South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18)

List Comments

Search for Comments

Order By
in order

1,995 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
CatWoman 18 Jan 2020

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Housing Requirements for Neighbourhood Plans Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1787
I was very interested by the Consultation session held at Milborne Port recently. I am not against development in Milborne Port, if such development is done on as small a scale and in as environmentally friendly way as possible. In line with current concerns over Climate Change and the Council's own policies on sustainability and ecological sensitivity, I wish with all my heart that there was much more commitment to these crucial aspects than is evident in recent and current plans. In general
T Jackson 17 Jan 2020

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Housing Requirements for Neighbourhood Plans Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1463
I agree with Comment ID 6 from David King and his analysis of housing numbers required for the 5 year housing supply.The problem with 5 year housing supply is the speed which they are built, which is in the hands of the developers but they benefit from applying for extra housing in the wrong places to meet the 5 year housing supply. I believe from your figures the housing supply for 2023-2028 will be 7,974 why can't these be brought forward?. The number of houses for Yeovil should not be reduce
SCC Transport Policy 16 Jan 2020

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Transport and Accessibility Overview Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1529
Thank you for consulting with Somerset County Council. Strategic Commissioning Transport and Highways welcome the opportunity to comment on the Preferred Option document. We also look forward to on-going constructive and active engagement on transport and highways matter that impact on more than one local planning area. Our main comment with regards to transport are that there are still concerns (as outlined in our response to the Issues and Options document) that the options put forward have
«anonymous» 14 Jan 2020

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Economic Prosperity Land at Lopen Head Nursery Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1651
This policy effectively invites footloose businesses to identify new (unplanned) business locations, in less than sustainable locations, that might not have otherwise been strategically tested in the way that the "allocations" have. The provision and funding of significant infrastructure at the "allocated" sites is predicated on these sites meeting identified future demand for Employment uses, the viability of which can only be further undermined by this Policy (see comment on 8.79 &
J Carter 16 Dec 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Scale of Growth - Housing Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1434
Stick to your plan - The study by Robert Archer applicable to 2028 makes perfect sense. Why waste more public money when you have potential sites identified & graded? Greedy land owners and agents - Good quality agricultural land should be retained as such and not sold off on a purely selfish profit lead scheme. Bombarded - Templecombe has been targeted by farmers looking to get rich quick. In spite of this sites remain undeveloped. Why? (Slades Hill typical example) Valued Sensitivity - Each
Charlton Horethorne Parish Council 13 Dec 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Settlement Hierarchy for South Somerset Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1461
RE SOUTH SOMERSET LOCAL PLAN REVIEW 2016-2036 PREFERRED OPTIONS CONSULTATION (REGULATION 18) Charlton Horethorne Parish Council saw no need to comment on the local plan review during the consultation period but have recently become aware of points made by Grass Roots Planning (comment ID 609) in their submission of 6th September which have potentially far reaching consequences for Charlton Horethorne. The Parish Council would ask SSDC to take note of their following comments, even though the c
C G Fry and Son Ltd 11 Dec 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Market Towns Land east of Shudrick Lane Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1367
We support the inclusion of Policy IM2 in the Preferred Options Local Plan Review for the development of 220 dwellings at Shudrick Lane. As we set out in our previous representations, the site is located immediately adjacent to the built up area of Ilminster and is within walking distances from the range of services and facilities within the town centre. The site therefore presents an opportunity for the delivery of sustainable development which will contribute to the meeting housing needs of th
«anonymous» 11 Dec 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Market Towns Land rear of Penlain Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1329
Preferred options Consultation - Crewkerne (Local Plan 2016-36) The following comments apply to the CR2 site (Cropmead Orchard) * My name is Christine Rusell. I am the resident owner of 'Newland' East Street, formally named ;Applegarth'. My house is situated between Penlan and Townsend House. it has been extensively renovated. Your document appears to show one of the access points from East Street to the CR2 site (Cropmead Orchard) as replacing my house and garden. My property is NOT an access
M Hunt 29 Nov 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Settlement Hierarchy for South Somerset Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1464
I am writing, on behalf of the North Cadbury and Yarlington Parish Council, to question the reclassification of North Cadbury from a Settlement, as in the previous iteration of the Local Plan, to Village. We understand that this may have been done as our area, with the Cadbury Business Park on it's western edge, is perceived as being suitable for further potential development. Furthermore, we note that other similar groupings of villages in South Somerset, such as ours, are not being similarly t
Origin3 18 Oct 2019

South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Market Towns Land rear of Penlain Text Block

  • Comment ID: 1477
5.1 The Preferred Options identifies four other sites in Crewkerne in addition to the CLR site to meet the housing requirement for the settlement over the plan period. The sites are:  CR1 – East of Lang Road (100 dwellings)  CR2 – Land Rear of Penlain (100 dwellings)  CR3 – Land West of Station Road (270 dwellings)  CR4 – Land East of Charlton Close (10 dwellings) 5.2 We have concerns over the capacity of some of these sites to deliver the numbers suggested in the draft allocations with
Next pageLast page