New Local Plan Options

Search Representations

Results for THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council search

New search New search

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Q1. Do you have any comments on the Draft Vision?

Representation ID: 3549

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Summary: The Parish Council is concerned at the emphasis being placed on 'edge of Leicester settlements'; 'sustainable urban extensions'; and, the placing of the PUA at the top of Harborough's Settlement Hierarchy. Surely HDC should be protecting the make-up of the District and not allowing the absorption of key village settlements into the City of Leicester. The proximity to Leicester is by no means the only measure of sustainability. It is difficult to see the benefits that the proposed relief road will provide. Rather it will redirect traffic through the heart of the settlement including the Conservation Area.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Q2. Do you have any comments on the Draft Objectives, or any additional objectives to suggest?

Representation ID: 3551

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Draft Objectives are for the District as a whole. The Parish Council supports the re-usage of previously developed land and buildings (Figure 3, pint 3.)

However, with regard to development within the PUA, in addition to the response above to Q1, there are issues of unsustainability in relation to issues such as public transport, schooling and GP provision.

Consideration should also be given to:
- the environmental impact of development such as air pollution from vehicles;
- the loss of agricultural land to development

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Q4. Do you have any comments on the proposed criteria-based policy to replace Limits to Development?

Representation ID: 3565

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

While the proposed criteria-based policy to replace Limits to Development has merits, there are concerns in the case of the PUA with respect to Points 4-9 and in particular Point 8m. 'Does not result in the coalescence of settlements; and protects the physical and visual separation of settlements'.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Q1. Do you have any comments on the Draft Vision?

Representation ID: 3576

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Parish Council is concerned at the emphasis being placed on 'edge of Leicester settlements'; 'sustainable urban extensions'; and, the placing of the PUA at the top of Harborough's Settlement Hierarchy. Surely HDC should be protecting the make-up of the District and not allowing the absorption of key village settlements into the City of Leicester. The proximity to the City of Leicester is by no means the only measure of sustainability. It is difficult to see the benefits that the proposed relief road will provide. Rather it will redirect traffic through the heart of the settlement including the Conservation Area.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Q2. Do you have any comments on the Draft Objectives, or any additional objectives to suggest?

Representation ID: 3577

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Draft Objectives are for the District as a whole. The Parish Council supports the re-usage of previously developed land and buildings (Figure 3, point 3.)

However, with regard to development within the PUA, in addition to the response above to Q1, there are issues of unsustainability in relation to issues such as public transport, schooling and GP provision.

Consideration should also be given to:
- the environmental impact of development such as air pollution from vehicles;
- the loss of agricultural land to development.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Option 1: Rural

Representation ID: 3591

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

While it is acknowledged that this option would spread the distribution of housing, the benefits on infrastructure across the District would be proportionately low.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Option 2: Core Strategy Distribution

Representation ID: 3592

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

While this option also spreads the distribution of housing, it does not make the most of potential housing growth should the Magna Park development be determined. With regard to the PUA, the option further substantially increases housing provision, without addressing the impact this would have on an increased volume of traffic.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Option 1: Rural

Representation ID: 3603

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

: While it is acknowledged that this option would spread the distribution of housing, the benefits on infrastructure across the District would be proportionately low.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Option 2: Core Strategy Distribution

Representation ID: 3604

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

: While it is acknowledged that this option would spread the distribution of housing, the benefits on infrastructure across the District would be proportionately low.

Comment

New Local Plan Options

Option 2: Core Strategy Distribution

Representation ID: 3606

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: THURNBY AND BUSHBY Parish Council

Representation Summary:

While this option also spreads the distribution of housing, it does not make the most of potential housing growth should the Magna Park development be determined. With regard to the PUA, the option further substantially increases housing provision, without addressing the impact this would have on an increased volume of traffic.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.