Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Mr Tom Edwards search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC3 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 3300
Received: 29/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Tom Edwards
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC3:
- Not been subject to proper legal consultation
- Preserving historic village
- Conflicts with NPPF and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
- Relocating School and the impact on village centre
I write this in a personal capacity, solely as a resident as Ickleford.
I believe that the local plan impacting Ickleford village has not been subject to proper legal consultation. It also contradicts NHDC policy on preserving historic villages.
On sites IC1, IC2 & IC3 the local plan is " Not Sound" as it also conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
On site IC3 and LS1 the local plan is not legally compliant as there was no consultation on these sites.
Also on site IC3 relocating the school is "Not Sound" as it would destroy the centre of the village, contrary to the NHDC policy to protect historic villages.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
LS1 Land at Bedford Road
Representation ID: 3301
Received: 29/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Tom Edwards
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to LS1:
- Not been subject to proper legal consultation
- Preserving historic village
- Conflicts with NPPF and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
- Relocating School and the impact on village centre
I write this in a personal capacity, solely as a resident as Ickleford.
I believe that the local plan impacting Ickleford village has not been subject to proper legal consultation. It also contradicts NHDC policy on preserving historic villages.
On sites IC1, IC2 & IC3 the local plan is " Not Sound" as it also conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
On site IC3 and LS1 the local plan is not legally compliant as there was no consultation on these sites.
Also on site IC3 relocating the school is "Not Sound" as it would destroy the centre of the village, contrary to the NHDC policy to protect historic villages.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC2 Burford Grange, Bedford Road
Representation ID: 3302
Received: 29/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Tom Edwards
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC2:
- Not been subject to proper legal consultation
- Preserving historic village
- Conflicts with NPPF and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
- Relocating School and the impact on village centre
I write this in a personal capacity, solely as a resident as Ickleford.
I believe that the local plan impacting Ickleford village has not been subject to proper legal consultation. It also contradicts NHDC policy on preserving historic villages.
On sites IC1, IC2 & IC3 the local plan is " Not Sound" as it also conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
On site IC3 and LS1 the local plan is not legally compliant as there was no consultation on these sites.
Also on site IC3 relocating the school is "Not Sound" as it would destroy the centre of the village, contrary to the NHDC policy to protect historic villages.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC1 Land at Duncots Close
Representation ID: 3303
Received: 29/11/2016
Respondent: Mr Tom Edwards
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to IC1:
- Not been subject to proper legal consultation
- Preserving historic village
- Conflicts with NPPF and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
- Relocating School and the impact on village centre
I write this in a personal capacity, solely as a resident as Ickleford.
I believe that the local plan impacting Ickleford village has not been subject to proper legal consultation. It also contradicts NHDC policy on preserving historic villages.
On sites IC1, IC2 & IC3 the local plan is " Not Sound" as it also conflicts with National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on the Green Belt.
On site IC3 and LS1 the local plan is not legally compliant as there was no consultation on these sites.
Also on site IC3 relocating the school is "Not Sound" as it would destroy the centre of the village, contrary to the NHDC policy to protect historic villages.
