5 Comments in Total
| Name: Parish Clerk | Location: Beckwithshaw | Date Added: 21/08/2008 | | Subject:
LDF response forms | Comment:
Response forms can be downloaded from www.harrogate.gov.uk/ldf.
Completed forms to be saved as Word documents and attached to e-mails adressed to: ldf@harrogate.gov.uk.
All responses must be submitted by 16:30 on Friday 22nd August 2008. |
| Name: Parish Clerk | Location: Beckwithshaw | Date Added: 21/08/2008 | | Subject:
Response to LDF volume 2 | Comment:
HARROGATE DISTRICT LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK:
CONSULTATION RESPONSE FORM
(July / August 2008)
How to make comments:
• For the Council to consider and process your representation effectively please use this form
to submit your comments.
• Please fill in one form for each option/page/paragraph you wish to comment on.
• For more copies of this form visit (www.harrogate.gov.uk/ldf), email ldf@harrogate.gov.uk or phone the planning policy team on (01423) 556586
• Alternatively, you can access this form on the above website, save and complete it electronically
and email your response as an attachment to ldf@harrogate.gov.uk
• Your response should be received by the Council no later than 4:30pm on Friday 22 August 2008.
• Once submitted, your comments will be available for others to read.
Name: Haverah Park with Beckwithshaw Parish Council Agent (if applicable):
Address:Parish Clerk, 3 The Walled Garden, Address:
Moor Park, Beckwithshaw, Harrogate
Postcode HG3 1QW Postcode
‘phone: 01423 521 006 ‘phone:
email: clerk@beckwithshawpc-gov.co.uk email:
Please indicate which consultation document you wish to comment on (use a separate form for each document):
Main Report:
X Harrogate and Knaresborough Urban Extension Study Volume 2
Supporting Documents:
Biodiversity Study
Landscape, Green Belt and Green Wedge Assessment
Sustainability Appraisal to the Harrogate and Knaresborough Urban Extension Study Volume 2
Traffic Assessment
Travel and Accessibility Assessment
Which option/page/paragraph do you wish to comment on?
Are you commenting Supporting or objecting
Please set out overleaf your comments or reason/s for support/objection
DELIVERABILITY
All the sites are effected by crucial issues on deliverability ie: Utilities, Schools, Health, Highways and overall infrastructure and on the point of these crucial issues Harrogate Borough Council has not investigated in sufficient depth.
This is particularly serious because the deliverability is not within the Council’s remit.
The five headings of Volume 2 show negative responses from the other infrastructure providers outside Harrogate Borough Council’s control, which concerns residents on how they can be made to deliver the necessary services which would be required to provide a “MEANINGFUL QUALITY OF LIFE”.
SUSTAINABILITY
The Parish Council has serious doubts about the methodology used to conclude which sites are the most favourable.
The methodology used ( ticks -/ and crosses X ) is qualitative, no weighting is given to the differing importance of various factors and no way of measuring when something becomes an opportunity or constraint.
Table 1 page 6.
S2 had the highest number of opportunities of all the sites in Harrogate, but subsequently in HKUES Vol 2
Two pages are devoted to why S2, The initially most favoured site is not suitable.
This is the only site in the documents examined in such depth, the conclusion of this further (and equally flawed) analysis is that S2 is no longer a favoured option.
The Parish Council has very serious reservations as to how this conclusion has been reached.
OPTION EVALUATION
The parish Council was surprised that given Harrogate Borough Council’s historical concerns over controlling large scale developments and the resulting creep in excessive demands by the developers to constantly increase the initial allocations of property numbers and loss of providing community facilities identified at outline planning studies and recommendations.
This has resulted in large scale developments being unable at completion to provide for necessary public transport services and short term on street parking facilities for new residents visitors.
Serious doubts have since been raised about Option Evaluation and the Parish Council believes that this has led to erroneous conclusions about the balance of small versus large sites.
Please see comments on sustainability below and appendix attached of G Arrowsmiths Planning Consultant’s Report on behalf of the Parish Council
We note in Inspectors letter to Harrogate Borough Council dated 4 April 2008 one of areas of concern was consultation with stakeholders and public.
