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
Mark Buxton - CgMs 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11740353/1/8530260/-
Other Comments 1. Tesco recognise the Council's desire to undertake a targeted consultation to focus on a number of key issues and the proposed main changes to the Local Plan Preferred Options 2015. However, as this excludes the Council's proposed approach to other land uses, notably employment land and allocations, it is not clear whether and how the Council has responded to representations Tesco submitted to the 2015 draft plan seeking, inter alia, greater flexibility in respect of the Thane
- - Stone Hill Park Limited 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16856385/1/8530260/-
We welcome the latest iteration of the Local Plan, which addresses the concerns that we raised in our previous representations (March 2015). In particular we are pleased to see that: • The proposed local plan is now underpinned by an adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence base in accordance with the requirements of NPPF paragraph 158. This includes the following reports: - Thanet Strategic Housing Market Assessment by GL Hearn (January 2016) which identifies the Objectively Assessed Need
Vincent Ganley - Kent Wildlife… 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11431041/1/8530260/-
Impact of existing allocation on Roadside Nature Reserve TH04 The existing, previous allocations between Manston Road and Half Mile Ride may impact upon the Roadside Nature Reserve TH04, on Flete Road where it meets Manston Road. Any impact needs to be mitigated for and this should be included in the site-specific policy wording.
Clive Morris 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11953857/1/8530260/-
The grossly excessive housing demand figure of 17,140 will overwhelm Thanet's already fragile infrastructure and the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan does not reassure me the social framework of the area will survive such an onslought of demand from incomers. Although on p. 13 of the document , some sensible alterations to the existing road network are suggested, this cannot alter the huge increase in traffic ( plus consequential air pollution) generated by new housing. None of us can live wi
Luke Warburton 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16632225/1/8530260/1
Preferred by who? Having read through previous feedback, I'm struggling to see how this revision is in alignment with people's preferences. In fact, it has gone the opposite, what with an increase in housing requirements. My previous comments are not answered from the consultation before, so I expect these to be put forward again. Road infrastructure in not able to cope. Schools, doctors and other services are already at a strain. Until we can prove Thanet can handle its current level of occupan
philip redman 17 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11423201/1/8530260/-
I am very concerned re the proposed road re routings and some of the thought gone into addressing the traffic density in the St Peter,s area and the Victoria traffic lights, also the college road roundabout just along from out QEQM hospital. These areas do have to be addressed and you seem to have done this in an ad hoc way, in which I am sure will cause major disruption in the planning, passing and construction of these routes. These areas are compounded in traffic density by the creation of We
david morrish - C.P.R.E 16 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 11492641/1/8530260/-
Background In February 2015 ,I made representations as follows to the then Draft Local Plan Proposals . * The level of housing growth The level of housing growth incorporated in the Local Plan should be a bottom-up approach related to objective, evidence based need; * A lack of adequate evidence on the future robustness sustainability and soundness of the proposalsI considered that the Current 2015 Draft Local Plan lacked crucial evidence which calls into question the future robustness and so
Danielle Dunn - Broadstairs &a… 16 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16821825/1/8530260/-
The Sustainability Assessment for each of the available sites in the SHELAA should have been completely revisited when the OAN number increased to ensure that the best and most suitable sites were being allocated in the Local Plan. The Sustainability Appraisal for policy SP05 has not been undertaken correctly as it should have been completelyre-written following the change in proposals for the site, yet the new draft policy is based on the former site appraisal.
Kathleen Coleman-Cooke 16 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16625249/1/8530260/-
Comments attached
John Walker 16 Mar 2017

3. Other Comments (no name)

  • Comment ID: 16620097/1/8530260/3
I OBJECT TO THE PROPOSAL FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLAN TO BUILD 2,500 HOUSES ON MANSTON AIRPORT. MANSTON Airport is designated for Aviation use only, and should remain so. I reason thus:- 2.1 Whilst this land is still designated for aviation use only, and so long as the Thanet Local Plan to 2031 is at draft stage and still unapproved, I feel no proposals to change its use can be approved or put into place. So long as interest is being expressed in retaining MANSTON as a fully function