Preferred Options

Search representations

Results for Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council search

New search New search

Object

Preferred Options

Whitnash East (South of Sydenham)

Representation ID: 49860

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The site is potentially uneconomic to develop requiring substantial infrastructure costs (new road costing in excess of £18m). Only necessary to consider site if you support the Preferred Options housing projections. The Parish Council supports a substantially lower housing projection figure.

Full text:

See Attachments

Support

Preferred Options

Thickthorn

Representation ID: 49861

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Use of this as part of the policy for dispersal of the housing required is supported. It is between existing housing and the A46 and includes a number of playing fields. These should be retained or relocated as part of the development with sufficient landscaping and retaining of existing tree shelter belts to minimise the effect on neighbouring housing. It may turn out that the number of houses that could reasonably be provided on this site is less than the plan proposes. Note that geenbelt development issues may apply.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

Red House Farm (East of Lillington)

Representation ID: 49862

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This site is in the green belt and can only be developed under very special circumstances. However, if sites 4 and 5 do not proceed, then it would not be unreasonable to select this site if it is unavoidable.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

Loes Farm (North of Woodloes)

Representation ID: 49865

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This site is in the green belt and can only be developed under very special circumstances. However, if sites 4 and 5 do not proceed, then it would not be unreasonable to select this site if it is unavoidable.

Full text:

See Attachments

Support

Preferred Options

Warwick Gates Employment Land (Junction of Harbury Lane/ Heathcote Lane)

Representation ID: 49866

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Tis land has remained undeveloped for business use since Warwick Gates was built, and there is considerable unused or underused employment land in the district, it would not be unreasonable to change the use of the unused parts of the site to residential, providing it is kept for the final period of the plan, but only if it becomes necessary to commit this site to residential and there is not a demand at that time for land for business use. It should not be used at the present time for residential and kept in reserve for about 10 years.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

Woodside Farm (South of Whitnash)

Representation ID: 49871

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Oppose development of this site. It is part of the rural area of the district and has a distinct character. The land proposed has quite steep inclines, and it will be costly to stablise land as well as provide suitable drainage services. Development in this area might not be suitable for elderly and disabled people and will be highly visible from across the district. There is significant electrical infrastructure across the site and farming land will be lost. Development of this area will not be required if lower housing levels is accepted.

Full text:

See Attachments

Support

Preferred Options

Fieldgate Lane/ Golf Lane, Whitnash

Representation ID: 49872

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This is a 4 ha site on the west of the railway line which is SHLAA site L11. This would give 90 dwellings and would be relevant to the use of land within urban locations. It is unlikely to overload existing facilities. The southwest corner of the site has a fairly steep slope, it would be affected by noise from the railway line and possibly stray golf balls from the golf course so its capacity may be less than the 90 in the plan.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

B. Category 1 and 2 Villages

Representation ID: 49873

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This is a generalised target being arbitrarily set. Each village will have a different set of problems in achieving those targets and target setting is not the way to plan. Every village or settlement, not just the villages so far selected, should be examined with each community to see how practical these targets are taking into account any Local Housing Needs Surveys.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

Bishop's Tachbrook

Representation ID: 49876

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

In Bishop's Tachbrook, we cannot but feel we are being really targeted, because not only is it planned to place 1350 homes on land within the parish (Asps 1100 and Woodside 250), the total, in and in close proximity to the parish, being proposed is 3,150 plus a further 100 in the village making 3,250 in total. Housing needs survey indicated a need for 14 homes and it is considered that in total 75 houses might be a more appropriate level of development. Also potential housing sites outside village envelope, need to be considered.

Full text:

See Attachments

Object

Preferred Options

3. The Local Plan Process

Representation ID: 49880

Received: 02/08/2012

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Representation Summary:

To dogmatically require category targets in this way is entirely contrary to governments intentions as set out in the NPPF Core principles. These 12 principles are that planning should: be genuinely plan-led, empowering local people to shape their surroundings, with succinct local and neighbourhood plans setting out a positive vision for the future of the area. The District Council asked the public which of 3 options that they thought should be the selected option and 58% chose the low option growth. So far that response has been ignored.

Full text:

See Attachments

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.