View Response

Response Details

Response Details
From V Braun
Date Started: 08 Jan 2017 19:36. Last modified: 08 Jan 2017 19:36
Status Complete
Response ID #514478

1

Agree that the challenges set out in section 2 of the consultation document are the key challenges facing Elmbridge?

 

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don't Know

Please explain your answer
The 3 sets of challenges (economic, environmental and social) encompass a broad range of issues that impact on our lives, now and in the future.

2

Do you consider there are other challenges that we should be addressing?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

3

Do you consider any particular challenge or challenges that are more important than the others?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
We should invest mainly in the Economic and the Environmental challenges.
If we deliver on the Economic challenge, we can afford to deliver on the Social challenge. It has, however, to be given boundaries driven by the Environmental challenge.

4

Agree that Option 2 is the most appropriate option?

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don’t know

If you disagree, please explain why and what other option would you support and why?
«No response»

5

Do you consider the suggested exceptional circumstances are sufficient to support the amendment of the Green Belt boundary?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
I hesitate to support the claim that "One of the worst levels of affordability in the country coupled with an under supply of affordable homes" is an exceptional circumstance that can lead to the amendment of the Green Belt boundary. The Borough's proximity to London is what is causing the housing demand, and the Green Belt's role is exactly to protect the space around London. You can't use the cause as an excuse to attack the mitigation.

6

Agree that, given the appropriate exceptional circumstances, these three key strategic areas are appropriate for removal from the Green Belt?

 

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don’t know

Please explain your answer
The 3 proposed areas are adjacent to strongly or moderately performing Green Belt areas; so assuming that the protection of those areas remain - the overall damage done within that geography is limited.

7

Do you know of any sites within any of the three key strategic areas that could be considered for future development?

 

  • Yes
  • No

Please explain your answer
«No response»

8

Do you consider that other areas of land should be removed from the Green Belt including those that are moderately or strongly performing?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
Moderately or strongly performing Green Belt areas should quite simply NOT be developed.

9

Do you agree that we should seek to provide more of a balance in terms of the size of new homes being built?  

 

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
Generally speaking, I am in favour of letting market forces determine. However, in our Borough, I presume there are a lot of wealthy property investors originating from outside of the Borough, who may unfairly skew the demand.

10

Given the over delivery of homes with 4 or more bedrooms should we try to limit their delivery in future?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
Large properties on large plots put relatively less pressure on the surrounding infrastructure, so they do serve a greater purpose.

11

Should we seek to increase minimum densities at sustainable locations in the urban areas, such as in town centres and at train stations, above 40 dwellings per hectare, where this would not impact on local character?

  • Yes (If yes, what density do you think would be appropriate?)
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
The equivalent of victorian terrace density would appear reasonable, i.e. 60-80 dph. However, only a very small area (whether "town centre" or "at train stations") should be allowed such high density.

12a

Within the three key strategic areas we will be exploring opportunities for accommodating our development needs taking into account site constraints, land ownership, compliance with other planning policies and the need to support sustainable development.  If potential housing sites are identified within these areas, do you consider it appropriate to

a. deliver at higher densities i.e. above 40 dwellings per hectare, in order to maximise delivery?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

12b

Within the three key strategic areas we will be exploring opportunities for accommodating our development needs taking into account site constraints, land ownership, compliance with other planning policies and the need to support sustainable development.  If potential housing sites are identified within these areas, do you consider it appropriate to:

b. Support lower density developments that maintain the open character of an area and reflects the surrounding character

 

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

13

Agree with our approach to continue to apply Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy e.g. consider on a case by case basis whether local circumstances are sufficient to warrant the requirement of affordable housing contributions on all sites where there is a net increase in housing and where it is viable?

 

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don't know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

14

Are there any other aspects of Government policy which you think we should consider with regard to meeting the accommodation needs of non-travelling Travellers?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
If this Borough is the 4th most expensive place in the country - we should not make specific plans nor investments to support travelling people, they should be accommodated in areas less expensive, to NOT add pressure to the high demand and costs in this Borough.

