Proposed Submission South Somerset Local Plan (2006 - 2028): Main Modifications - August 2014

List Comments

Search for Comments

Order By
in order

11 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
S Lewis-Cowlin 10 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 39
I object to the Main Modifications and the Local Plan in that it continually fails to recognise the need to retain primary agricultural land.  Grade A land. Whilst planning policy in general is supposed to 'save' land of this value the SSLocal Plan happily writes its destruction into our future and that of our children.   Greater attention needs to be paid to the future of our soil and our potential to feed an ever growing population.  Neither the Council nor the Inspector is taking in to accou
Environment Agency (Mr M Holm) 10 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 92
We would highlight that our comments to the previous consultation earlier in 2014 represent our relevant position, which we consider these policies to be sound. Our comments we as follows: Growth for Yeovil The principles of Climate Change Policy EQ1 should prevent inappropriate development being located in the Flood Risk areas through the application of National Planning Policy Frameworks Sequential Test. For the directions of growth through the strategic allocations there will need to be fu
Mr and Mrs Lewis 09 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 99
It is also worth mentioning that the existing road network around the Keyford site would not meet the increased demands generated by the vehicles coming in and out of this site. The A37 is a busy fast road; surrounding roads like Sandhurst and Wraxhill are residential roads not capable of taking increased traffic flows. The development adjoins a Hospice which at the moment is a tranquil site and should remain so. Anyone thinking that people from this development are going to use public transport
F T & O M Waterfield 09 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 79
Despite these modifications we still feel that the road infrastructure in the area designated is inadequate, and will result in greater traffic congestion all around the town. Anybody who drives around will have noticed the increase in this congestion over the last couple of years. We also understand and regret that a considerable amount of grade one agricultural land is still being used.
John Mitchell 09 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 95
Whatever the nature of the proposed further Main Modifications to the Keyford urban extension I remain opposed to it in principle. There are already a number of sites for more houses around Yeovil yet to be developed and it is hard to believe that the overstretched infrastructure and the employment potential of the town can possibly stand the additional strain. Nor can the town centre, which is affordable only for large companies and not for so many aspiring local shop-keepers. This problem is i
Mr and Mrs Lewis 09 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 96
Our strong objections to any further development around Yeovil are stated in our previous letter dated 07-01-14. Regarding the use of Grade I agricultural land, the loss of beautiful countryside and the pressure future developments will put on an already struggling road infrastructure.
Sport England 07 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 50
After reviewing the modifications, Sport England has NO COMMENT to make.
AliceWalker 06 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 37
Having considered the modifications proposed, Natural England does not have any additional comments. We are satisfied with the conclusions of the HRA addendum report that the findings of the previous HRA work are still valid, and we have no further comments to make at this stage.
A T Kimpton 05 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16
(A) I object to the building on Grade 1 Agricultural Land, which is at a premium with many brown field sites available these must be used as a priority. (B) I object to the Option for the South Keyford area being included. The ever increasing volume of traffic is already causing congestion at the Quick Silver roaundabout.
Waite Chartered Surveyors 02 Oct 2014

Main Modifications Introduction and Background (no name)

  • Comment ID: 28
We have studied these Further Main Modifications carefully, in particular Policy Nos. YV3 and SS5.  We are not satisfied that these will achieve what we consider is necessary and required to enable the Local Plan to meet all the objectives at which it should be aiming and we therefore object to the Proposed Further Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission South Somerset Local Plan 2006-2028. You may remember from our letter of 8th January 2014 and our Representations at the subsequent Resu
Next pageLast page