01.02

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan - Pre-Submission Reg19 (interactive) 2020

Representation ID: 20855

Received: 17/12/2020

Respondent: Mx Miles Row

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Too vague. It does not make clear it needs to be balanced but still meet net zero commitments.

Change suggested by respondent:

01.02 Planning involves weighing up economic, social and environmental factors to achieve the most balanced and sustainable way forward into a net zero emissions future.

Full text:

Too vague. It does not make clear it needs to be balanced but still meet net zero commitments.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan - Pre-Submission Reg19 (interactive) 2020

Representation ID: 21125

Received: 23/12/2020

Respondent: Sudbury Area Green Belt Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

We believe this is unsound, as the draft Plan appears unsustainable:
- It's not a Plan, but an administrative document, and won't result in change in future planning decisions;
- Only minimally meets requirements of the NPPF etc, especially for biodiversity;
- Will fail to protect important green sites, from urban sprawl;
- Fails to propose compensating existing populations, by helping meet the Accessible Natural Green Space standard for existing communities.

Change suggested by respondent:

- A proactive interpretation of requirements of the NPPF etc for biodiversity, to identify important green sites, and protect from urban sprawl.
- Help existing communities meet the Accessible Natural Green Space standard by ensuring a green strip between them and new estates.

Full text:

We believe this is unsound, as the draft Plan appears unsustainable:
it doesn’t read like a Plan, but like an administrative document, it evidently will not result in any change in future planning decisions, in more than an insignificant number of cases.
It aims to meet only a minimal interpretation of the requirements of the NPPF etc. This will almost certainly be true for biodiversity.
The Plan contains virtually nothing that is proactive. It fails to protect environmentally important green sites, from the risk of urban sprawl. It fails to make the simplest proposals to reduce the chronic pattern of new developments not compensating existing populations, by ensuring any green strip between old and new, or similarly using the opportunity to meet the Accessible Natural Green Space standard for existing communities.