2 responses from Mr and Mrs A.C. and J. Skinner (Individual)
1. Mr and Mrs A.C. and J. Skinner (Individual) : 22 Jul 2008 09:16:00
A typed or handwritten document was submitted. This has been scanned and can be downloaded below:
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
The South Storth Site (33)
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
The south Storth site (33) seems inappropriate for commercial development.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
areas around Quarray lane and worked out quarray would seem more appropriate with better raod access.
2. Mr and Mrs A.C. and J. Skinner (Individual) : 22 Jul 2008 10:54:00
A typed or handwritten document was submitted. This has been scanned and can be downloaded below:
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
South Storth Site (33)
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Oppose
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
South Storth Site seems inappropriate for light industry from an access point of view.
Please use this space if you wish to set out a new option for consideration.
it would be better to have it at (32) where there are already access road to quarray and other industrial buildings.