Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on VALP Proposed Submission - T6 Footpaths and cycle routes

Representation ID: 2681

OBJECT Oxfordshire County Council (John Disley)

Summary:

Policy T6 Cycle routes - refers to county-wide and local strategies but does not appear to consider cross-boundary opportunities.

More details about Rep ID: 2681

Representation ID: 2645

OBJECT Gleeson Strategic Land represented by Nexus Planning Ltd (Mr Steven Doel)

Summary:

Clarify within the policy that existing pedestrian routes should be protected from any 'unacceptably' adverse impacts of new development.

More details about Rep ID: 2645

Representation ID: 2442

SUPPORT Wendover Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group (Mr Jonathan Clover)

Summary:

This policy is welcomed.

More details about Rep ID: 2442

Representation ID: 2103

OBJECT CEG represented by Nexus Planning Ltd (Mr Steven Doel)

Summary:

The policy should provide clarify that existing pedestrian routes should be protected from any
'unacceptably' adverse impacts of new development.

More details about Rep ID: 2103

Representation ID: 1988

OBJECT Edward Ware Homes represented by Pegasus Group (Robert Taylor)

Summary:

Policy T6 states that existing pedestrian routes will be safeguarded from any adverse effects of development. This could prevent sustainable development opportunities including those which actually enhance public rights of way, owing to minimal adverse effects (relating to landscape or noise for example). This does not reflect the NPPF's presumption in favour of sustainable development.

More details about Rep ID: 1988

Representation ID: 1608

OBJECT Waldridge Garden Village Consortium represented by Pegasus Group (on behalf of Jeremy Elgin) (Mr Neil Tiley)

Summary:

Policy T6 states that existing pedestrian routes will be safeguarded from any adverse effects of development. This could prevent sustainable development opportunities including those which actually enhance public rights of way, owing to minimal adverse effects (relating to landscape or noise for example). This does not reflect the NPPF's presumption in favour of sustainable development.
The policy should be reworded to be consistent with Policy C4 which recognises that any adverse impacts to a public right of way should be viewed alongside the benefits of the development.

More details about Rep ID: 1608

Representation ID: 1401

OBJECT Edward Ware Homes represented by Pegasus Group (Robert Taylor)

Summary:

Policy T6 states that existing pedestrian routes will be safeguarded from any adverse effects of development. This could prevent sustainable development opportunities including those which actually enhance public rights of way, owing to minimal adverse effects (relating to landscape or noise for example). This does not reflect the NPPF's presumption in favour of sustainable development.

More details about Rep ID: 1401

Representation ID: 948

SUPPORT Chiltern Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Conservation Board (Dr Lucy Murfett)

Summary:

The Chilterns Conservation Board supports this policy.

More details about Rep ID: 948

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult