Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Mr and Mrs Roger and Sarah Thorp search
New search
New search
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC1 Land at Duncots Close
Respondent: Mr and Mrs Roger and Sarah Thorp
Legally compliant? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Representation Summary:
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
Full text:
We are residents of Ickleford, and object to the Proposed Submission for additional housing in Ickleford on the following grounds:-
1. Building on Green Belt
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 as it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework. It also conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
2. Sewerage and Flooding
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1 and IC3 as the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; sites IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden. The Local Plan also conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
3. Lack of proper consultation
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for sites IC3 and LS1, as the NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
4. Traffic
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as we understand that the NHDC modelling is flawed, since it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
5. Air quality
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
6. Relocation of the School
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for site IC3, as the consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages. Ickleford's primary school is thriving and is at the heart of village life. The loss of the school would mean the destruction of Ickleford's historic character.
7. No coordination with neighbouring authorities
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as it appears to be the case that NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
For the above reasons, we therefore request that the Local Plan proposals for Ickleford are reviewed by the Planning Inspector.
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
IC2 Burford Grange, Bedford Road
Respondent: Mr and Mrs Roger and Sarah Thorp
Legally compliant? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Representation Summary:
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
Full text:
We are residents of Ickleford, and object to the Proposed Submission for additional housing in Ickleford on the following grounds:-
1. Building on Green Belt
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 as it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework. It also conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
2. Sewerage and Flooding
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1 and IC3 as the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; sites IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden. The Local Plan also conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
3. Lack of proper consultation
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for sites IC3 and LS1, as the NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
4. Traffic
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as we understand that the NHDC modelling is flawed, since it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
5. Air quality
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
6. Relocation of the School
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for site IC3, as the consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages. Ickleford's primary school is thriving and is at the heart of village life. The loss of the school would mean the destruction of Ickleford's historic character.
7. No coordination with neighbouring authorities
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as it appears to be the case that NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
For the above reasons, we therefore request that the Local Plan proposals for Ickleford are reviewed by the Planning Inspector.
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Respondent: Mr and Mrs Roger and Sarah Thorp
Legally compliant? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Representation Summary:
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
Full text:
We are residents of Ickleford, and object to the Proposed Submission for additional housing in Ickleford on the following grounds:-
1. Building on Green Belt
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 as it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework. It also conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
2. Sewerage and Flooding
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1 and IC3 as the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; sites IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden. The Local Plan also conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
3. Lack of proper consultation
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for sites IC3 and LS1, as the NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
4. Traffic
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as we understand that the NHDC modelling is flawed, since it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
5. Air quality
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
6. Relocation of the School
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for site IC3, as the consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages. Ickleford's primary school is thriving and is at the heart of village life. The loss of the school would mean the destruction of Ickleford's historic character.
7. No coordination with neighbouring authorities
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as it appears to be the case that NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
For the above reasons, we therefore request that the Local Plan proposals for Ickleford are reviewed by the Planning Inspector.
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Respondent: Mr and Mrs Roger and Sarah Thorp
Legally compliant? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Representation Summary:
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
Full text:
We are residents of Ickleford, and object to the Proposed Submission for additional housing in Ickleford on the following grounds:-
1. Building on Green Belt
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2 and IC3 as it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework. It also conflicts with NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt.
2. Sewerage and Flooding
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1 and IC3 as the main sewer cannot cope with current demand; sites IC1 and IC3 will add to this burden. The Local Plan also conflicts with NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce the risk of flooding from new developments.
3. Lack of proper consultation
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Legally Compliant' for sites IC3 and LS1, as the NHDC did not allow prior consultation on these sites.
4. Traffic
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as we understand that the NHDC modelling is flawed, since it does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC policy on transport.
5. Air quality
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as increased traffic pollution conflicts with NHDC policy on air quality.
6. Relocation of the School
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for site IC3, as the consequent impact on the village conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance the historic character of villages. Ickleford's primary school is thriving and is at the heart of village life. The loss of the school would mean the destruction of Ickleford's historic character.
7. No coordination with neighbouring authorities
We believe that the Local Plan is 'Not Sound' for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, as it appears to be the case that NHDC have not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
For the above reasons, we therefore request that the Local Plan proposals for Ickleford are reviewed by the Planning Inspector.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.