15

Do you consider there to be any other specific housing needs that are an issue within Elmbridge and that we should seek to address as part of the new Local Plan?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

16

Do you agree that the Council should seek to protect our most important and strategic employment areas from redevelopment to uses other than offices, warehousing and factories?

 

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don't know

Please explain your answer
Providing local employment opportunities should reduce the pressure on our roads and railways; business taxes will benefit the wider community.

17

If not, what degree of flexibility do you consider would be appropriate with regard to alternative uses in such areas?

«No response»

18

Do you think that there are any exceptional circumstances that would support the amendment of the Green Belt boundary at Brooklands to support the further development of employment uses at this site?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
The Green Belt area is strongly performing - this should be respected.

19

Other than Green Belt what other barriers do you consider could prevent further development at Brooklands?

The area surrounding Brooklands is already very developed.

20

We will seek to maintain our broad support for tourism related development as set out in the Core Strategy. However, to recognise the importance of Sandown Park Racecourse as both a sporting and exhibition venue should we:

Encourage the redevelopment of Sandown Racecourse to provide improved and extended conference and hotel facilities?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
If there are strong economic projected benefits to the Borough from such development, then redevelopment work that doesn't damage the Green Belt area may be acceptable.

21a

Maintain our policy of focussing new retail development to town and village centres?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
Shops located outside of centres rarely come across as attractive and cause trade traffic in those areas.

21b

Continue to protect primary shopping areas from other uses as set out in the current Core Strategy?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
I would like a mix of service business among the retailers to increase the variety. As it is today, there are so many similar retail businesses (greeting cards + charities + beauty + bed stores) that the town centre (Walton) is too homogeneous.

21c

Consider allowing other important uses in primary high street shopping frontages such as doctor’s surgeries, dentists and libraries?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

22

Should the Council continue to give a high level of protection to all open spaces and designate those spaces that meet the criteria for Local Green Spaces?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
The green spaces are so important to the air quality and for general enjoyment of the local environment. Much used by dog walkers, families, workers taking lunch breaks etc.

23

Do you agree with our approach to biodiversity and mitigating the impact of new development on the Thames Basin Heaths habitat?

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
I would think that refusing all new residential applications within the buffer zone would provide better protection?

24

Do you agree that our strategic and pro-active approach to supporting our heritage assets is appropriate?

  • Yes, I agree
  • No, I disagree
  • I don't know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

25

If not, what approach do you think we should take?

«No response»

26

Do you agree that the Council’s current approach to considering design and character is appropriate?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

27

If not what approach do you think we should take?

«No response»

28

Should we look at including a policy providing more detailed advice on what is required to limit the cumulative impact of small scale development on flood risk?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
It is important to consider the impact of any development on the whole area that this development can affect, not just looking at the site in isolation. This also applies to micro sites, such as front gardens.

29

Do you consider the existing policies seeking to reduce the impacts of new development with regard to delivering more sustainable travel patterns outlined above are still appropriate?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
There is insufficient provision of public transportation and cycle lanes. The footpaths are poorly maintained. Traffic congestion and air polution are significant concerns.

30

Are there other approaches we should consider?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
«No response»

31

What do you consider to be the essential infrastructure items required to support new communities e.g. the potential development of the 3 key strategic areas?

Public transportation, bike lanes, road safety measures.

32

What smaller infrastructure improvements do you think could be made within your local area to address some of the negative impacts arising from new development?

Pedestrian crossing facilities at Hersham station. Traffic calming measures on Rydens Road.

33

We recognise that there may be other issues or options we have not considered that you would like to raise. If there are we would like to hear these and consider them as part for this consultation. Please use this space to write anything else you would like us to consider.

 

The projected housing needs can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If more housing is made available, more people will move to the area, requiring more infrastructure, etc etc. I hope the plan will reflect the very minimum housing requirements for the Borough.

34. Files

«No files»