Purpose of this SPD

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 2825

Received: 21/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Bernard Poulter

Representation:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediatley to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreaction pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastaing fires in 2019 & 2020

Full text:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediatley to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreaction pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastaing fires in 2019 & 2020

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 4642

Received: 23/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Daren Murray

Representation:

It is wholly inaccurate relying on wrong assumptions and developer reports which should not be accepted due to a serious conflict of interest.
Burley in Wharfedale development will have a significant impact on wildlife and this is not being fully investigated by either the council or developers.

Full text:

It is wholly inaccurate relying on wrong assumptions and developer reports which should not be accepted due to a serious conflict of interest.
Burley in Wharfedale development will have a significant impact on wildlife and this is not being fully investigated by either the council or developers.

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 5179

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Miss Teresa McDonell

Representation:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Full text:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 5284

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Robin McDonell

Representation:

Purpose of this SPD
1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Full text:

Purpose of this SPD
1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at
1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other Urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as Dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling ,and , most dangerous of them all, Cat predation .
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is Key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 5347

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Claire Ure

Representation:

I consider that the the SPD document is wholly inaccurate for the reasons set out in my summary.

Full text:

I consider that the the SPD document is wholly inaccurate for the reasons set out in my summary.

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 5737

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Nick Jones

Representation:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at 1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling and, most dangerous of them all, cat predation!
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Full text:

1.3 "In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed", yet at 1.4 you move immediately to mitigation.
In 1.5 you identify additional recreation pressure, but fail to mention the other urban effects on the SPA/SAC such as dumping, wild fires, pollution through traffic increases, noise levels, volumes of particulates given off from vehicles, domestic chemical runoff, mountain biking, dog walking and fouling and, most dangerous of them all, cat predation!
The deterioration and loss of supporting "Functional Habitats" is key, especially after the devastating fires in 2019 & 2020

Object

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 5797

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Roger Wilson

Representation:

1.2 states risks need to be addressed before planning permission is granted. Permission has been but this is yet to complete. This is a procedural breach.
1.3 In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed. You are very far from "certainty". In 1.4 you are already fully looking at mitigation as if this consultation and document are irrelevant and can be ignored. This is a procedural breach.
Why is 1.5 only mentioning recreational pressure. What about the increase in traffic pollution, noise, the serious effects of pets on wildlife and domestically sourced pollution.
What is described in this chapter is NOT the purpose of the SPD.

Full text:

1.2 states risks need to be addressed before planning permission is granted. Permission has been but this is yet to complete. This is a procedural breach.
1.3 In the absence of certainty, the plan should not proceed. You are very far from "certainty". In 1.4 you are already fully looking at mitigation as if this consultation and document are irrelevant and can be ignored. This is a procedural breach.
Why is 1.5 only mentioning recreational pressure. What about the increase in traffic pollution, noise, the serious effects of pets on wildlife and domestically sourced pollution.
What is described in this chapter is NOT the purpose of the SPD.

Support

Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document

Representation ID: 27914

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Ltd

Agent: Lichfields

Representation:

The SPD should make clear in its introduction that that it will only apply to new planning applications validated after the adoption of the SPD in order to provide clarity as to the relevant regimes, and that where planning permission has been granted in the form of an outline planning permission the SPD will not apply to any subsequent application for approval of Reserved Matters. This is on the basis that the policy and its terms will have needed to be addressed prior to the grant of outline planning permission.

Full text:

See attachments of CEG’s representation to the Draft Bradford District Local Plan Preferred Options (Regulation 18) Consultation. This includes:
-Appendix 1 Assessment of the Housing Requirement proposed within Policy SP8
-Appendix 2 Commentary on Evidence Base Documents
-Appendix 3 The Secretary of State’s decision and Inspector’s Report regarding application
16/07870/MAO (reference APP/W4705/V/18/3208020)
-Appendix 4 Burley-in-Wharfedale Alternative Site Assessment (2016)
-Appendix 5 Burley-in-Wharfedale Updated Alternative Site Assessment (April 2019)
-Appendix 6 Scalebor Park Land Registry Extract
-Appendix 7 Response to the HRA, associated policies and the South Pennine Moors
SPA/SAC Planning Framework SPD (prepared by Baker Consultants