3 responses from Mrs Zoe Davison (Individual)
1. Mrs Zoe Davison (Individual) : 29 May 2008 20:45:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
4.70 Sustainability Appraisal
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.
page 169, paragraph 4.70
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.
You state that the preferred option scores negatively against environmental and natural resource indications.
To say that all developments will be subject to the sustainable development principles in order to mitigate against these negative impacts is a totally unacceptable approach, and contrary to earlier statements.
According to PO9 (principle 8, page 112), new developments are required to respect and be sympathetic to the character of the locality, enhance the existing built environment and create a 'sense of place'. ensure the amenity of neighbouring properties are protected and that the amenity of future occupiers will not be affected by adjoining existing users. Hopefully these words mean what they say.
The plan is not sound in relation to sustainability appraisal
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
I would suggest that the scale of the development has to be appropriate to the area to reduce the negative impacts.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination
Adopted by the District Council
2. Mrs Zoe Davison (Individual) : 29 May 2008 10:46:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
4.70 Sustainability Appraisal
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.
page 169, paragraph 4.70
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.
You state that the preferred option scores negatively against environmental and natural resource indications.
To say that all developments will be subject to the sustainable development principles in order to mitigate against these negative impacts is a totally unacceptable approach, and contrary to earlier statements.
According to PO9 (principle 8, page 112), new developments are required to respect and be sympathetic to the character of the locality, enhance the existing built environment and create a 'sense of place'. ensure the amenity of neighbouring properties are protected and that the amenity of future occupiers will not be affected by adjoining existing users. Hopefully these words mean what they say.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
I would suggest that the scale of the development has to be appropriate to the area to reduce the negative impacts.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Adopted by the District Council
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination
3. Mrs Zoe Davison (Individual) : 29 May 2008 10:59:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
4.65 - 4.69 Policy Context and Justification
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.
page 168, Table 6.3
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Neither support nor oppose - just want to comment
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.
To consider that infilling at Heversham and Leasgill, which are two quite separate hamlets, will have little impact on the landscape seems to consider the effect of new building on the landscape rather than the effect of new building on the existing buildings. Already there are traffic problems on the old A6 with school traffic, farm traffic and the increasing number of parked cars. People here do not see Milnthorpe as their service centre, and travel much further than possible by walking or public transport. Any restrictions on car use will be seen as a retrograde step.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
First an acknowledgement that the older linear hamlet of Leasgill with a single access road requires a different treatment to the more traditional layout of Heversham. Secondly a need to restrict development to affordable housing rather than expensive housing for second homes.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Adopted by the District Council
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination