From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Sara Walsh [
22 November 2013 17:23
Planning Policy and Urban Design
Local Plan Public Consultation Document
Questionnaire Publication Allocations Plan Sara.pdf
Dear Sir/Madam,
I enclose my completed Questionnaire for your attention.
Kind regards
Sara Walsh
1
LOCAL PLAN (ALLOCATIONS) PUBLICATION VERSION
Public Consultation
11th October – 22nd November 2013
Have Your Say!
The consultation period on this document runs from 11 October to 22 November 2013. All
comments and completed forms should be returned to the Planning Policy Team by 23:59 on
22 November 2013.
The document and accompanying evidence base, including the Sustainability Appraisal, is
available on the council’s website at www.havant.gov.uk/
Paper copies of the document and accompanying Sustainability Appraisal are also available at the
Public Service Plaza and at libraries throughout the borough.
Comments can be returned using the questionnaire, via email to policy.design@havant.gov.uk or
posted to the following address:
Planning Policy Team
Havant Borough Council
Public Service Plaza
Civic Centre Road
Havant
Hampshire
PO9 2AX
If you would like to comment on any part of this document then please complete the form overleaf.
This form has three parts:
Part A - Personal Details
Please note that representations are not confidential and that they will be published on the
council’s website and copies made available for public inspection. However, personal details, other
than the respondent’s name and/or organisation, will not be made public.
Part B - Your Representation(s)
Please fill in Part B for each representation you wish to make e.g. individual representations will
need to be made for each site allocation, strategic or development management policy referred to.
Please request additional copies of this form if necessary or supply information on separate paper
Part C – Any other comments you wish to make
Please fill in Part C for any additional comments you wish to make, not covered under Part B.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss any elements of the consultation document
further then please contact a member of the Planning Policy Team on (023) 92446539.
Please note that comments received cannot be treated as confidential as all comments must be
publicly available in accordance with government regulations. Please be aware that Havant
Borough Council and East Hampshire District Council are working in partnership and information
may be shared across the two organisations.
Please be aware that due to the likely volume of responses officers will be unable to provide a
personal reply to representations made during the public consultation period.
This questionnaire is available in other formats. To request any of these formats please
contact 023 92474174.
If you already have a consultee reference please enter it here: _ _ / _ _ _ _
LOCAL PLAN (ALLOCATIONS) PUBLICATION VERSION
Public Consultation (Reg 19)
11 October – 22 November 2013
Part A
Contact Details
Title: Mrs
Name: Sara Walsh
Organisation (if relevant): N/A
Address:
…………………………………………………. Post Code:
Email:
Tel:
Important Information:
•
Please provide your name and full address. ‘In confidence’ representations will not be
accepted
•
Please complete Part A and then Part B for each representation made. Please copy or
download additional copies of Part B as required and Part C if necessary
•
All representations are publicly available and can be viewed on request
•
Please make your responses before the deadline of 23:59, 22 November 2013
Part B
Name or Organisation
Sara Walsh
1. To which part of the Allocations Plan does this representation relate?
Strategic policy
no.
EM1
Paragraph no.
Site
Allocation
ref. no.
Dev.
Management
policy no.
UE13
Page
no.
Evidence Base
Study
2. Do you consider the Allocations Plan ‘sound’?*
*The considerations relating to a development plan being sound are
explained in the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 182)
Yes
No
x
If you ticked the ‘No’ box, do you consider the Allocations Plan is unsound because it is not:
(1) Positively prepared
Yes
x
(2) Justified
Yes
x
(3) Effective
Yes
x
(4) Consistent with national policy
Yes
x
3. Do you consider the Allocations Plan complies with the legal/procedural requirements
for preparing a development plan?
Yes
No
4. Please give details why you consider the Allocations Plan is unsound or not legally
compliant. Please be precise as possible. If you wish to support the soundness or legal
compliance of the Allocations Plan please also use the space below to set out your
comments.
x
1. I believe that the overwhelming number of objections to the Horsefield site (UE11)
swayed planners to use the less adjacently populated site of UE13 which implies that
the decision was not sound.
2. The involvement of a developer’s proposals whilst the Allocations Plan is still in draft
form appears to make the decision to develop UE13 as unsound as it appears that the
decision has been made with the developer’s profit in mind rather than that of the
residents.
3. The principle reason for choosing this site has been because of the developer
contribution to flood alleviation. This should not be a material planning consideration
whilst allocating the most suitable sites for housing therefore this should be considered
unsound.
4. The original public consultation was taken with a lower number of 100 houses, therefore
the public have not been adequately consulted as the number of houses has risen by
40%.
5. Due to a Section 106 agreement which halted further development of the green gap
between Havant and Emsworth “in perpetuity”, many people were falsely led to believe
that this would render this site free from development so would not have voted against
it in earlier consultations.
