Draft Core Strategy - Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report February 2011

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

60 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Highways Agency 27 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 61
  • Response Type: Observation
Thank you for providing the Highways Agency with the opportunity to comment on the above Local Development Framework (LDF) document. We have reviewed the documents and find the modelling undertaken to be satisfactory. As expected the modelling shows that development to the south of Yeovil is preferable and we are reassured that negative impacts of the proposed Urban Extension on the A303 are likely to be limited to the Cartgate Roundabout. We support the recommendations as set out in the Non -
Justin Binny Bennett 18 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 60
  • Response Type: Observation
I am writing with regard to and to object to the "Non-Technical Forecasting Report - Final v2a, Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension, February 2011", prepared for Somerset County Council and prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff. I am a Parish Councillor with East Coker but am writing as an individual, although I am aware that East Coker Parish Council (ECPC) has submitted a reply to the above and I would like to fully endorse all that is written within the reply from ECPC and as an individual reques
P Gliddon 18 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 59
  • Response Type: Observation
Thank you for your letter of March 1st regarding the traffic modelling following your council's development framework for extending the housing in Yeovil on the residential side of the town. I can foresee nothing but utter chaos in the suggestions for this scheme. At the time of writing I can tell you that at times it is completely impossible to get out of my drive on Dorchester Road often waiting for 50 or 60 cars to pass before leaving my drive - it is not always possible to choose the time o
P J Burrows 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 58
  • Response Type: Observation
Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension Further to my letter of 26 November 2010 on the SSDC Draft Core Strategy October 2010, I would like to put on records my concerns over what I consider to be failings and inadequacies in the above report. 1. Options selected for "Eco-success" The election of which sites will be assessed and evaluated for "eco-success" and those which will be evaluated for non - success appears to be highly subjective and prejudiced to produce
S Owen 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 57
  • Response Type: Observation
I refer to your letter of 1st March 2011 regarding "Notification of Publication of Yeovil Traffic Modelling" in connection with the SSDC's Draft Core Strategy Consultation. 1. The assumptions that have been made related to traffic scenarios based on "eco-success" are totally biased because they are based on your own report's flawed conclusions that these can't be applied to Development Options 1, 2 and 3 to the north and east sides of Yeovil. I do not accept that "partial eco-success" or "full
J and S Mitchell 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 56
  • Response Type: Observation
I am writing in response to your letter of 1/3/11 inviting comments on the Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report. I have already commented on the southern option for the Urban Extension in my letter to you of 30/11/10 and voiced my opposition to a development of this size on any of these options and this remains as the background to my further comments. The Traffic Modelling Report refers at the outset to the eco-target of 50% of all journeys generated to be made by modes of transport other than the
T L G Matthews 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 55
  • Response Type: Observation
Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report. Thank you for your circular letters dated March 1st 2011, concerning the above report. We have been away on an extended holiday and have not been able to study the document in the detail we should have liked, but wish to make the following observations for your consideration. 1. We think that the report compilers should have undertaken a traffic analysis for "eco-success" in Options 1, 2 and 3, not just in Options 5 and 6. Without such analysis there can be no v
J M Lumley 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 54
  • Response Type: Observation
Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report. Thank you for your circular letters dated March 1st 2011, concerning the above report. We have been away on an extended holiday and have not been able to study the document in the detail we should have liked, but wish to make the following observations for your consideration. 1. We think that the report compilers should have undertaken a traffic analysis for "eco-success" in Options 1, 2 and 3, not just in Options 5 and 6. Without such analysis there can be no v
East Coker Parish Council 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 53
  • Response Type: Observation
The East Coker Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to comment of the Somerset County Council Traffic Survey (Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension) as part of the Draft Core Strategy consultation process. In providing this response the Parish Council has considered whether the survey makes adequate comparison between the traffic and highways aspects of the various strategic options. It is essential that the same clear set of criteria be used across all options as a rigorous basis for compari
West Coker Parish Council 15 Apr 2011

Yeovil Traffic Modelling Report: Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension February 2011 Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension

  • Comment ID: 51
  • Response Type: Observation
Please find below the comments and objections regarding the findings of the Core Strategy meetings, Review of Yeovil Eco-Urban Extension, the Traffic Modelling Report and the subsequent meeting that you had with the West Coker Parish council on 28th March 2011. We still feel very strongly that any such development should be sited to the north of Yeovil where it would cover grade 3 agricultural land and not the grade 1 suggested in your plans. We are an agricultural country and must be committed
Next pageLast page