about the impact the planned housing will have on the village of Ickleford, its school, the traffic increase, we currently use G.P. surgeries in Hitchin and they struggle to cope with their patient numbers. I am worried how much the situation will deteriorate with 319 additional homes in the village. The local secondary schools in Hitchin are highly in demand and surely also will struggle to accommodate the planned new housing. I feel there is currently no increase in supporting community infrastructure, if anything just financial cut backs, closures of school etc. - how can this current suggested additional housing be appropriate?
I look forward to hearing from you with your comments on the above. If there is any way this concern can be forwarded to the relevant committees I would be more than grateful.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
LS1 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1905
Received: 22/11/2016
Respondent: Ms Carol Garrett
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to LS1:
- Scale of development
- Building on Green Belt
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt
- Village character
- Open Space
- Sewerage & Flooding
- Lack of Proper Consultation
- Highway infrastructure and congestion
- Air Quality
- Relocation of the School
- Historic Character
- Heritage assets
- No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities (Central Bedfordshire Local Plan)
I am a resident of Ickleford Village in Hertfordshire and would like to lodge my own personal objections to the planned additional housing in Ickleford:
IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes.
Which I feel strongly is an amount of housing that the infrastructure of Ickleford and the surrounding area of Hitchin where we have our G.P. surgeries and secondary schools will not be able to sustain.
1. Building on Green Belt
For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework.
- Conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
Ickleford is a beautiful village surrounded by green fields on the borders of Lower Stondon/Arlesey - Befordshire. This is enjoyed by many families and groups as a countryside area for walking/running and exercise, also walking their pets. The removal of this Green Belt area and adding additional housing will be against our hopes to keep green belt countryside free.
2. Sewerage & Flooding
For sites IC1 and IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reasons:
- Evidence shows that the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden.
- Conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
With the current difficulties the whole country is experiencing with flooding issues, which then require already stretched services who have to rescue elderly and vulnerable people, requires the use of many government departments to clear the devastation that flooding causes to properties is already a massive burden in this country, and problem that appears to be becoming more and more of a difficult issue. I feel to add to this knowingly is totally unacceptable.
3. Lack of Proper Consultation
For sites IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for the following reason:
- NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
I feel the above comment is self-explanatory and disgraceful if it is 'Not Legally Compliant'. I do wonder why this happened as I am sure there would have been many objections, which I assume for planning purposes is easier to avoid.
4. Traffic
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'not Sound' for the following reasons:
- NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
I have lived in the village for 21 years and brought up our three children here. It already has an excessive amount of traffic driving through the village each day. When taking our children through the village to the local school we often took our lives in our hands because of the narrow pavements and excessive speed of the cars going through the main road. The addition of traffic slowing measures has helped, but I cannot see that adding the amount of housing suggested will help this situation at all. Most people have at least one car per household if not two, and sometimes more. They will all add to the congestion around the school when they leave their premises each day and compromise further the safety of the children trying to access the school.
5. Air Quality
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- Increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
I feel although I am not an expert on Air Pollution, it is blatantly obvious more housing and added car use in the village must add to Air Pollution which is a worldwide issue, if this conflicts with the NHDC policy on air quality surely this is inappropriate.
6. Relocation of the School
For site IC3 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- The consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages.
The village of Ickleford has an amazing historical background and I have always thought that the local school is part of this and situated next to our beautiful church. There are links between the school and the church, and other organizations like the local Scouting and Brownie and Guides Groups. If the school were to be relocated purely because of the building of a new 150 home housing estate this would be devastating to the community of Ickleford. It is also blatantly obvious that the current school would never be able to cope with such an increase in the population of Ickleford.
OUR MAJOR CONCERN: If the school is relocated could you tell me would the existing school field then be granted permission for another huge amount of housing as our back garden is adjoined to the current school field?
7. No Co-Ordination with Neighbouring Authorities
For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - The Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason:
- NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
I am not sure why this has not happened but surely it should have been considered.
I would like to say as a resident I am really concerned about the impact the planned housing will have on the village of Ickleford, its school, the traffic increase, we currently use G.P. surgeries in Hitchin and they struggle to cope with their patient numbers. I am worried how much the situation will deteriorate with 319 additional homes in the village. The local secondary schools in Hitchin are highly in demand and surely also will struggle to accommodate the planned new housing. I feel there is currently no increase in supporting community infrastructure, if anything just financial cut backs, closures of school etc. - how can this current suggested additional housing be appropriate?
I look forward to hearing from you with your comments on the above. If there is any way this concern can be forwarded to the relevant committees I would be more than grateful.