LATE REPRESENTATION I object to the following in the proposed main modifications: 1.         Housing numbers In the current economic climate, the estimate of the demand for housing and employment for the foreseeable future remains over-inflated

1 The comments of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Somerset Branch (CPRE) on the main modifications proposed by South Somerset Distrioct Council (SSDC) to the Local Plan (LP) are outlined below. General Points 2 It remains the view of CPRE that the predicted requirement for new dwellings is excessive. Following the Examinatin in Public (EiP), thr Inspector did not comment on this issue though it remains crucial as to whether any further greenfield expansion of Yeovil is necessary. There

This document contains the East Coker Parish Council response to the proposed  main modifications. Our correspondence, submissions and discussions have been consistent and supported with evidence and previous submissions remain extant.  The responses to the current proposed main modifications and underpinning documentation are detailed in supporting appendices /enclosure with this covering letter.   It is welcomed that South Somerset District Council agreed the Inspector's preliminary findings

Why don't SSDC and the Planners safeguard Yeovil's integrity as a 'country town' by saying no to any further development. It has already lost its charming appeal as a market town and is rapidly becoming a 'blot on the landscape' due to previous poor planning decisions, which anyone can now see naturally place limitations on growth e.g. road infrastructure. If SSDC and the Planners are hell bent on development why not improve what we already have within the existing boundary of Yeovil? Many plann

These representations are submitted on behalf of the Wessex Farms Trust (WFT) which is an owner of part of the land at Keyford allocated for new development in the Local Plan. WFT has taken a strong and central interest in forward town planning at Yeovil for over ten years and was present at the local plan examination in May last year. It has a number of comments on the proposed main modifications and these are summarised in this note which starts with a short review of the current position befo

In its representations to the Submission version of the Local Plan (August 2012) and the Examination (spring/summer 2013), Abbey Manor Group ('AMG') supported the designation of Yeovil as the focus for future development as the main town in the District. This remains the case. AMG similarly made representations on how future development at Yeovil could best be accommodated. Whilst AMG supported the principle of development at the (southern) Yeovil Sustainable Urban Extension, the company also p

2.1 Recent appeal decisions (Templecombe Ref: APP/R3325/A/13/2196919), Officers Committee Reports and South Somerset's February 2013 Annual Monitoring Report all confirm that South Somerset District Council's five year housing land supply is fragile even before the 20% buffer is incorporated. In this respect, Origin3 question whether the proposed modifications to Policies YV1 and YV2 which concentrate significant levels of the district-wide housing provision at two large urban extensions to Yeov

Why don't SSDC and the Planners safeguard Yeovil's integrity as a 'country town' by saying no to any further development. It has already lost its charming appeal as a market town and is rapidly becoming a 'blot on the landscape' due to previous poor planning decisions, which anyone can now see naturally place limitations on growth e.g. road infrastructure. If SSDC and the Planners are hell bent on development why not improve what we already have within the existing boundary of Yeovil? Many plann

I object to the proposals for the two Urban Extensions and the resulting population increase on the following grounds: 1. Yeovil does not have an appropriate employment base. The only two significant employers are Augusta-Westland and Yeovilton.  Since both rely on the defence establishment and Augusta is foreign-owned they cannot be regarded as stable employers. 2. Yeovil's lack of good transport links to the north and east hampers its prospects of attracting further significant employment op

Please refer to the attached document SSDC Consultation Document - soundness Issue 1 and the Inspector Please find enclosed my comments and documents relating to the proposed Main Modifications which arise from the Inspectors Preliminary Finding (July 2013). I attended the Local Plan hearings in May 2013 where I participated on many of the issues under discussion and still feel that insufficient weight and assessments or reasonable alternatives have been considered. South Somerset District Co