5.11.8 to 5.11.12 Explanation
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
The LPA should be able to demonstrate that it has a 5 year land supply for Gypsy and traveller sites - is this the case?
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
Lack of trust and lack of consideration for established town and village residents.
A seemly one sided approach to favoring gypsy/travelers development.
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?