We note that the consultation response form does not include a heading to respond to.
There was no consultation with the public about all sites for housing to be to the West of Harrogate
The Core strategy was submitted to central government including issues of all housing to be to the West of Harrogate
The present consultation has been taken by the council to be solely in the main holiday period which disenfranchises a large number of the population
We also note the decision to submit the ( HKUES 2) as the council’s evidence to the Planning Inspector was made by one individual Cabinet Member for Planning and the Environment without the backing of the all party District Development Committee.
Please return this response form to FREEPOST HARROGATE DISTRICT LDF before 4:30pm on Friday 22 August 2008
Any questions? – please contact the LDF Policy Team:
Telephone: 01423 556586 Fax: 01423 556540 Email: ldf@harrogate.gov.uk
|
| Name: Parish Clerk | Location: Beckwithshaw | Date Added: 21/08/2008 | | Subject:
Response to LDF volume 2 | Comment:
HARROGATE DISTRICT LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK:
CONSULTATION RESPONSE FORM
(July / August 2008)
How to make comments:
• For the Council to consider and process your representation effectively please use this form
to submit your comments.
• Please fill in one form for each option/page/paragraph you wish to comment on.
• For more copies of this form visit (www.harrogate.gov.uk/ldf), email ldf@harrogate.gov.uk or phone the planning policy team on (01423) 556586
• Alternatively, you can access this form on the above website, save and complete it electronically
and email your response as an attachment to ldf@harrogate.gov.uk
• Your response should be received by the Council no later than 4:30pm on Friday 22 August 2008.
• Once submitted, your comments will be available for others to read.
Name: Haverah Park with Beckwithshaw Parish Council Agent (if applicable):
Address:Parish Clerk, 3 The Walled Garden, Address:
Moor Park, Beckwithshaw, Harrogate
Postcode HG3 1QW Postcode
‘phone: 01423 521 006 ‘phone:
email: clerk@beckwithshawpc-gov.co.uk email:
Please indicate which consultation document you wish to comment on (use a separate form for each document):
Main Report:
X Harrogate and Knaresborough Urban Extension Study Volume 2
Supporting Documents:
Biodiversity Study
Landscape, Green Belt and Green Wedge Assessment
Sustainability Appraisal to the Harrogate and Knaresborough Urban Extension Study Volume 2
Traffic Assessment
Travel and Accessibility Assessment
Which option/page/paragraph do you wish to comment on?
Are you commenting Supporting or objecting
Please set out overleaf your comments or reason/s for support/objection
DELIVERABILITY
All the sites are effected by crucial issues on deliverability ie: Utilities, Schools, Health, Highways and overall infrastructure and on the point of these crucial issues Harrogate Borough Council has not investigated in sufficient depth.
This is particularly serious because the deliverability is not within the Council’s remit.
The five headings of Volume 2 show negative responses from the other infrastructure providers outside Harrogate Borough Council’s control, which concerns residents on how they can be made to deliver the necessary services which would be required to provide a “MEANINGFUL QUALITY OF LIFE”.
SUSTAINABILITY
The Parish Council has serious doubts about the methodology used to conclude which sites are the most favourable.
The methodology used ( ticks -/ and crosses X ) is qualitative, no weighting is given to the differing importance of various factors and no way of measuring when something becomes an opportunity or constraint.
Table 1 page 6.
S2 had the highest number of opportunities of all the sites in Harrogate, but subsequently in HKUES Vol 2
Two pages are devoted to why S2, The initially most favoured site is not suitable.
This is the only site in the documents examined in such depth, the conclusion of this further (and equally flawed) analysis is that S2 is no longer a favoured option.
The Parish Council has very serious reservations as to how this conclusion has been reached.
OPTION EVALUATION
The parish Council was surprised that given Harrogate Borough Council’s historical concerns over controlling large scale developments and the resulting creep in excessive demands by the developers to constantly increase the initial allocations of property numbers and loss of providing community facilities identified at outline planning studies and recommendations.
