Online Response Form

Responses

List of answers to the specified question
NameOptionTextDate
Deleted User • The Strategic Consultation paper contains numerous flaws and inconsistencies. The methodology is subjective and flawed. I believe the wording of the questions is manipulative and self-serving - seeking to justify the council’s own recommendations and is thus not truly consultative.
• 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 nearer to higher urban areas.
• Re. Parcels 14 and 20, no consideration has been given re. access to jobs and employment. There are limited employment opportunities in this immediate area as opposed to exploring options in Walton, Weybridge, Hersham etc or nearer to Esher and also nearer to Kingston.
• Re. Parcel 14, no consideration has been given re. access to any amenities, such as shops, schools, surgeries etc.
• Please consider the economics of building lower-cost housing in areas of Elmbridge (parcels 14 and 20) that are focused on high-value homes.
• 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 my opinion Elmbridge proposals directly contradict these EU directives
• The timing of this consultation being launched just prior to Christmas, not being directly informed by the council that this was about to happen, 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. Phase 2 should start in September after people have returned from summer holidays.
• Have the council consulted with SCC re. the massive implications the 3 huge housing developments (Wisley Airfield, Parcel 14, Parcel 20) will have on the local environment of Cobham? And the subsequent quality of lives of its residents? There would need to be a radical investment in the infrastructure, transport, roads, schools, nurseries, GP surgeries, dental surgeries, leisure facilities etc to cater for this huge increase in local population.
21 Mar 2017 11:46
Save Cobham Green Belt (Keith… • The Arup Consultants were Briefed in the wrong way. It should never have been done in the way it was and the three Options should not have been put forward in the way they have been.
• 4500 pages of consultation pages and 32 loaded questions is quite disgusting and unfair on all residents.
• 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
• 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
• Phase 2 should start in September and not July1st as proposed over summer holidays.
• Finally, I think the Council should invite a cross section of Residents from Action Groups such as www.savecobhamgreenbelt to work alongside them as volunteer consultants to resolve this Community Challenge!
21 Mar 2017 11:14
Epsom and Ewell Borough Counci… EEBC welcomes the preparation of the Strategic Options and considers it to be a well written and presented document that has appropriately identified the key issues and challenges of meeting the identified growth demands.

Like Elmbridge, Epsom & Ewell is a tightly constrained area and shares in the challenge of responding to the significant Objective Assessed Housing Need figure identified by the jointly prepared SHMA.

Through a partial review of our spatial strategy, EEBC is considering the level of growth that can be sustainably accommodated over the next plan period. We are in the early stages of preparing our evidence base, which includes a Green Belt Study and review of
housing land supply. The initial outcomes of this evidence gathering indicate that it is extremely unlikely there will be any scope to accommodate a shortfall in housing need arising from neighbouring authorities and those within the HMA.

The provision and delivery of an appropriate level of infrastructure to support future growth is imperative for ensuring that sustainable development is achieved. Given the existing pressures on capacity, this is a real risk to the delivery of each strategic option. EEBC
would like to highlight its commitment to working together in conjunction with neighbouring authorities, in particular the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames and relevant parties in relation to this strategic issue.

I hope this information is of assistance and EEBC would welcome the opportunity to ensure that we continue to work on strategic issues with Elmbridge as our Local Plans progress.
21 Mar 2017 11:14
Birds Hill Oxshott Estate Co.… Designation of the Birds Hill providing greater protection to the character
and Estate as a Conservation Area, as a means of appearance of the
Estate.
21 Mar 2017 11:06
Deleted User Should the Council wish to discuss Next’s requirements for a new retail store in the Brooklands area, we would be pleased to engage with the relevant officers. 21 Mar 2017 10:53
CALA Homes (Hannah Turley) The Issues and Options report discusses that there is a requirement for Elmbridge to deliver 9,480 dwellings over the plan period from, 2015-2035 which aligns with the conclusions for the Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2016 which forms the emerging evidence base to the Local Plan. It is considered that Elmbridge Borough Council should seek to meets its objectively assessed needs in full and engage fully with the Duty-to-cooperate to ensure that any unmet needs of neighbouring authorities or and its own needs are appropriately addressed through the Local Plan process. 21 Mar 2017 10:51
Deleted User TDWGRA contests the requirement to find space for 9,500 new dwellings in Elmbridge over the next 20 years. Since these numbers were prepared circumstances have changed. In particular, the Brexit vote is likely to have a considerable impact on housing demand. The infrastructure in Elmbridge and surrounding areas is already inadequate and, this alone, should require the Council to require that numbers be re-visited. Massive investment would be needed to cope with development on the scale envisaged, and there is no evidence that this would be forthcoming.
Notwithstanding, we recognise that there is pressure to increase the number of dwellings in Elmbridge.

