Online Response Form


List of answers to the specified question
Deleted User • Do not believe Parcels 14 or 20 should be developed. The analysis is subjective and flawed 21 Mar 2017 16:03
Deleted User No 21 Mar 2017 16:03
Woolf Bond Planning (strvwn Brown) See covering letter.

The key feature of the urban area in Elmbridge is the relatively low-density character within many of its settlements according to the paragraph 2.2 of the Elmbridge Local Plan: Strategic Options
Consultation (Reg 18) from December 2016.

At the same time the Land Availability Assessment form September 2016 identifies that due to the Borough's location within the Green Belt the amount of land available for development is constricted. Consequently, both of the documents highlight the high demand for property in the Borough and increasingly deepening affordability issues.

While we fully support increasing of density in urban areas, there remains an opportunity to allocate suitable and sustainable sites, such as Claygate House and its land to the rear (east), for housing development. This will help to deliver a broad mix of housing to complement higher density flatted schemes elsewhere in the Borough.
21 Mar 2017 15:42
Woolf Bond Planning (strvwn Brown) Yes 21 Mar 2017 15:42
Deleted User See views expressed elsewhere 21 Mar 2017 13:38
Deleted User Yes 21 Mar 2017 13:38
Deleted User • As outlined previously, I do not believe parcels 14 or 20 should be developed. The analysis is subjective and flawed. Parcel 14 has virtually no developable area left (Millgate, Scouts, residents, protected species, ancient woodland, protected common land). 21 Mar 2017 13:15
Deleted User No 21 Mar 2017 13:15
Anthony Williamson In order to contain development in fewer areas 21 Mar 2017 12:55
Anthony Williamson No 21 Mar 2017 12:55
Next pageLast page