HS2 Protecting Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities

Support

Representation ID: 65085

Received: 23/06/2014

Respondent: Sport England

I would suggest the following amendment to be in line with the NPPF paragraph 74 from:
1.an alternative can be provided which is at least equivalent in terms of size, quality, accessibility, usefulness and attractiveness, and a management plan is submitted to ensure the future viability of the provision, or
TO
an alternative can be provided which is at least equivalent or better provision in terms of size, quality, accessibility, usefulness and attractiveness, and a management plan is submitted to ensure the future viability of the provision,

Object

Representation ID: 65394

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Nigel Hamilton

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

There should be no loss of public open space.

Support

Representation ID: 65548

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Keith Wellsted

Good idea

Object

Representation ID: 67137

Received: 24/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Ray Steele

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Totally ignored especially in Neighbourhood Plans for Whitnash. The Neighbourhood Plan has identified the only remaining open spaces within its boundary for recreation and leisure including wheelchair accessible routes to a 'Whitnash Wood'. The Local Plan has chosen to include all possible areas for housing instead. Whitnash will be totally covered with houses without being able to expand culturally and provide leisure space within its boundary