This has resulted in large scale developments being unable at completion to provide for necessary public transport services and short term on street parking facilities for new residents visitors.
Serious doubts have since been raised about Option Evaluation and the Parish Council believes that this has led to erroneous conclusions about the balance of small versus large sites.
Please see comments on sustainability below and appendix attached of G Arrowsmiths Planning Consultant’s Report on behalf of the Parish Council
We note in Inspectors letter to Harrogate Borough Council dated 4 April 2008 one of areas of concern was consultation with stakeholders and public.
We note that the consultation response form does not include a heading to respond to.
There was no consultation with the public about all sites for housing to be to the West of Harrogate
The Core strategy was submitted to central government including issues of all housing to be to the West of Harrogate
The present consultation has been taken by the council to be solely in the main holiday period which disenfranchises a large number of the population
We also note the decision to submit the ( HKUES 2) as the council’s evidence to the Planning Inspector was made by one individual Cabinet Member for Planning and the Environment without the backing of the all party District Development Committee.
Please return this response form to FREEPOST HARROGATE DISTRICT LDF before 4:30pm on Friday 22 August 2008
Any questions? – please contact the LDF Policy Team:
Telephone: 01423 556586 Fax: 01423 556540 Email: ldf@harrogate.gov.uk
|
| Name: Parish Clerk | Location: Beckwithshaw | Date Added: 15/03/2008 | | Subject:
Response to Local Development Framework Strategy | Comment:
HARROGATE DISTRICT LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK:
CONSULTATION RESPONSE FORM (January/February 2008)
How to make comments:
• For the Council to consider and process your representation effectively, please use this form
to submit your comments.
• Please fill in one form for each document you wish to comment on.
• Your response should be received by the Council no later than 4:30pm on Friday 29 February 2008.
• For more copies of this form visit (www.harrogate.gov.uk/ldf),
email ldf@harrogate.gov.uk or phone the planning policy team on (01423) 556586 or (01423) 556584
• Alternatively, you can access this form on the above website, save and complete it electronically
and email your response as an attachment to ldf@harrogate.gov.uk .
• Once submitted, your comments will be available for others to read.
Name: Haverah Park with Beckwithshaw Parish Council Agent (if applicable):
Address:Parish Clerk, 3 The Walled Garden, Moor Park, Address:
Beckwithshaw, Harrogate
Postcode HG3 1QN Postcode
‘phone: 01423 521 006 ‘phone:
email: clerk@beckwithshawpc-gov.co.uk email:
The following sets out all the documents that the Council are consulting on between 18 January and 29 February 2008. Please indicate which consultation document you wish to comment on (use a separate form for each document):
Site Allocations (Homes and Jobs) DPD: Preferred Options Volumes 1 – 13 (please fill in section 1)
Sustainability Appraisal to the Site Allocations (Homes and Jobs) DPD (Please fill in section 1)
Community Sports Regeneration Area Action Plan (AAP) Preferred Option (Please fill in section 2)
Development Limits Issues and Options (Please fill in section 3)
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) (Please fill in section 3)
Strategic Flood Risk Sequential Test (Please fill in section 3)
Local Landscape Designations Issues and Options (Please fill in section 3)
Note: If you are commenting on the Site Allocations (Homes and Jobs) DPD and wish to suggest a new site for future development, please provide the following information:
• A plan clearly showing the site’s location
• The site area in hectares
• The current use of the site
• What you consider is the most suitable future use for the site
If you are commenting on the Issues and Options Consultation on the Development Limits and would like to suggest a change to a development limit provide:
• A plan clearly showing the suggested change to the development limit
• Why you consider a change is necessary
SECTION 1
COMMENTS ON SITE ALLOCATIONS (HOMES AND JOBS) DPD: PREFERRED OPTIONS:
Which Preferred Options do you agree should go forward for housing and employment development? (list below using option reference and give your reasons for agreement)
The Parish Council does not support the preferred options due to the lack of prior consultation to alter the Parish Boundary
This process is considered inaccessible to a section of the electorate due to its magnitude and technical complexity of the process and the needs for computer literacy and competence.
