Strategic Growth Options

Search representations

Results for Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council search

New search New search

Object

Strategic Growth Options

1.14 Consultations

Representation ID: 5764

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Parish have already provided responses on the 2013 Preferred Options document and those comments should be considered along with the 2015 Strategic Growth Options ones.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Question 12

Representation ID: 5766

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

A major concern of the Parish Council is that the necessary infrastructure to support large numbers of additional properties just does not exist. The sewage treatment works is at full capacity and services such as doctors, school places and parking are all overloaded.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Question 12

Representation ID: 5768

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Due to the piecemeal nature of the 13 sites that have been identified within the Village Boundary the LDP does not take account of this method of development as individual developers would not be responsible for infrastructure improvements to cope with the additional housing. There must be a strategy in place to ensure that prior to any development taking place the infrastructure within the village must be improved to cope as it is already an issue with the developments of True Loves and BellMead.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Question 6

Representation ID: 5769

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Of great concern is the potential erosion of the Green Belt and Special Landscape Area surrounding the parish that would result if the sites were developed. Examples of the damaging effect on the landscape can be seen as the inappropriate development in the Green Belt at Trueloves takes place.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Question 6

Representation ID: 5771

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Village Design Statement (VDS) created by the people of Ingatestone and Fryerning after detailed and exhaustive consultation with the residents, makes it very clear that the residents do not support the erosion of the Green Belt and they strongly support the retention of the existing boundaries. The residents also believe that the visual breaks between Margaretting and Mountnessing should be maintained and that the existing Residential Envelope should not be extended so as to protect Ingatestone's village character (See pages 8 and 9 of the VDS).

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Question 6

Representation ID: 5772

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The Council wish to emphasise the importance of the quality of the landscape surrounding Ingatestone and Fryerning and point out the great importance of maintaining this considerable asset by careful allocation of developable land and maintaining a green separation between the villages.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

042 Land at Bell Mead, Ingatestone

Representation ID: 5773

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

We understand the land has been sold and plans are awaited from the developer. We trust that the proposals will be based on the ideas put forward at the 2 seminars we attended with BBC, our Ward Councillors and the developers with provision for 14 homes and 10 car parking spaces.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

064 Land adjacent Everglades, Avenue Road, Ingatestone

Representation ID: 5774

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Development has already started.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

078 Land at Parklands, High Street, Ingatestone

Representation ID: 5775

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This is a perfect example of "blurring" of village boundaries. Any village needs green open spaces to define its beginning and end. Developing this site would be a perfect example of how to destroy Ingatestone's village character and its attractive rural approach from the South. This site is in the Green Belt and Special Landscape Area. Development here would therefore be deemed inappropriate, decrease the separation between the village and Margaretting and increase urban sprawl. The site could accommodate a large number of properties increasing the demand on already stretched infrastructure and services. Its development would not be supported by the Parish Council.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

079A Land adjacent to Ingatestone by-pass (part bounded by Roman Road)

Representation ID: 5776

Received: 26/02/2015

Respondent: Ingatestone and Fryerning Parish Council

Representation Summary:

It is essential that a green space separation be maintained between Ingatestone and Mountnessing. Development on this site would therefore not be supported by the Parish Council and should be rejected.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.