
Consultation Point: Design – Backland Development Person ID 1218717 Full Name parminder khanghura ID 1071 Order 34 Number 4.8 Title Design – Backland Development Organisation Details Consultee Type - Please select the type of consultee: Date Received - Date Received: Duty to Cooperate Body - Is this organisation a Duty to Cooperate Body? Agent on behalf of - Consultee is an agent on behalf of: Person ID Full Name Organisation Details Plan-Level: Legally Compliant - Do you consider the Local Plan to be legally compliant/non-compliant. Legally compliant a - Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is/is not legally compliant, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Legally compliant b - Are you proposing a modification to make the Local Plan legally compliant and/or to strengthen its compliance? Legally compliant c - Please set out your suggested modification(s) below:You will need to say why this modification(s) will make the Local Plan legally compliant/strengthen its legal compliance. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Plan-Level: Soundness - Do you believe this plan meets the tests of Soundness? Soundness mods - Please give details of why you consider this Local Plan is/is not sound, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Soundness mods - Are you proposing any modifications to strengthen the Plan's ability meet the test of soundness? Policy 1a - Please specify how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Plan-level upload - Please upload any supporting evidence Plan-Level: Duty to Co-operate - Do you consider the Local Plan to have met the requirements of the Duty to Co-operate in accordance with section 110 of Localism Act 2011 and section 33A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004? Please note that any non-compliance with the Duty to Co-operate is incapable of modification at examination Duty to Co-operate a - Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan has met/not met the requirements of the Duty to Co-operate.Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Attendance at the EiP - If your representation is proposing a modification(s), do you consider is necessary to participate at the examination in public? Attend EiPb - If you wish to participate at the examination in public, please outline why you consider this to be necessary (please be as precise and succinct as possible Policy Level - PP - If you do not believe this policy to be positively prepared please explain why Backland Development Fulmer is vehemently opposed to Backland development, Policy DM DP8 (Pg 25 Draft Local Plan) of the Draft Local Plan however well designed, which is one of the cornerstones of our Neighborhood Plan. Backland development is not possible without adversely and substantially affecting the privacy and amenity of existing and new residents. It is also contrary to our status as a conservation area. Infill through Backland development would neither respect nor enhance the character of the village. There are no suitable plots for infilling development in the village which would could provide for ‘active 234 frontages’ Policy DMP13 (Pg 30 of the Draft Local Plan) The current adopted South Bucks Core Strategy – Adopted February 2011 is clear that infil is not appropriate in Fulmer on account of its openness. "2.2.30 - These settlements contain a very limited range of shops and community facilities, in some cases, none at all. Almost all of the settlements have poor access to public transport, particularly at weekends. ... However, Taplow Riverside, Taplow Village, Fulmer, Dorney Village and Denham Village are all conservation areas and are particularly small. As such, even limited infilling will be inappropriate in these villages". No evidence has been presented to show what has changed since 2011 to reverse this accepted policy. Page 48 4.26 of the Draft Local Plan lists Fulmer as a Conservation Area and the Green Belt Settlement Review further identifies it as both a small settlement and a conservation area. PP Mods - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy 1 - If you do not believe this policy to be justified please explain why Policy 2a - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy 2 - If you do not believe this policy to be effective please explain why. PAa - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy 3 - If you do not believe this policy in consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework Feb 2019 please explain why Policy 3a - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy-level file upload - Please attach any supporting evidence Person ID 1218717 Full Name parminder khanghura ID 1141 Order 34 Number 4.8 Title Design – Backland Development Organisation Details Consultee Type - Please select the type of consultee: Date Received - Date Received: Duty to Cooperate Body - Is this organisation a Duty to Cooperate Body? Agent on behalf of - Consultee is an agent on behalf of: Person ID Full Name Organisation Details Plan-Level: Legally Compliant - Do you consider the Local Plan to be legally compliant/non-compliant. Legally compliant a - Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is/is not legally compliant, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Legally compliant b - Are you proposing a modification to make the Local Plan legally compliant and/or to strengthen its compliance? Legally compliant c - Please set out your suggested modification(s) below:You will need to say why this modification(s) will make the Local Plan legally compliant/strengthen its legal compliance. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Plan-Level: Soundness - Do you believe this plan meets the tests of Soundness? 235 Soundness mods - Please give details of why you consider this Local Plan is/is not sound, including references to relevant legislation, policies and/or regulations. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Soundness mods - Are you proposing any modifications to strengthen the Plan's ability meet the test of soundness? Policy 1a - Please specify how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Plan-level upload - Please upload any supporting evidence Plan-Level: Duty to Co-operate - Do you consider the Local Plan to have met the requirements of the Duty to Co-operate in accordance with section 110 of Localism Act 2011 and section 33A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004? Please note that any non-compliance with the Duty to Co-operate is incapable of modification at examination Duty to Co-operate a - Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan has met/not met the requirements of the Duty to Co-operate.Please be as precise and succinct as possible. Attendance at the EiP - If your representation is proposing a modification(s), do you consider is necessary to participate at the examination in public? Attend EiPb - If you wish to participate at the examination in public, please outline why you consider this to be necessary (please be as precise and succinct as possible Policy Level - PP - If you do not believe this policy to be positively prepared please explain why Backland Development Fulmer is vehemently opposed to Backland development, Policy DM DP8 (Pg 25 Draft Local Plan) of the Draft Local Plan however well designed, which is one of the cornerstones of our Neighborhood Plan. Backland development is not possible without adversely and substantially affecting the privacy and amenity of existing and new residents. It is also contrary to our status as a conservation area. Infill through Backland development would neither respect nor enhance the character of the village. There are no suitable plots for infilling development in the village which would could provide for ‘active frontages’ Policy DMP13 (Pg 30 of the Draft Local Plan) The current adopted South Bucks Core Strategy – Adopted February 2011 is clear that infil is not appropriate in Fulmer on account of its openness. "2.2.30 - These settlements contain a very limited range of shops and community facilities, in some cases, none at all. Almost all of the settlements have poor access to public transport, particularly at weekends. ... However, Taplow Riverside, Taplow Village, Fulmer, Dorney Village and Denham Village are all conservation areas and are particularly small. As such, even limited infilling will be inappropriate in these villages". No evidence has been presented to show what has changed since 2011 to reverse this accepted policy. Page 48 4.26 of the Draft Local Plan lists Fulmer as a Conservation Area and the Green Belt Settlement Review further identifies it as both a small settlement and a conservation area. PP Mods - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy 1 - If you do not believe this policy to be justified please explain why Policy 2a - Please specify as precisely and succinctly as possible how you would modify this policy to improve its alignment to this test of soundness. Policy 2 - If you do not believe this policy to be effective please explain why.
Details
-
File Typepdf
-
Upload Time-
-
Content LanguagesEnglish
-
Upload UserAnonymous/Not logged-in
-
File Pages14 Page
-
File Size-