Object

Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations

Representation ID: 21623

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Mr James Matthews

Representation Summary:

I object strongly to the inclusion of the site as ‘preferred’ its inclusion is based on flawed documents and reasoning.
Coltishall does not have good transport links as stated
The site entrance is on a ‘c’ class one way road with a narrow hump back bridge. No ‘informal agreement with Highways has been obtained as stated, only a requirement for a full transport survey which has not been carried out.
No climate impact assessment has been carried out, a development in an isolated conservation villages will have a considerable greater carbon foot print compared to more urban developments

Full text:

I object strongly to the inclusion of the site as ‘preferred’ its inclusion is based on flawed documents and reasoning.
Coltishall does not have good transport links as stated
The site entrance is on a ‘c’ class one way road with a narrow hump back bridge. No ‘informal agreement with Highways has been obtained as stated, only a requirement for a full transport survey which has not been carried out.
No climate impact assessment has been carried out, a development in an isolated conservation villages will have a considerable greater carbon foot print compared to more urban developments