Do you support or object to the preferred option for Sustainable Buildings, particularly in respect of higher targets for the reduction of carbon emissions?

Support

Representation ID: 2719

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Devitt

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 2773

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Pauline Neale

It is the Council's aim to meet/exceed expectations for the sustainability of new homes' carbon emissions and water conservation targets.

Object

Representation ID: 2813

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Sheila F. Hadfield

More roads and more traffic will increase urban emissions. At present, trees lining the A46 help to absorb carbon. Should be preserved!

Object

Representation ID: 3011

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs and Mr J Parr and Cotterill

Think of all the carbon omissions needed to produce the fall of 10%

Support

Representation ID: 3114

Received: 17/09/2000

Respondent: Mr Anthony Morris

Support

Support

Representation ID: 3129

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mel Gillman

Reduction in carbon emissions by requiring quality development is to be supported providing it can be achieved at reasonable cost.

Support

Representation ID: 3243

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: mrs stella moore

common sense

Support

Representation ID: 3300

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: Mr David John Bowers

I support it.

Support

Representation ID: 3358

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Terence Kemp

Support

Object

Representation ID: 3467

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr P Dimanbro

Targets will not be reached unless vehicles become carbon neutral - electric propulsion more frequent and cheaper Public Transport.

Support

Representation ID: 3494

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs E. Appleby

Support

Support

Representation ID: 3728

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Richard Brookes

Supported.

Support

Representation ID: 3771

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Dennis Michael Crips

Howe much higher? eg double ?

Object

Representation ID: 3918

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Patricia Diane Freeman

How many carbon emissions would be created by 3500 houses by people who would certainly use their cars.

Object

Representation ID: 3973

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Kim Matthews

The targets are not nearly stringent enough. The aim should be for the building to be as carbon-neutral as possible. Solar panels, ground source heat pumps, double glazing, and rain water harvesting for toilet flushing and garden use shoudl all be planning requirements.

Support

Representation ID: 4111

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Angela Clarke

Support

Object

Representation ID: 4214

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

I do not believe we should set targets with a lower threshold than the regional policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 4250

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Aldi Stores Ltd

Agent: WYG Planning & Design

The percentage target which the Core Strategy should set should relate to energy used in accordance with the emerging RSS Phase 2 (Revision) policy and the figure should be set at 10 percent which is supported by the local climate change strategy and emerging regional and national policy

Object

Representation ID: 4274

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

I do not believe we should set targets with a lower threshold than the regional policy

Support

Representation ID: 4459

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Andrea Telford

support

Support

Representation ID: 4570

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association

support

Support

Representation ID: 4637

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr S Morris

support

Comment

Representation ID: 4731

Received: 23/10/2009

Respondent: V Gill Peppitt

It is important to reduce carbon emissions, however do carbon emissions also come from cars? Good transport, cyclepaths important, I would not want to see 'wind farms locally'.

Object

Representation ID: 5016

Received: 08/10/2009

Respondent: Mr Graham Harrison

OBJECT : Support in respect of new buildings, consider that this is too narrow on interpretation- see answer19 (i).

Support

Representation ID: 5177

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Barry Betts

I would support this as long as the Council does not use it as a revenue collection mechanisim. However, I suspect this is the case.

Object

Representation ID: 5240

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Sonia Owczarek

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 5304

Received: 23/10/2009

Respondent: Lindsay Wood

More houses = more cars = more harmful emissions - plant more trees rather than cutting down.

Support

Representation ID: 5317

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: J. N. Price

Some flexibility may be necessary in the case of re-developed buildings.

Object

Representation ID: 5368

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: SEAN DEELY

I believe that WDC should be setting higher standards

Support

Representation ID: 5420

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: John Baxter

Support.