View Response

Response Details

Response Details
From Wendy Whitaker
Date Started: 30 Jan 2017 08:21. Last modified: 30 Jan 2017 08:21
Status Complete
Response ID #518839

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
Firstly, I do not believe that the infrastructure currently in place around Cobham is coping with the current level of people and vehicles. Travelling around Cobham on a normal day is often time-consuming and then exacerbated by small incidents on the A3 and M25. Large lorries often going through hold up the traffic too. There is nowhere to build new roads. In regard to services, the Doctors is very busy making getting an appointment in a timely fashion impossible. There is not a secondary school in Cobham for the current children. I feel this will all be made worse by adding additional dwellings.

Secondly I am very concerned about the pollution levels around our area been enclosed by the A3 and M25 and more cars will make this worse. In only has to rain a little and several of our roads – particularly along Blundel Lane get very flooded. Putting down more concrete and additional waste disposal will make matters worse if this development goes ahead.

Thirdly, I believe in the Green Belt and the reasons it was set up. Why do we need to change that now? The Green Belt near here is used for walkers, by wildlife, Scouts, Guides, local residents for reaction and other groups, giving a little bit of space between Cobham Stoke and Oxshott. The protection of the Green Belt was an Elmbridge Council Core Strategy – it should not change now.

I would also like to know why the Covenant covering Knowle Hill has been revoked – this land should have been protected from developments such as the one proposed.

In order to keep Elmbridge and particularly Cobham the lovely place it is we need to refuse permission to give up our Green Belt.

2

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

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
The biggest single thing you can do is improve the road infrastructure particularly around Cobham. With the roads as they are so busy and the lack of parking in Cobham particularly soon people won’t want to come here and use our shops or services.

Next you need to maintain our Green Belt and remember the reasons for it being there. In line with this we need to address the pollution levels and maintain they environment and wildlife we currently have.

Search for other areas where this development would be appropriate and beneficial for all.

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
Consider the current residents of this area and ensure they are safe from pollution, flooding and can get around without huge delays, book GP appointments easily, send their children to a local school.

Provide Green Spaces for recreation and for wildlife to thrive.

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?
Why are we not being asked to consider other options as part of this consultation? Is there an option to do nothing or have the other options considered? If it has already been decided that the other options were not appropriate, has that decision been based on the correct criteria? Is it accurate? Was local knowledge taken into account e.g. apparently there are natural springs on the land you are looking at – was this confirmed? I would like to see brown field sites considered as part of this consultation.

My concern is that once taken away the Green Belt cannot be recovered and this decision should not be taken lightly. Also once this goes through others will follow and further degrade the quality of life for residents. Additionally, I disagree that the there are Exceptional Circumstances in relation to housing provision. The Green Belt should not be used for this.

I would also like the council to consider that affordable and social housing should have good links to employment and services. It takes more than an hour to get a bus from here to Kingston.

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 was under the impression that it was very hard to justify the use of Green Belt land and that housing needs was not a justification. I also thought that the boundaries of the Green Belt could only be changed if local people agreed and I don’t agree.

I believe that there are other sites that are more suitable in many ways and taking the Green Belt should be the VERY last resort. Have other sites been considered seriously?
Are there any brown field sites that could be used?

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
These three areas are not appropriate – I am concerned that the criteria used for assessing them was inconsistent.

The Green Belt around Knowle Hill / Blundel Lane is preventing urban sprawl between here and Oxshott. It is keeping the areas distinct and is currently semi-rural not ‘semi urban’

Again I am curious as to why the covenant protecting some of this area has been removed. Also I am concerned about the road system and the congestion we currently experience. With the A3 and M25 and roads in between there is very little scope for alleviating the traffic congestion.

I know there are ancient woodlands as part of this area that should be protected and wildlife as well. Some of the land is flood plain and I am concerned that flooding in this area will get worse.

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
I do not have detailed knowledge of other areas but believe it is the council’s responsibility to exhaust all possibilities and not just opt for open spaces.

Again the flooding, woodlands, wildlife and current usage of this area should be enough to dissuade developers from using this land. I also understand that some of this area was used for landfill which would further complicate a development.

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
No I don’t think any land should be removed from the Green Belt and that housing needs are not a good enough reason to use the land that has been laid aside for very good reasons. Those reasons all still exist and have not changed.

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
Yes, I believe that all types of houses should be built and social and affordable housing should be at the front of the plan.

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
I agree that too many large houses have been given planning permission when some of the land could be used for a more balanced housing plan.

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
I definitely think that higher density is one way of tackling the housing requirements. I have no idea what density would be appropriate as it would depend on the local services, rail links, bus routes, job market and recreational spaces to maintain a decent standard of living for all.

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
As I don’t think that this land should be built on at all this is an academic question. I come back to my comments above regarding infrastructure that is not coping now – the constraints of the land and whether affordable housing in this area would remain ‘affordable’.

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
Again I don’t think land should be built on at all. The premise that this land is suitable is questionable. To use Green Belt land and then still not address the number of houses required would not be an ideal solution. Giving up the land should be as a very last resort – not just nice to have a few houses on.

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
Yes, it should be case by case – the quality of life for new and existing residents should be considered. There are so many different areas with many different needs.

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
I do not know what areas of Government policy would help with this situation.

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
None that I am aware of.

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
No I think it should be considered on a case by case basis and the local needs taken into consideration. I believe there would be benefits to local communities having easy access to employment and retail outlet – not least it would improve congestions on our roads.

17

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

Again I think it should be considered on a case by case basis and the local needs taken into consideration. I believe there would be benefits to local communities having easy access to employment and retail outlets – not least it would improve congestions on our roads.

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
I don’t know specifically what you are referring to here – but in keeping with my other responses I believe the Green Belt should remain intact.

19

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

I would only know of the road congestion which is usually bad in normal times – I used to visit Brooklands a lot to shop but have stopped going as it takes too long to get there and back due to congestion.

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
I believe there is enough conference and hotel facilities in this area and more are not necessary.

21a

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

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
Yes – I dislike out of town shopping areas as it encourages use of the car. If town centres were developed it would cut down on car usage and pollution and congestion.

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 believe a balance of these areas is the way forward.

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
Yes, definitely – allow people to access these important places without having to travel. I think it encourages people to use other retail outlets if they come to town to do these things too.

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
Yes definitely this will help with pollution and quality of health and living.

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
«No response»

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
This is a fundamental part of the concern – that all the extra water will have nowhere to go with more concrete in the ground. I believe that all the infrastructure should be considered e.g. waste disposal / flooding / community resources / doctors / dentists / roads etc.

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
«No response»

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?

Again I don’t think any of these areas should be developed but the main areas are road – not fit for purpose now / access to community resources / schools / doctors / green areas for recreation/ links to buses and trains.

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?

I think that would be very hard given the restraints and overcrowding we currently have.

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.

 

I am concerned about the whole approach to this consultation with very little information initially and then a council run meeting with Option 2 as the only option for consultation. No other options up for discussion. The removal of a covenant without consulting the local community is also cause for concern.

I also think this document is overly onerous, repetitive, asking the same question in a slightly different way and would be interested to know how much it cost to produce, maintain, run and collate when surely normal letters of objection or support would have sufficed.

34. Files

«No files»