Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011 - 2031

Comment

Representation ID: 6380

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

Car parking in Pirton has undoubtedly become a hassle. Houses built in the past did no cater for the increased financial ability of house residents to have more than one vehicle. The village therefore needs to be forward looking not by saying " please not in my back yard " but a positive approach giving true quality of life to those who live in Pirton.

All this is to late for the current houses but in any new development with larger sites allowing car parking in bigger house plots. This could accept a further expansion of the village boundary to allow development to take place where gardens creep into the areas beyond the green belt and into areas scheduled as ancient monuments

Comment

Representation ID: 6402

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

I must assume that under this policy if a "way" [walkway] is agreed across land a development proposal will be supported

Comment

Representation ID: 6403

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

Under this heading I would add that the speed limit in the village should be reduced to 20mph
There is a desperate need for the speed limits to be reduced and enforced in Pirton. Consideration should be given to a speed limit of 20mph but a further reduction to 10mph in certain areas such as the school, Methodist church, St Mary's Church, junction at the Fox public house, entrance to the recreation ground and in front of the shop / post office and the village pond

Comment

Representation ID: 6404

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

I do not see much in the NDP that will enhance the support of local business whereas the economic, social and environmental policies that would come with building new dwellings will deliver results. It is the bigger picture that needs to be explored. This aspect of a development" plan has not been considered

Comment

Representation ID: 6405

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

By building more houses, by making amenities better, by having better services, public and private, residents will be able to maximize their quality of life within the village. Section 106/CIL funding can be made available.

Object

Representation ID: 6406

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

Question whether residents want an extensive archaeological protective policy and particularly if it will mean archaeological investigations having to take place not just on new building but on extensions too.

Chapter should be written in conjunction with landowners.

Policy should be deleted as it stands.

Object

Representation ID: 6407

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

As stated earlier the views to be seen of the AONB should apply towards not from that area.

Coupled with the idea that VCA's should be introduced this approach is nonsense and intrusive. In other words a further negative approach to building houses by creating an additional and unnecessary obstacle. Each planning application should be treated on its own merits and prevented from going through a natural scrutiny by binding arguments set out in a "non document"

Comment

Representation ID: 6408

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

It is illogical that the recreation ground should not form part of the village. The boundary should go around this area. Areas in proximity should be logical thinking also be included in the village boundary.

Comment

Representation ID: 6409

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

Again the Character Assessment document takes hold of policy strategy and demonstrates the "green and environmental" approach.

Comment

Representation ID: 6410

Received: 23/03/2017

Respondent: Mr Wilfred Aspinall

Again the Character Assessment document takes hold of policy strategy and demonstrates the "green and environmental" approach.