Core Strategy - Consultation Draft

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

22 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Living Within Environmental Limits CS3: Environmental Risk Management CS3: Environmental Risk Management

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/3
  • Status: Accepted
The area of search to be the whole of North Somerset should be amended to say that with regard to the Service Villages it is the Service Village and its immediate environs and economic hinterland that is the relevant area of search. In respect of 2) any Council land so identified must have already been formally declared to be surplus and be genuinely available for purchase by private treaty.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS17: Residential Sites Providing Affordable Housing Only CS17: Residential Sites Providing Affordable Housing Only

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/11
  • Status: Accepted
The restriction on affordable housing sites under this policy (in rural exceptions and allocated sites) not to be permitted should be deleted. The present requirements as set out in Policy H/5 of the current Replacement Local Plan should continue to prevail.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities CS27: Sport, Recreation and Community Facilities CS27: Sport, Recreation and Community Facilities

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/17
  • Status: Accepted
The requirements of this policy must be subject to the viability considerations of the proposed development.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Living Within Environmental Limits CS9: Green Infrastructure CS9: Green Infrastructure

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/4
  • Status: Accepted
In so prioritising the numbered points these should be applied having regard to both the need for flexibility and to reach a balanced conclusion in relation to all of the policy considerations associated with any planning application under consideration.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 4: Area Policies CS31: Market and Coastal Towns CS31: Market and Coastal Towns

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/18
  • Status: Accepted
In relation to both the employment and residential development elements of this policy, this should permit an increased level of development than the limited extent currently envisaged under the proposed policy. Yatton should be considered to be a market town the subject of this policy.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Living Within Environmental Limits CS10: Transport and Movement CS10: Transport and Movement

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/5
  • Status: Accepted
The proposed policy should be amended to include a scheme for a Yatton - Congresbury by-pass.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS19: Green Wedges/Strategic Gaps CS19: Green Wedges/Strategic Gaps

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/12
  • Status: Accepted
The proposed policy should be deleted as it is tantamount to introducing green belt restrictions in areas without the need to justify same in planning terms. Either the land is worthy of green belt status or else it remains countryside; the policy should be deleted.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 4: Area Policies CS32: Service Villages CS32: Service Villages

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/19
  • Status: Accepted
In light of the representations made under policies CS13, CS14 and CS20, the policy should be amended to permit an increased level of both housing and employment development than the very limited extent currently envisaged under the proposed policy. A more positive approach to facilitating such development should be incorporated in the wording.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS12: Achieving High Quality Design and Place-making CS12: Achieving High Quality Design and Place-making

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/6
  • Status: Accepted
The general requirements for residential development to achieve the Building for Life Gold standard is considered to be unreasonable unless it is subject to consideration of the broader viability of such development.
Deleted User 16 Mar 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 4: Area Policies CS33: Smaller Settlements and Countryside CS33: Smaller Settlements and Countryside

  • Comment ID: 3573697/CSCD/20
  • Status: Accepted
The strictly limited scope for residential development is not appropriate for those settlements currently with a settlement boundary. Reference to employment development should now be reviewed and replaced by wording in accordance with PPS4, particularly policies EC6 and EC10 therein. The requirement that employment development will not be permitted in the open countryside should be deleted.
Next pageLast page