View Response

Response Details

Response Details
From Deleted User
Date Started: 17 Jan 2017 17:49. Last modified: 21 Mar 2017 15:51
Status Complete
Response ID #516817

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
We have lived here since 1973 having recently retired, we now feel that we may be forced to leave as the the thought of constant traffic and noise disruption on going for months or even years, is to intolerable to bear. We understand that bankside drive will be a entry point to the building site and therefore a very big increase of traffic will occur in our road. Again causing a overwhelming amount of distress, my wife is on medication for severe blood pressure, and damage to the grass verges as was the case when Paragon installed the new roofs last winter. Also what plans have you to protect the wildlife on this nature reserve ?

2

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

 

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know

Please explain your answer
Local resources already strained, GP's services, Hospital, One local bus service already under strain (K3), schools, etc. etc.

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
Schools and GP's

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
Unclear and confusing for elderly people

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
Ambiguous for old people.

Additional Comments Received via Email 22.02.2017:
Up until about ten or more years ago you couldn't build anything without a long drawn out dialogue with the council, but in the recent period there have been big developments such as on the Milk Marketing board site, Inland revenue tax sites, Thames Water site, plus several smaller sites and new roads appearing. All of these developments resulting in many hundreds or thousands of new houses being introduced to the Long Ditton area without adequate additions to the local amenities or infrastructure. This obviously has added to problems with existing pressure on schools, GP's, Hospital, public transport and other local services.

Further development on the proposed site namely Stoke fields, One Tree Hill, would certainly create problems in terms of greater traffic pollution and parking, both of which are already problematic, thus leading to further chaos .

What plans are in place to preserve the many varied wildlife and animals, and woodlands, both of which have flourished for generations in our lovely nature reserve, which is regularly enjoyed by so many, young and old alike (school field trips, dog walking, which is beneficial to the dogs and their owners) all year round.

We believe that all in all this matter has not been considered properly, and that other, more accessible and suitable landsites within the Elmbridge area could be looked at in order to fulfill the Government criteria for housing.

We have lived in [Road Name deleted] for 43 years and locally almost all our lives ( 67 years ) and appreciate the natural urban way of life in Long Ditton.

Petition received from Mr L. Hards stating to following - we the undersigned want to register our disgust and objection to any planned or suggested building of housing on the land known as "Stokes Field" or "One Tree Hill". This also applies to any planned access through Bankside Drive. Signatures received - 64.

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
Were not aware of this info.

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
your confusing me

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
Confusing

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
Confusing

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
cramp in arthritic hand, confused

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
confused

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
confused

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
confused

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
confusd

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
tired and confused

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
confused

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
confused

19

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

old and confused

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
No opinion

21a

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

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't Know

Please explain your answer
No opinion

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
no opinion

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 opinion

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
Protection of wildlife and nature walks 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
no opinion

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 opinion

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 opinion

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
no opinion

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
don't understand and tired

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?

protected open spaces, nature reserves and parks

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?

leave area as it is, stop overcrowding amenities and services.

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.

 

This is a expensive and good area to live in, which has been developed in many spaces already in the last few years i.e. Milk marketing board,Inland revenue areas and many more smaller developments. Up to 10\20 years ago there was NO developments at all of any size or sort allowed by the council or the government.