Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

22 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Tetlow King (admin) 07 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 11844417//1
We represent Rentplus, a company providing an innovative affordable housing model aimed at delivering discounted rented homes to buy for people who are unable to acquire a property on the open market but also trapped by ineligibility for existing affordable housing tenures. Enclosed with this consultation response is an Affordable Housing Statement by Tetlow King Planning setting out the model's compliance with the NPPF definition of affordable housing and how this should be incorporated into l
Deleted User 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 931233//8
CPRE supports the policy within rural areas outside Service Villages to be strictly controlled to protect their character and unsustainable development that would impact negatively on the landscape.
Deleted User 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 3361153//6
PHSV support the change to the policy to set out criteria for residential development of an appropriate scale within infill villages, which supports sustainable development.
Deleted User 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 11854273//3
The policy continues to preclude development away from infill villages. In policy terms such locations are treated as open countryside. It would therefore preclude sustainable development opportunities such as that at Weston Business Park that is well related to Weston-super-Mare and the Weston Villages, and therefore in a more sustainable location than most opportunities at the service villages and smaller settlements. For reasons set out in relation to CC-MM04 above, flexibility needs to be i
Deleted User 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 11683201//2
The small print of Policy CS33 We consider that the reference to 'residential redevelopment' must surely be a typographical error as this form of permitted supply would be highly restrictive and would not actually include pure infilling. It is therefore even tighter in its control than that the original version of CS33. On this basis the CS33 villages would have to be called 'residential redevelopment villages' rather than 'infill villages'. We assume that the proposed wording is a mistake, and
Environment Agency 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 1020673//8
All new development should be in-accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), specifically relevant for the Agency would be any development within flood plain. This should include evidence of Sequential Test acceptability, as well as an appropriate Flood Risk Assessment which addresses all flood concerns.
Deleted User 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 14352161//5
I strongly support this policy. Essential to severely restrict development to within boundaries to maintain the rural character of North Somerset.
North Somerset Levels IDB 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 11734177//8
We note that there is no change to this policy however we would wish for the policy to be amended to require that Flood risk and drainage must be considered at a local and catchment scale by the planning authority, and any proposed development will need to be supported by a flood risk assessment which reflects this approach within its proposed surface water drainage strategy.
Wrington Parish Council 05 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 1019201//8
We support the proposed policy. However, we suggest that some of the related statements apply equally to Service Villages, or at least one or two of these, for example the reference to rural development in para 4.93 and to dormitory settlements in para 4.94. As they are clearly relevant, these statements should of course also be incorporated into policy CS32, especially in relation to Wrington.
Kingston Seymour Parish Council 03 Sep 2016

Core Strategy-Examination into consequential changes of remaining remitted policies Proposed main modifications Policy CS33, Modification CC-MM08

  • Comment ID: 15298593//6
Kingston Seymour Parish Council strongly supports the retention of this policy. We are concerned that opportunistic developments – such as the one currently being considered in the Kenn Parish – will have an adverse impact on service delivery and infrastructure provision in the immediate area. In the Employment section, there is mention that employment development will only be permitted within settlement boundaries. In Policy CS14, it is unclear whether settlement boundaries are being deleted
Next pageLast page