Object

Representation ID: 5485

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 323

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Table 3-2 fails to use the most recent baseline data. Suggested improvements to the objectives and indicators in Table 3-3 have been ignored.

Object

Representation ID: 5498

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 323

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The SA underestimates the impact of Objective ER3. Uncertainties should not be recorded where there are clearly going to be negative effects. This section needs to reflect the conclusions of the assessment of the plan and the effects of development of the Garden Suburb. The previous comment that there will obviously be an increase in traffic has been ignored, although the response in Appendix C states that it is agreed there is likely to be an effect.

Object

Representation ID: 5609

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

SOCS commented previously (September 2014) in response to IBC's updated SA scoping consultation letter. SOCS feel the responses given to key issues in the letter sent do not address these key issues [the need to incorporate an updated evidence base and give more detailed consideration to alternative spatial options] sufficiently. SOCS reserve the right to continue to question the "evidence base".

Object

Representation ID: 5730

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

SOCS endorse the Northern Fringe Protection Group's points. The SA underestimates the impact of Objective ER3. Uncertainties should not be recorded where there are clearly going to be negative effects. This section needs to reflect the conclusions of the assessment of the plan and the effects of development of the Garden Suburb. The previous comment that there will obviously be an increase in traffic has been ignored, although the response in Appendix C states that it is agreed there is likely to be an effect.