Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for CPRE Hertfordshire search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
WY1 Land south of Little Wymondley
Representation ID: 6176
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to WY1: (see reps on para 4.53, SP8 and SP14-19) - development unsound, not consistent with NPPF, no exceptional circumstances that justify removal. Development would cause significant harm.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
BK3 Land between Cambridge Road and Royston Road
Representation ID: 6189
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to BK3: harmful impact on countryside, contrary to national policy, excessive scale in terms of size and character, unsustainable - employment, services and private vehicle.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
RD1 Land at Blacksmiths Lane
Representation ID: 6190
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to RD1: Harmful impact on the countryside contrary to national policy - no justification.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
RY10 Land south of Newmarket Road
Representation ID: 6191
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to RY10: Harmful impact on the countryside contrary to national policy - no justification.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
SP2 Land beween Horn Hill and Bendish Lane, Whitwell
Representation ID: 6192
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to SP2: Harmful impact on the countryside contrary to national policy - no justification. Excessive scale in size and character of the village, unsustainable location - employment, services and private vehicles.
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Baldock
Representation ID: 6197
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to amended Green Belt boundary (see comment on para 6.26) from current established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national green belt policy. Significant harm to GB and purposes
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Cockernhoe and east of Luton
Representation ID: 6198
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to amended Green Belt boundary (see comment on para 6.26) from current established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national green belt policy. Significant harm to GB and purposes
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Graveley & North of Stevenage
Representation ID: 6199
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to amended Green Belt boundary (see comment on para 6.26) from current established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national green belt policy. Significant harm to GB and purposes
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Hitchin
Representation ID: 6200
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to amended Green Belt boundary (see comment on para 6.26) from current established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national green belt policy. Significant harm to GB and purposes
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Kings Walden
Representation ID: 6201
Received: 23/11/2016
Respondent: CPRE Hertfordshire
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to amended Green Belt boundary (see comment on para 6.26) from current established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national green belt policy. Significant harm to GB and purposes
See attachment
