Proposed Modifications to the Thanet Local Plan

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

12 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
John Repsch 28 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 240
While spending hours petitioning on Birchington's doorsteps, it became clear to me that carrying out Thanet's proposed Local Plan would be considered the height of irresponsibility. Many reasons were pointed out: * Grade 1 land should be regarded as special. The country's home-grown produce is currently at 60% and falling. If we are going to treat our best farmland in such a cavalier manner, how will we cope if the Brexit bargaining goes against us? And what's the point of rating it Grade 1 whe
Joshua Mellor - Barton Willmore LLP 27 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 174
We welcome the changes to the Strategic Site policies, including Policy SP14, which provide a consistent approach to the strategic housing policies. The modifications proposed across these policies, including identifying an approximate average density and removing the requirement for a development brief, will assist in enabling efficient use of the site and the prompt delivery of housing. Taken together, the modifications proposed to Policy S14 ensure the policy is "sound".
Barbara Cooper - Kent County C… 27 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 252
The County Council strongly recommends the wording for requirement 3 "Masterplanning will be informed by and address the following: …3) pre-design archaeological evaluation" is modified to: pre-design archaeological assessment and evaluation and provision, if necessary, for the preservation of significant archaeological remains. In addition, the inclusion of a requirement such as that set out at 2) in MM0/35 should be included in the MM/034 to help preserve and enhance the setting of Scheduled
Gary Fowler 27 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 265
I have a major objection to the 1,600 houses proposed the grade 1 agricultural land located to the southwest of Birchington. Firstly there are three scheduled monuments in close proximity to the land proposed for this housing which would result in catastrophic damage to the archeology in the vicinity and make any context or future investigation practically impossible if the surrounding fields are build on. The three scheduled monument links are listed below https://historicengland.org.uk/listin
C Solly 27 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 339
Response by policy shown in "italics" and my comments in "bold" shown below: "Land is allocated for up to 1,600 new dwellings with an approximate average density of 35 dwellings per hectare (net) at Birchington." This part of policy understands that mixed development may incur a mixture of housing and I can accept this. I do contend with the level of housing (1600 dwellings) and the sites selection process, and will refer back to my previous representations on this. "Proposals will be judged
N/A - Tesco Stores Limited 27 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 194
See attached file For the reasons set out in our duly made representations to the Submission Local Plan we continue to have concerns over the Local Plan's reliance on a handful of strategic sites to deliver a substantial proportion of the district's housing needs over the plan period. Following the deletion of a mixed use development at Manston Airport from the Proposed Revisions to the Local Plan these large sites were proposed to accommodate additional housing development to make up the shor
Dave Corsby 24 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 145
Parts of the Local Plan have been overtaken by the Government recognition of the need to mitigate the effects of Global Warming. The Government are supporting replanting of woodland and are embarking on environmental issues which include the preservation of agricultural land. The overwhelming objection by local residents to allowing house building on precious agricultural land has been ignored. The present draft local plan undervalues best and most versatile agricultural land and ignores the fac
Miss P A Smith 24 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 147
Concern at the reduction of provision of open space. This applies across the majority of housing provisions when we are being urged to increase – down by 8.42ha
Alan Byrne/English Heritage 24 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 110
MM/033, MM/034, MM/035, MM/036, MM/040 – while we welcome the additional and more specific references to heritage (archaeology and listed buildings) we maintain our view, as previously stated, that a heritage impact assessment is required prior to allocation of the sites in view of the likely harmful impacts that will result from development of these sites. Allocation of these without prior assessment is liable to leave the heritage assets vulnerable to detrimental change to the character and se
Gary Fowler 23 Jan 2020

Main Modifications Chapter 3 - Housing strategy MM/034 MM/034

  • Comment ID: 103
petition against the building of 1,600 houses on grade 1 agricultural land in Birchington i attended the public consultation event run by Ptarmigan Land and Millwood Homes on the 04th October 2019. They presented this to my mind as a done deal, this is before the final consultation for the local plan is finalised and without any planning permission being applied for. There are numerous reasosn why this development should be rejected that are listed in the petition header as below This will me
Next pageLast page