GNLP0192

Showing comments and forms 1 to 1 of 1

Support

Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations

Representation ID: 20598

Received: 10/03/2020

Respondent: Miss Sarah Dugdell

Representation Summary:

(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)

This land is also far from ideal for a residential development. My previous comments on Dog Lane stand on this proposal too. Dog Lane is not in a position to carry further traffic. It is a small lane and vehicles would have to pass a large number of the properties on Dog lane to reach this development. It just isn't feasable. There is also no safe walking route on Dog lane itself. It could pose a danger to pedestrians. The junction with the B1149 is not sufficient for this development.

Full text:

This land is also far from ideal for a residential development. My previous comments on Dog Lane stand on this proposal too. Dog Lane is not in a position to carry further traffic. It is a small lane and vehicles would have to pass a large number of the properties on Dog lane to reach this development. It just isn't feasable. There is also no safe walking route on Dog lane itself. It could pose a danger to pedestrians. The junction with the B1149 is not sufficient for this development.