Proposed Revisions to Draft Local Plan (Preferred Options)

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

41 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Angela Schembri - RPS Planning… 25 Apr 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 14448865/1/8530260/-
I write in connection with Thanet District Council's ('TDC's') consultation on Proposed Revisions to their draft Local Plan (Preferred Options) which began in January 2017 ('the Local Plan consultation') to provide you with representations on behalf of our client RiverOak Strategic Partners Limited ('RiverOak'). I would be grateful if you could consider the points raised within this letter. If you think it would be helpful to meet with RiverOak to discuss matters further, please do not hesitate
Paul Dickinson 25 Apr 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11428225/1/8530260/-
However one thing that I've noticed in my initial analysis is that, according to Map 5 from the Draft Local Plan, the proposed future development at Westwood completely cuts off the main green wedge that runs through the towns. This will obviously isolate people and wildlife, forcing both onto the road system. It is here where a green corridor would allow people and wildlife to get in and out of Thanet, to Manston and beyond, safe and healthy manner. From Strategic Priority 4, it would also hel
Michael Davis 11 Apr 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16652513/1/8530260/-
Summary Map is far too small to see any details on. Why was it not rotated 90 Deg. and made much bigger. I would like to see a large supermarket development on the edge of Birchington, perhaps near Planet Earth where locals could shop to save going all the way to Westwood Cross. A corner shop in this age would not last long.
Jan Hinton 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16511713/1/8530260/-
Comment 1. During the period of time just before the LP comments were due in, despite your extensive marketing, the revised news did not reach most of the residents who were directly affected. I visited about 20 households in the vicinity of Shottendane Road and only 2 had heard of the revised plan even though it will be extremely disruptive to most, if it goes ahead. The main reason was that many are elderly and hardly leave their homes let alone go on twitter and facebook which are totally al
C Solly 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11423873/1/8530260/-
Comments Regarding Section 1: Summary Map I note the changes made, however it is not clear of the areas that has been changed in this revision, also I presume planning applications for windfall sites has been included and this is not clear. There are many changes in the revision that should be considered at consultation.
C Mayall - Southern Water 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11421185/1/8530260/-
Comments on Eurokent: Infrastructure capacity- Water distribution There is currently insufficient water distribution (underground) capacity available to serve this site. Lack of capacity in the immediate vicinity of a site is not a constraint to development. Necessary infrastructure can be provided when the development comes forward, in collaboration with the developer and the planning authority. However, in order to support delivery, planning policies should recognise the need for infrastructur
Raymond Sun 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16633377/1/8530260/-
In essense Thanet has limited natural resources & under used man made ones. This consultation does not seem to balance the ability of the Isle to maintain a status quo. It was known for open spaces and non cramped urban housing. Now it is congestion & homes go wherever they can be built (for who ever, not just locals). The education standard has been low, those with abiities leave the area. Jobs in tourism, transport, farming,etc. need boosting for long term prospects – builders will go when th
Russell White 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11410913/1/8530260/-
A major omission from this local plan is any reference to the Ramsgate Royal harbour, Marin and port. Under no circumstances should the port area be considered for dirty industries. It is fully accepted that the Port should incorporate appropriate harbour/Port and maritime-related commercial activities. It should be the subject of a thorough analysis of its strategic, environmental and tourist activities. Ramsgate and Pegwell bay is a vitally important area both from the historic location and i
John Walker - The Ramsgate Society 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11420769/1/8530260/-
AN ADDITIONAL CONCERN * Ramsgate Port and Harbour Ramsgate Port and Harbour are of strategic importance to both the town itself and to Thanet as a whole. The lack of any detailed consideration in the Draft Local Plan (2015) and in the Revisions document is a glaring and unwarranted omission. There is only a vague reference in the Draft Local Plan (2015) as follows: "1.14 Ramsgate Port is an infrastructure asset and is important for the green economy sector and as a wharf for the movement of
Natural England - Natural England 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11420161/1/8530260/-
Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Natural England is pleased to note that many of the comments made in our formal response (our ref: 156572) to the first draft HRA have now been incorporated into this most recent draft. In particular we are pleased to see that a detailed assessment of the potential for the plan to affect 'functional habitat' used by Special Protection Area (SPA) bird species has now been included. As there may well be further additions and revisions to both Local Plan polici
Next pageLast page