The Consultation Draft Local Plan

Showing comments and forms 31 to 38 of 38

Support

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6267

Received: 04/04/2017

Respondent: Mrs Jane Hardwick

Representation:

Overall supports the Draft Plan and would urge the Council to progress the Plan with speed.

Full text:

NEDDC Local Plane (2011-2033) Consultation Draft

I am writing to SUPPORT the Draft Plan

I support the re-categorisation of Ashover and Kelstage as level 3 settlements and Alton, Fallgate and Littlemoor as level 4 settlements which realistically reflect these communities. I support that there is "no specific housing requirements" for level 3 & 4 settlements

I support the removal of housing growth targets for the rural west of the District

I support the importance of local settlement gaps 4.70 - 4.75

My concerns are:

4.80 I am concerned that the revised settlements boundaries will be published alongside the Publication Version of the Local Plan without public consultation.

Policy SDC2 - I am concerned that there isn't enough protection for Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows. It is too easy for developers and landowners to destroy all of these without punishment. and I feel this policy should be stronger.

Overall I SUPPORT the Draft Plan and would urge the Council to progress the Plan with speed.

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6316

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Strata Homes Limited

Agent: DLP (Planning) Ltd - Sheffield office

Representation:

Strata Homes object to the Policies Map and wish to include this site as a housing allocation site next to the proposed allocation of land off Whitecotes Lane for housing in Chesterfield Borough Council.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6583

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Brailsford

Agent: Roger Yarwood Planning Consultant Ltd

Representation:

The absence of either a Policy Map or a Green Belt Map covering the whole of the District leaves a policy vacuum in regard to some areas, because much of the District falls beyond any of the maps. This is a major deficiency and calls into question the validity of the consultation.
Higham is a significant settlement equally as sustainable as some of the settlements which feature on Policies Maps and deserves consideration for a reasonable level of housing provision.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6589

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Mr Neil Mowatt

Agent: Roger Yarwood Planning Consultant Ltd

Representation:

The absence of either a Policy Map or a Green Belt Map covering the whole of the District leaves a policy vacuum in regard to some areas, because much of the District falls beyond any of the maps. This is a major deficiency and calls into question the validity of the consultation.
Wessington is a significant settlement equally sustainable as some of the settlements which feature on Policies Maps. Wessington deserves better consideration.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6596

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Mr Grey

Agent: Roger Yarwood Planning Consultant Ltd

Representation:

Mr Grey points out that the absence of either a Policy Map or a Green Belt Map covering the whole of the District leaves a policy vacuum in regard to some areas, because much of the District falls beyond any of the maps.

Full text:

See attachment

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6633

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Home Builders Federation

Representation:

At present the Draft Local Plan is unsound because of a number of unresolved matters which are summarised as:-

-no Statement of Co-operation justifying the defined HMA, its relationship with other neighbouring authorities and the resolution of any unmet housing needs;

-a proposed housing requirement which is not based on an up to date OAHN;

-the lack of flexibility in the HLS in order to pass the Government's proposed Housing Delivery Test and maintain a 5 YHLS throughout the plan period;

-an out-of-date whole plan viability assessment;

-no evidence to justified policy requirements on housing standards and self-build.

Full text:

See attached

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6657

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Mr Matt Slack

Agent: Roger Yarwood Planning Consultant Ltd

Representation:

M Slack objects to the Clay Cross Policies Map and states that it is a failure to not include the Land opposite of Rykneld House within the Clay Cross Policies Map.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Representation ID: 6684

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Mr Perez

Agent: Roger Yarwood Planning Consultant Ltd

Representation:

Mr Perez points out that the absence of either a Policy Map or a Green Belt Map covering the whole of the District leaves a policy vacuum in regard to some areas, because much of the District falls beyond any of the maps.

Full text:

See attachment