SC1 3n.

Object

Representation ID: 5989

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: mr stephen pratt

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

these alternatives are rarely used by commuters

Object

Representation ID: 6173

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Helen Taylor

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This is a very unspecific statement. I haven't seen anything that has made any difference with any of the new housing developments around , despite having a similar clause. Most houses still seem to have on average 2 cars. this sounds like jargon.

Object

Representation ID: 6196

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Grahame Taylor

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

What is this. I believe this was included in the granting of planning permission for the new developments around us, most households still seem to have 2 cars and not make use of any green travel package.

Object

Representation ID: 6554

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Penelope Fielden

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Another example of an idea rather than an actual plan on how you are to do this and no previous attempts during all the previous construction and building in Scraptoft so how can this be trusted? See attached sheet for objections and comments on this.