Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Mr Rowan Skinner search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC1 Land at Duncots Close
Representation ID: 1965
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Rowan Skinner
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC1: Green Belt, wastewater infrastructure capacity, flooding, traffic modelling does not consider increased traffic from C Beds, air quality, cumulative impacts with C Beds plan not considered, highway safety
I write to you as a resident of Ickleford in regard to the NHDC Local Plan for additional housing in and around Ickleford.
As a younger home owner and resident of Ickleford I recognise the urgent need for additional housing in the London Commuter belt, with this in mind I still feel that the proposal is ill thought through and unsound for the following reason.
1) Duncots Close (location of IC1) is small cut-d-sac with no pavements - pedestrians have to walk on the road to access the houses. The situation as is, is already a serious safety hazard. Any additional housing in this area as proposed under IC1 will increase traffic and poses a very serious safety hazard to the residents and other pedestrians. Due to the positioning of houses it appears impossible to provide suitable pavements.
Summary: Objection of the grounds of safety.
2) For site IC1, IC2 and IC3 the Local plan is not sound as it is in conflict with eh National Planning Policy Framework and conflicts with the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
3) Duncots Close (location for IC1) has already suffered with sewerage draining issues as the main sewer cannot cope with the demand. The proposed IC1 and IC3 will increase this demand and will increase risk of flooding for the local residents.
4) For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason: NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport
5) 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
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
7. No coordination 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
Please may the planning inspector review the proposal for Ickleford with the above comments in mind?
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC2 Burford Grange, Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1966
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Rowan Skinner
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC2: Green Belt, traffic modelling does not consider increased traffic from C Beds, air quality, cumulative impacts with C Beds plan not considered
I write to you as a resident of Ickleford in regard to the NHDC Local Plan for additional housing in and around Ickleford.
As a younger home owner and resident of Ickleford I recognise the urgent need for additional housing in the London Commuter belt, with this in mind I still feel that the proposal is ill thought through and unsound for the following reason.
1) Duncots Close (location of IC1) is small cut-d-sac with no pavements - pedestrians have to walk on the road to access the houses. The situation as is, is already a serious safety hazard. Any additional housing in this area as proposed under IC1 will increase traffic and poses a very serious safety hazard to the residents and other pedestrians. Due to the positioning of houses it appears impossible to provide suitable pavements.
Summary: Objection of the grounds of safety.
2) For site IC1, IC2 and IC3 the Local plan is not sound as it is in conflict with eh National Planning Policy Framework and conflicts with the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
3) Duncots Close (location for IC1) has already suffered with sewerage draining issues as the main sewer cannot cope with the demand. The proposed IC1 and IC3 will increase this demand and will increase risk of flooding for the local residents.
4) For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason: NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport
5) 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
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
7. No coordination 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
Please may the planning inspector review the proposal for Ickleford with the above comments in mind?
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC3 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1967
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Rowan Skinner
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC3: Green Belt, wastewater infrastructure capacity, flooding, no prior consultation, traffic modelling does not consider increased traffic from C Beds, impact of school relocation on village character, air quality, cumulative impacts with C Beds plan not considered
I write to you as a resident of Ickleford in regard to the NHDC Local Plan for additional housing in and around Ickleford.
As a younger home owner and resident of Ickleford I recognise the urgent need for additional housing in the London Commuter belt, with this in mind I still feel that the proposal is ill thought through and unsound for the following reason.
1) Duncots Close (location of IC1) is small cut-d-sac with no pavements - pedestrians have to walk on the road to access the houses. The situation as is, is already a serious safety hazard. Any additional housing in this area as proposed under IC1 will increase traffic and poses a very serious safety hazard to the residents and other pedestrians. Due to the positioning of houses it appears impossible to provide suitable pavements.
Summary: Objection of the grounds of safety.
2) For site IC1, IC2 and IC3 the Local plan is not sound as it is in conflict with eh National Planning Policy Framework and conflicts with the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
3) Duncots Close (location for IC1) has already suffered with sewerage draining issues as the main sewer cannot cope with the demand. The proposed IC1 and IC3 will increase this demand and will increase risk of flooding for the local residents.
4) For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason: NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport
5) 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
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
7. No coordination 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
Please may the planning inspector review the proposal for Ickleford with the above comments in mind?
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
LS1 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 1968
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Rowan Skinner
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to LS1: No prior consultation, traffic modelling does not consider increased traffic from C Beds, air quality, cumulative impacts with C Beds plan not considered
I write to you as a resident of Ickleford in regard to the NHDC Local Plan for additional housing in and around Ickleford.
As a younger home owner and resident of Ickleford I recognise the urgent need for additional housing in the London Commuter belt, with this in mind I still feel that the proposal is ill thought through and unsound for the following reason.
1) Duncots Close (location of IC1) is small cut-d-sac with no pavements - pedestrians have to walk on the road to access the houses. The situation as is, is already a serious safety hazard. Any additional housing in this area as proposed under IC1 will increase traffic and poses a very serious safety hazard to the residents and other pedestrians. Due to the positioning of houses it appears impossible to provide suitable pavements.
Summary: Objection of the grounds of safety.
2) For site IC1, IC2 and IC3 the Local plan is not sound as it is in conflict with eh National Planning Policy Framework and conflicts with the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
3) Duncots Close (location for IC1) has already suffered with sewerage draining issues as the main sewer cannot cope with the demand. The proposed IC1 and IC3 will increase this demand and will increase risk of flooding for the local residents.
4) For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 - the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for the following reason: NHDC modelling is flawed as it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport
5) 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
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
7. No coordination 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
Please may the planning inspector review the proposal for Ickleford with the above comments in mind?