Online Response Form

Responses

List of answers to the specified question
NameOptionTextDate
1939 (Elizabeth Ann) There has been very little time for the public to air their views on these important matters, most of us only having been made aware in the last three weeks of the consultation process, and the deadline is very imminent.
It is a bit bewildering and alarming to read varying numbers relating to the likely building applications that threaten to be put forward....for example, is it "9480" houses or "1000" houses on each of two parcels of Green Belt; 9 or 16 Travellers' sites?
This area has been filled with high value homes - what's to stop these developers building more of the same if they had the chance?
11 Feb 2017 16:28
1981 (Oliver Bath) This new Local Plan (Strategic Options Consultation document) contains numerous flaws and inconsistencies. The methodology is subjective and flawed. The entire premise of the consultation rests on the requirement to build 9,480 new homes. The probability of this forecast being correct needs to be understood – is it enough to remove Green
Belt status forever? Particularly in light of the Government's concerns around the lack of a standard methodology to assess housing need. It would be a very very sad day if this went ahead.
22 Feb 2017 10:25
1st Cobham Scout Group (Patric… The Strategic Consultation paper contains numerous flaws and inconsistencies. The methodology is subjective and flawed
 Entire premise of the consultation rests on the requirement to build 9480 new homes. The probability of this forecast being correct needs to be understood – is it enough to remove Green Belt status forever?
 The paper has only explored 3 parcels of so called "weakly performing" land – other parcels of so called "weakly, moderately or strongly" performing may be more suitable for development e.g. nearer to higher urban areas
 No consideration given with the proposals for the Cobham & Stoke d'Abernon of access to jobs and employment. Limited employment opportunities in the immediate area as opposed to exploring options in Walton or Weybridge and other towns
 Economics of building lower cost housing on areas of Elmbridge (parcels 14 and 20) that are focused on high value homes. Risk if Green Belt is removed that Millgate Homes (current owners of 45 acres of parcel 14) will look to build more high-end (4+ bedroom) homes . What makes the Council think this would change in the future?
 Elmbridge strategy does not support the stated EU requirement which seeks to preserve and enhance the quality of life of its residents, both current and future. In our opinion Elmbridge proposals directly contradict these EU directives
 Timing of this consultation being launched just prior to Christmas, the lack of information provided to local residents and the length and complexity of the questionnaire seem to lead to the conclusion that the Council is simply going through a process and not seriously open to any challenge from local residents
07 Feb 2017 22:12
1st Hinchley Wood Scouts (Adri… • 80% of local residents are unaware of the situation. Far better consultation around Cobham, Oxshott and Stoke d’Abernon is required, as amazingly two parcels are within walking distance of each other, with a 1200 student school about to open up. This flawed and totally unrealistic proposal will turn vast numbers of residents against the Council instead of moving the communities and Council together. Shame on those who lead these initiatives.
• The timing of this consultation being launched just prior to Christmas, the lack of information provided to local residents, and the complexity of the questionnaire suggest that the Council is simply box ticking, and not open to any challenge. This is extremely disappointing as you are supposed to be our elected representatives. As such, you should stand up for and protect our interests.
• Similarly, the timing of the second phase of Consultation over the summer is further evidence of a lack of willingness to engage local residents. You know very well that the majority of residents will be away on summer vacation. This is an outrage.
• The Council’s proposal gives no consideration to the availability of jobs and employment. Limited employment opportunities in Cobham will put more pressure on commuting when the level of congestion (roads and trains) is already barely manageable.
• The Council’s proposal does not support the stated EU requirement which seeks to preserve and enhance the quality of life of its residents, both current and future. In our opinion, Elmbridge proposals directly contradict these EU directives.
17 Mar 2017 10:37
1st Hinchley Wood Scouts (Pete… • The Strategic Consultation paper contains numerous flaws and inconsistencies. The methodology is subjective and flawed
• Entire premise of the consultation rests on the requirement to build 9480 new homes. The probability of this forecast being correct needs to be understood – is it enough to remove Green Belt status forever?
• The paper has only explored 3 parcels of so called “weakly performing” land – other parcels of so called “weakly, moderately or strongly” performing may be more suitable for development e.g. nearer to higher urban areas
• No consideration given with the proposals for the Cobham & Stoke d’Abernon proposals of access to jobs and employment. Limited employment opportunities in the immediate area as opposed to exploring options in Walton or Weybridge
• Economics of building lower cost housing on areas of Elmbridge (parcels 14 and 20) that are focused on high value homes. Risk if Green Belt is removed that Millgate Homes (current owners of 45 acres of parcel 14) will look to build more high-end (4+ bedroom) homes and pay the Council off as they have done on the existing building. What makes the Council think this would change in the future?
• Elmbridge strategy does not support the stated EU requirement which seeks to preserve and enhance the quality of life of its residents, both current and future. In our opinion Elmbridge proposals directly contradict these EU directives
• Timing of this consultation being launched just prior to Christmas, the lack of information provided to local residents and the length and complexity of the questionnaire seem to lead to the conclusion that the Council is simply going through a process and not seriously open to any challenge from local residents.
15 Mar 2017 13:49
4th Thames Ditton ‘Ajax’ Sea S… • The Strategic Consultation paper contains numerous flaws and inconsistencies. The methodology is subjective and flawed
• Entire premise of the consultation rests on the requirement to build 9480 new homes. The probability of this forecast being correct needs to be understood – is it enough to remove Green Belt status forever?
• The paper has only explored 3 parcels of so called “weakly performing” land – other parcels of so called “weakly, moderately or strongly” performing may be more suitable for development e.g. nearer to higher urban areas
• No consideration given with the proposals for the Cobham & Stoke d’Abernon proposals of access to jobs and employment. Limited employment opportunities in the immediate area as opposed to exploring options in Walton or Weybridge
• Economics of building lower cost housing on areas of Elmbridge (parcels 14 and 20) that are focused on high value homes. Risk if Green Belt is removed that Millgate Homes (current owners of 45 acres of parcel 14) will look to build more high-end (4+ bedroom) homes and pay the Council off as they have done on the existing building. What makes the Council think this would change in the future?
• Elmbridge strategy does not support the stated EU requirement which seeks to preserve and enhance the quality of life of its residents, both current and future. In our opinion Elmbridge proposals directly contradict these EU directives
• Timing of this consultation being launched just prior to Christmas, the lack of information provided to local residents and the length and complexity of the questionnaire seem to lead to the conclusion that the Council is simply going through a process and not seriously open to any challenge from local residents
15 Mar 2017 14:18
A & M Beard The Cobham area needs more housing, but the Consultation paper is not clear on what type or where.
The Strategic Areas would not necessarily release the land for necessary and desirable development.
The Consultation is unclear on how many homes would be delivered by removing Green Belt status.
Until the nature of potential development is known it is not possible to assess relative priorities.
21 Mar 2017 09:43
A C Hewett The Cobham area needs more housing, but the Consultation paper is not clear on what type or where. The Strategic Areas would not necessarily release the land for necessary and desirable development. The Consultation is unclear on how many homes would be delivered by removing Green Belt status. Until the nature of potential development is known it is not possible to assess relative priorities. 03 Mar 2017 11:25
A C R Elliott Until the nature of potential development is known it is not possible to assess relative priorities. 07 Mar 2017 16:29
A Flack no 03 Feb 2017 14:15
Next pageLast page