Strategic Distribution Option C

Showing comments and forms 1 to 11 of 11

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5101

Received: 29/02/2016

Respondent: MR Michael Wilcox

Representation Summary:

This is the worst possible option effectively discarding all current planning policy and opening up the countryside to unlimited further development. It also significantly worsens non rail head traffic and will significantly increase traffic through villages without contributing to local employement

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5105

Received: 03/03/2016

Respondent: BROUGHTON ASTLEY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Broughton Astley Parish Council would not like to amend any previous comments, subject to ratification by the Parish Council, at the meeting to be held on Thursday 17 March 2016.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5130

Received: 07/03/2016

Respondent: mrs vera mcbay

Representation Summary:

Total disregard has been shown for local villagers and there opinons

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5138

Received: 09/03/2016

Respondent: LUTTERWORTH TOWN COUNCIL Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Lutterworth Town Council wishes to repeat its previous objections in relation to these options that do not appear to have been addressed to date:

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5163

Received: 13/03/2016

Respondent: Ian Lewis

Representation Summary:

this option would provide 232 hectares of land, which is well in excess of the total needed in Leicestershire. The additional problems that would accompany this development, traffic, road safety, pollution, loss of countryside would far outweigh any benefits. Given that Option A has been agreed along with other non-rail sites in the county/region, Option C should be dismissed as unnecessary.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5187

Received: 14/03/2016

Respondent: Mrs Shiela Carlton

Representation Summary:

No

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5245

Received: 16/03/2016

Respondent: Mr Colin Hancock

Representation Summary:

Planning applications of a similar type at East Midlands Gateway, Ibstock and Rugby Gateway, will provide 232 hectares of capacity...well in excess of the total required in Leicestershire. Road capacity is already stretched in the Lutterworth area, and there is an encroachment of traffic from employees getting to Magna Park on inadequate village roads.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5256

Received: 16/03/2016

Respondent: Mr Graham Logan

Representation Summary:

Now Option A has been approved and granting permission for Option C would mean exceeding Leicestershire warehouse quota of 107 hectares as well as contravening HDC's existing approved Local Plan.
Please take note of the hundreds of written objections to this option.
Approving more warehouses would increase the number of HGVs and commuter cars travelling on a local road infrastructure that already struggles badly to cope with current volumes.
Leicestershire is the 6th worst county for road deaths in England. We do not want any more!
Local people have overwhelmingly spoken out against this option, please respect our material considerations and reject Option C.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5262

Received: 16/03/2016

Respondent: Edmund Hunt

Representation Summary:

I previously highlighted the need for a secretary of state commitment to call in this application.
With the sustainability report highlighting its apparent significance and the recent decision to merge the planning meetings for 15/00865/OUT and 15/01531/OUT a call-in is even more necessary.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5266

Received: 16/03/2016

Respondent: Mr A Adcock

Representation Summary:

To reinforce comments made in local plan consultation that option C needs to be called-in as a default. The SA report further evidences this given the levels of significance it applies to this option.

Comment

Sustainability Appraisal - Second Interim SA Report Appraising Options for the Provision of Strategic Distribution Growth (Feb 2016)

Representation ID: 5290

Received: 16/03/2016

Respondent: Anglian Water Services Ltd

Representation Summary:

No further comment.