We note that Harrogate Borough council has no declared standards for public accessibility to important components of its web site
This process has disenfranchised the electorate due to its long timescale of launch in 2004 accompanied by a new leaflet which at that time was not delivered to all electors.
The next notification was the current leaflet distributed in January 2008, requiring considerable research to meet the objectives of a response to the document ‘Plan the future with us’.
Which Preferred Options do you not think should go forward for housing or employment development?
• List below using option reference
• Give reasons why the preferred option should not be developed, and
• Tell us what other options would be better (if preferred option not allocated, then other option of equivalent size needs to be found)
VOLUME 3 HARROGATE TOWN (South West) H32 and H32(1) Housing & H27(1) Employment
H32(1) & H27(1) This allocation is for land mostly in a countryside Parish outside the Harrogate urban area development limit which falls under the category Group C villages and the countryside as identified in Volume 13 of the Preferred Options Consultation document.
H32(1) has constantly been protected as an important attractive open and countryside approach to Harrogate which also has an adjoining Principal National Tourist attraction at Harlow Carr Gardens which plays an important and major part in the tourism profile and brings enormous economic benefits to the town.
Harlow Carr plays an important part in developing and promoting green and sustainable national initiatives and this proposed high level of development on a recognised area of flooding could put this attractive tourist destination at risk
H32(1) acts as a ground sponge for excessive rainfall and it has been recognised that a large section of the site H32 nearest to Harrogate cannot be developed due to its marshland geographical features which includes rising springs and a stream.
Therefore the proposal would be to create a new settlement in a countryside setting with no physical link to the Harrogate Urban Area contrary to policy guidelines.
The proposal to create a new highway link into the settlement from the B6162 highway whose original construction had to be deliberately raised due to its crossing of historical marsh land and the future predicted climate change will exacerbate increases in ground and surface water and is further proof that excessive flooding will occur by the amount of hard standings that will be created if development takes place on this land.
Current high levels of rat run traffic from Leeds Bradford and Ripon have undermined the stability of this highway and further traffic numbers can only accelerate its destruction.
This development will also have a major impact on existing well established equestrian centres who already have to be wary of the continuing increases in traffic volumes, which have been recorded locally at over 1200 vehicles in a half hour period.
The official Traffic Assessment carried out in the urban extension study was limited in its terms of reference and assessments, therefore its conclusions are flawed, in particular it failed to take account of safety and environmental aspects and current observed excessive use of country roads adjacent to the B6161 and B6162
The core strategy makes reference to the importance of green wedges and this development will interfere with the approach to many well defined and popular public and country footpaths
The size of the proposed development will lead to an anticipated 3000 car journeys per day creating an excess of 1000 tonnes of Co2
This proposed site contravenes Government instructions which state that proposals should consider the availability of public transport and access to major infrastructure which are none existent in this countryside setting.
It will permanently damage aspects of the South West approach to Harrogate due to the removal of the Special Landscape area leading to loss of rural land forever.
The Parish Consultation identified that a more suitable site would be the A61 corridor on the south side of Harrogate between Pannal and Almsford Bank, bearing in mind this land exists within the Harrogate Urban Area and would not constitute development in the countryside as proposed for the suggested allocation of H32(1) and H27(1)
There is extensive land availability to meet the requirements of H32(1) on both sides of the A61 highway which currently has a mixed use of houses and businesses.
The A61 corridor has existing high quality highway and rail services with easy accessibility to Harrogate town centre and the major adjoining cities of Leeds, Bradford, York, and A1 motorway
This site would eliminate cross town traffic and reduce further increases in rat runs which have developed through the surrounding villages
Most of the properties will be attractive to Leeds/Bradford commuters as high levels of employment opportunities do not exist west of Harrogate, due to Harrogate relying on tourism which has a low level income opportunity.
H27(1) Cardale Park the current industrial and commercial employment land adjacent to H27 is under used and has a high level of commuter traffic from Leeds and Bradford using rat runs on ‘C’ class highways How Hill Road, Lady Lane, Hill Top Lane, and the B6161 and B6162 through the surrounding villages, due to the almost daily commuter gridlock which occurs in Harrogate centre.
