5.11.8 to 5.11.12 Explanation

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Object

Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 6224

Received: 03/11/2017

Respondent: LUBENHAM Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The LPA should be able to demonstrate that it has a 5 year land supply for Gypsy and traveller sites - is this the case?

Full text:

The LPA should be able to demonstrate that it has a 5 year land supply for Gypsy and traveller sites - is this the case?

Object

Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 7353

Received: 08/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Ray Middlemas

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Lack of trust and lack of consideration for established town and village residents.
A seemly one sided approach to favoring gypsy/travelers development.

Full text:

CONCERNS IN THE DRAWING UP AND PRE-CONSULTATION PERIOD.
1. Planning could/can be "nodded" approved without going to full Planning Permission.
2. Giving too much power to Head of Planning and Enforcement without approval of Full Planning Committee.
3. No apparent liaison between partner agencies.
4. Lack of MP's views on Plans.
5. Lack of Police views on Plan
6. Lack of Chief Constable's view of Plan
7. Lack of Police Commander's view of Plan.
8. Lack of Fire Department's view of Plan
9. Lack of Education Department's view of Plan.
10. Lack of NHS view on Plan.
11. Lack of Ambulance Service view of Plan.
12. Lack of consideration for established tow and village residents' view.
13. Lack of understanding of town and village needs.

HDC need to look at what this District really wants and not what certain Departments want.
The countryside in the District particularly the Lutterworth area already has enough gypsy/travelers sites.
Why is Spinney View Farm even being considered when the last owner who was not a gypsy was repeatedly refused development?