Proposed Main Modifications

Search Representations

Results for Ross Davies search

New search New search

Object

Proposed Main Modifications

MM207 - Page 138 Policy BA3 (ED146A)

Representation ID: 6930

Received: 02/03/2019

Respondent: Ross Davies

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

See full text below.

Full text:

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these reasons:
1. The changes are not effective, as they do not provide clear guidance on the appropriate extent of development in this part of Baldock.
2. The changes conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
3. It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
The 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.
In my opinion you are trying to ruin one of the last rural towns in Hertfordshire and the only reason I moved here in the first place. If this building takes place I will be forced from my home.

Object

Proposed Main Modifications

MM208 - Page 139 Policy BA4 (ED146A)

Representation ID: 6937

Received: 02/03/2019

Respondent: Ross Davies

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

See full text below.

Full text:

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these reasons:
1. The changes are not effective, as they do not provide clear guidance on the appropriate extent of development in this part of Baldock.
2. The changes conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
3. It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
The 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.
In my opinion you are trying to ruin one of the last rural towns in Hertfordshire and the only reason I moved here in the first place. If this building takes place I will be forced from my home.

Object

Proposed Main Modifications

MM409 - Page 142 paragraph 13.30

Representation ID: 6938

Received: 02/03/2019

Respondent: Ross Davies

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

See full text below.

Full text:

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these reasons:
1. The changes are not effective, as they do not provide clear guidance on the appropriate extent of development in this part of Baldock.
2. The changes conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
3. It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
The 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.
In my opinion you are trying to ruin one of the last rural towns in Hertfordshire and the only reason I moved here in the first place. If this building takes place I will be forced from my home.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.