We would urge Elmbridge to revisit its proposals for the Local Plan in terms of allowing planning permission on low density housing aimed at the very wealthiest buyers, many of whom do not, and will never live in the Borough.

Founded in 1934, the Thames Ditton and Weston Green Residents Association (TDWGRA) is a non-party-political organisation constituted to protect the amenities and furthering the interests of the inhabitants of the wards of Thames Ditton and Hinchley Wood and Weston Green. We have four councillors sitting on Elmbridge Borough Council, one Surrey County Councillor who additionally covers Long Ditton, and we hold regular public meetings to ensure that the voices of our constituents are heard. We have over 1,200 subscribing households representing some 2,760 members.
21 Mar 2017 10:31
Deleted User 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
• These proposals have no regard to the size of the existing settlements where the new house building is being considered and the impact on their existing communities and infrastructure. Because Elmbridge is neither a place of being or a community in its own right but a collection of very separate and different communities and settlements, any sensible housing strategy has to be broken
down and as a starting point to look at each settlement / community and assess how many additional dwellings need to be accommodated having regard to the size of that settlement to Elmbridge as a whole.
• As the whole purpose of deselecting green belt land is for meeting housing need, it is a flawed process that ignores infrastructure. Green belt land in an urban or semi urban community may be more appropriate for development where there is adequate or good infrastructure than where it is in a rural or semi rural community where there is inadequate or poor infrastructure.
21 Mar 2017 10:16
Deleted User This response constitutes the formal representation on behalf of Moore Place Holdings LLP in relation to
Elmbridge Borough Council’s Regulation 18 Consultation on ‘Strategic Options’ as part of the process of
producing a new Local Plan.

Moore Place Holdings LLP owns the Moore Place Golf Course on Portsmouth Road in Esher, a site which
extends to approximately 12.7 hectares.

There is no ownership impediment to this site being brought forward. This is a deliverable site in terms
of NPPF policy: the site is available now; it offers a suitable location for development now; and it is
achievable – there is a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within the first five
years of the new Plan period.

Whilst the site is currently in use as a nine-hole golf course, its redevelopment will not result in a
deficiency in provision in the local area given existing provision elsewhere, for example the nine hole
course at Sandown Park; Hersham Golf Club; and the Thames Ditton and Esher Golf Club. A number of
these already operate on a ‘pay and play’ basis.

Montagu Evans has undertaken a review of the Strategic Options Consultation (Regulation 18) document
dated December 2016 and the Green Belt Boundary Review (March 2016) which forms part of the new
Local Plan evidence base.

This formal representation is separated into two primary sections, an analysis of the Green Belt Review
evidence base document, followed by comments on the Strategic Options Consultation document. The
former has been reviewed because it has formed the basis for the selection of the three key strategic
areas identified for potential release from the Green Belt in the Regulation 18 draft of the new Local Plan.
21 Mar 2017 10:16
Deleted User From our perspective it is clear that Central Government have a predetermined agenda to create more housing than has been built in recent years. Elmbridge has met and exceeded previous targets for house building which has resulted in substantial growth in areas such as Walton. This has put severe pressure on the infrastructure of the area, most notably the capacity of the road network and school places. By way of example, Ashley Primary School in central Walton 15 years ago was a single form entry school, but is now having additional classrooms built to enable it to take in 3 forms of entry.

As well as there being an insufficiency of infrastructure to cope with further significant increases of population, parts of the existing infrastructure are in poor condition and prone to failure. You will no doubt be aware that Walton High Street and Bridge Street, Walton were closed to traffic between the beginning of August and the Remembrance Day weekend in November last year.

The first strategic imperative therefore has to be that further growth in the housing stock has to be proportionate to the ability to update the infrastructure. It will be physically impossible to expand schools such as Ashley Primary by yet another two forms of entry, so the question has to be, where would you put new schools.
21 Mar 2017 09:50
First pagePrevious page Next pageLast page