Indicative Settlement Boundary

Object

Representation ID: 60492

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: A.C. Lloyd Homes Ltd

Agent: Delta Planning

Objection is raised to the indicative new settlement boundary for Bishop's Tachbrook village. It is considered that the settlement boundary should be amended to include Site 2 land west of Bishop's Tachbrook

Support

Representation ID: 61049

Received: 19/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Jean Drew

It seems sensible to extend the village boundary to include any development on the preferred site south of the school.

Object

Representation ID: 61083

Received: 19/01/2014

Respondent: Mr. Roy Drew

If fewer houses are built and not all of the land is used, the boundary should be extended only to include the development.

Object

Representation ID: 61096

Received: 19/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Crampton

BT should be a larger village,

Object

Representation ID: 61414

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Malcolm Glenn

Agent: KPG Design Associates Ltd

-The positioning of all new development at one end of the main approach road to the settlement is unbalanced and creates an impression of a new-old divide.

Object

Representation ID: 61915

Received: 14/01/2014

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Roy & Maria Hirons

-The moving of the settlement boundary to fit in houses is wrong.

Object

Representation ID: 62154

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Bryan Sims

If we are forced to have housing developments in the village, I would support the alteration of the boundary to the South of the village (preferred option 1) as the only viable extension. However, the new boundary shown on Page 39, in my opinion extends too far west. The narrow 'extra' western area should be changed by extending the line running South along Holt Avenue to meet the Southern perimeter.