Proposed Revisions to Draft Local Plan (Preferred Options)

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

26 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Mark Buxton - CgMs 17 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 1454
  • Response Type: Object
Tesco's duly made representations to the Preferred Options consultation do not appear to have been addressed with regard to the draft housing allocations S536 and SS34. We continue to consider that it is potentially misleading to afford these sites the following addresses when they lie adjacent one another to the south of Millennium Way, and presumably should fall within the Broadstairs area:  'Land off Northwood Road, Ramsgate' (S536) and;  'Thanet Reach Southern Part' (SS34) Furthermore,
Steve Burrows 17 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 918
  • Response Type: Object
There needs to be be far more emphasis on sustainable development. In my view this is best achieved by increasing urban density, ether in Thanet or the urban areas where the majority of people mIgrating to Thanet would be moving from. To destroy such huge areas of agricultural land as proposed here is, I believe, a serious attack on the ability of future generations to provide for their needs. This plan is extremely short sighted and the people creating it need to be more inventive in their appr
D Wood 17 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 895
  • Response Type: Object
It is essential that the airport is maintained for aviation use and the site protected from development until a decision is made on the DCO application by Riveroak. Thanet desperately needs jobs at all skill levels and these would be provided by the proposed freight hub. Building a housing estate on the site would be a disaster for the area. Without any prospect off employment the new inhabitants would inevitably be benefits claimants and this allied with the complete lack of any supporting
david morrish - C.P.R.E 16 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 1415
  • Response Type: Object
* Phasing and rate / amount of new development in the early stages of the Plan Period The sequence of proposed development set out in Appendix B of the Preferred Options Report whilst attractive to potential developers /builders who have offered up sites for development or for sale, is unlikely to lead to developer funding sufficient and at the appropriate time in the future to deal with the increased traffic activity and the need for new or enhanced neighbourhood facilities In the event that
Leslie Bell 16 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 791
  • Response Type: Object
See above
Lorraine Williams - Broadstair… 16 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 746
  • Response Type: Object
The level of development proposed at Thanet Reach and Thanet Reach South and Westwood Centre would negatively affect the amenity of the existing green space and risk overcrowding these areas of Broadstairs.
Ashley Stacey - Cliffsend Pari… 15 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 691
  • Response Type: Object
CPC object to allocation of the 3 sites in Cliffsend. Site A - is an increase in numbers. - North of cottington road and south side of cottington both have really bad access issues. Cliffsend also suffers from very poor highways and footpaths. Flooding is also a massive issue and the applications do not confirm how they deal with this.
Stefan Whittingham 14 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 620
  • Response Type: Object
Put simply, Thanet does not have the infastructure to meet the needs of the current residents, although consideration has been made to add doctors surgeries and local amenities etc this does nothing for the current residents. The council may have large monetary incentives to build houses from the government , but this is such short term thinking, a quick fix. We need jobs and skilled jobs, not the temporary ones that house building will bring and supposed jobs from industrial areas that may be b
Kay Christey 13 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 552
  • Response Type: Object
Thanet area cannot cope with these extra dwellings. We had water shortages without these properties. The insfrastructure of gas, electricity, water and sewerage will not be able to cope. I think you are ruining the area. I cannot believe that you can ignore the other options. This is all about raising money from Council Taxes and not about looking after our area.
Andrew Blaydes 12 Mar 2017

1. Preferred Options Revisions Appendix B

  • Comment ID: 520
  • Response Type: Object
The only site which the people of Cliffsend might be prepared to accept is the one of Canterbury Road West. The other two are in countryside area's with only small roads. However we already have developments which are going to change the character of the village in ways the residents don't like. The roads of Cliffsend are too small to cope with the additonal traffic, many of the roads are very narrow and on't have footpaths. Thus walking or cycling anywhere is fraught with danger and many res
Next pageLast page