(continue on a separate sheet if necessary)
5. Please set out what change(s) you consider necessary to make the Allocations Plan
sound or legally compliant. It will be helpful if you are able to put forward your suggested
revised wording of any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.
1. Re-consult correctly with the correct number of houses to be built.
2. Remove developer’s contribution influence for flood alleviation proposals as part of the
criteria for allocation plan.
3. Re-consult specifically telling residents that the “in perpetuity” only means until one of
the parties changes its mind so that the residents know that this cannot be relied upon.
4. Take into account the varying population numbers and weight objections accordingly.
(continue on a separate sheet if necessary)
Please note your representation should cover succinctly all the information, evidence and
supporting information necessary to support the representation and suggested change, as there
will not normally be a subsequent opportunity to make further representations based on the
original representation at publication stage. After this stage, further submissions will be only at
the request of the Inspector, based on matters and issues they identify for examination.
6. If your representation is seeking a change do you consider it necessary to participate at
the examination hearings?
No, I do not wish to participate
in the examination hearings
x
Yes, I wish to participate in
the examination hearings
7. If you wish to participate at the examination hearings please outline why you consider
this to be necessary:
(continue on a separate sheet if necessary)
Please note the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those
who have indicated that they wish to participate at the examination hearings.
8. Do you wish to be notified at the address/email stated in Part A of any of the following:
(1) That the Local Plan (Allocations) has been submitted for independent examination
x
(2) The publication of the recommendation of any person appointed to carry out an
independent examination of the Local Plan (Allocations)
x
(3) The adoption of the Local Plan (Allocations)
x
Signature:
Date: 22/11/2013
Part C
Additional Comments
If Havant Borough Council wish people to download their forms online, they should
be able to be completed without the user having to completely rejig them. I know
some people who have been deterred from replying as they have not been able to
use the online downloads so this consultation may not be sound in itself.
I should like the following taken into account:
1. Horndean Road is a particularly narrow road for the volume of traffic it will be
expected to cope with. Furthermore, it passes a school where children are already
at risk where the traffic goes so fast. Regular and many police speed checks have
not managed to avert this danger.
2.The increase in the number of dwellings upon this site appears to have led to the
Developer planning for several blocks of flats or 3 storey houses which would
definitely be out of keeping with the present housing.
3.Sewerage provision would be difficult as there is very little fall from the site to the
temperamental main sewer in Horndean Road. There is a high water table in
Horndean Road and existing residents do experience water beneath their
floorboards after significant rainfull. Southern Water have stated that Sewerage
provision is limited in the documentation released by HBC.
4.The gas pipeline at UE2b would have to re-routed by the developer on this site at
their cost which would negate the reason for choosing UE13 over UE2b therefore
this renders the thinking by HBC as unsound.
5.The distance of the railway station from UE13 is the same or less as the Selangor
Avenue site, UE2b which further undermines the thinking of HBC.
6.The development of the UE2b would provide as much housing as UE13.
7.The impact on the Gap would be compromised which was why 20 years ago this
site formed part of a Section 106 agreement which was supposed to be ‘in
perpuity”.
8.The agricultural field has been cultivated and used for crops for the last seventy
years to my certain knowledge. In a time when local residents are looking for
products with a low carbon footprint, it seems short sighted to reduce the amount
of profit in order to line a farmer’s pockets.
Continued overleaf
9.It is not just a view that the Horndean Residents will lose although this will
certainly impact on them but this field is also the home to Roe Deer who are being
squeezed out of their environment by the development on both sides of the area.
Coupled with the bats who are resident and many other species of wildlife, this
seems a step too far. Site UE2b’s has already been compromised by the presence of
the bypass so would seem to be a better development site.
10.The proposal relies on giving pedestrian and cycle access across private land
between numbers 55 and 61 Horndean Road which has not been negotiated with
the land owner and is the drive way for 4 different dwellings.
11.Currently the Primary Schools in Emsworth and Westbourne are massively over
subscribed as are the Doctors. Good Secondary School provision, by a local
councillor’s admission, is also missing from the area so to build such vast numbers
of houses in an area where it is already a struggle doesn’t seem credible. Whilst
plans to extend one of the primary schools in the area is welcomed, providing
funding can be found, it does not allow parents a choice of school for their children.
Many will find themselves having to trek a fair distance, passing a good school on
the way, and will likely resort to using the car. This will adversely effect the local
carbon footprint.
Monitoring Questions are listed overleaf – these will be separated from
the main questionnaire on receipt and will not be used to identify you
further.
These questions are optional, but it would be much appreciated if you
could take the time to answer our questions to enable us to review the
effectiveness of our consultation.