Due to the upgrading of the A1 to motorway standards and Harrogate Borough Councils support of the Leeds City Region as a future development opportunity, The parish fails to understand why Flaxby Moor Industrial Park does not feature on any of the development proposals, as most major towns and cities have developed industrial parks adjacent to national highways to reduce the high levels of heavy traffic entering their urban areas.
Harrogate also relies on the Leeds City Region for employment due to the demographic profile of its residents qualifications.
If the proposed super highway trucks being considered by the EU and government get the go ahead Harrogate will have no suitable offloading points therefore reducing further industrial opportunities
See addition notes attached
N 2
COMMENTS ON COMMUNITY SPORTS REGENERATION AREA ACTION PLAN DPD:
Do you generally agree with the Preferred Option? (If you do give reasons why you generally agree and indicate what elements of the Preferred Option you don’t like)
This area is remote from Beckwithshaw and will be accessed by residents, using private transport, who participate in recognised team activities proposed on the site.
If you disagree with the Preferred Option, which option do you think is a better option for this area? (Give reasons below for supporting the other option)
SECTION 3
COMMENTS ON OTHER LDF CONSULTATION DOCUMENTS
Having told us which document you are commenting on earlier, please tell us which part of the document (e.g. paragraph / page number / development limit) you are referring to and state your comments below: (if you are commenting on or suggesting a change to a development limit please also send a map showing your suggested change)
A plan is enclosed identifying the area of land between Pannal and Almsford Bank.
I wish to comment on the lack of integrity and internal consistency of your document “Sustainability Appraisal to the “Site Allocations (Homes and Jobs) DPD: Preferred Options”” dated December 2007.
I submit these comments with particular reference to sites H27, H27(1), H32 and H32(1).
Site H32 and H32(1) – Land at Cardale Park West
Neither H32 nor H32(1) have been assessed for housing in the sustainability appraisal document. There is therefore no evidence of why you have selected H32(1) as a preferred option. This approach is not within the spirit of transparent consultation.
You’re concluding remarks state regarding H32 in the sustainability appraisal (page 31) include that “development of this site would represent large Greenfield development …… of high landscape quality and important to the setting of the town”. I fail to understand how you can conclude this and then propose to extend this site to three times its original size with a view to building over 800 homes.
Site H27 and H27(1) – Land at Jackland House Farm
In the sustainability appraisal (page 30), H27 “performed poorly against environmental objectives resulting in development extending into the countryside to the detriment of its character and this site is of high landscape quality”. Your argument against this is that a large development could provide amenities and employment. This does not mitigate your assessment of the poor performance of site H27 based on damaging the countryside, in fact it exacerbates this problem.
You claim that H27 scores highly on economic grounds. However it appears that your main economic sustainability issues (page 22) address issues around rural locations. I do not agree that site H27 is a true rural location on which development will benefit “the rural economy” in the way you describe. Furthermore an implication for the LDF of your economic issues states that development should not be “damaging [to] the essential nature and environment of the area”. This is obviously contradicted in your assessment of H27 on page 30.
In my opinion the reduction in size of this site to preferred option H27(1) does not sufficiently mitigate the above points.
It would appear that for employment use only H27(1) (assessed in your document for mixed use) would not score as highly as site H31. Site H31 lies partly within development limits (H27(1) lies entirely outside these limits), H31 would afford employees direct access to both the by-pass and the A1 and is already accessible by regular bus services. I would urge the council to consider H31 in lieu of H27(1) for employment use.
Draft Development Limits for Beckwithshaw:- The Parish Council has been unable to consult on this document as it was not released with the 13 Major consultation documents presented to the village for consultation purposes.
This is once again a flaw in the process of drip feeding information only after extensive investigation by representatives into the process has been carried out.
Please return this response form to FREEPOST HARROGATE DISTRICT LDF before 4:30pm on Friday 29 February 2008
Any questions? – please contact the LDF Policy Team:
Telephone: 01423 556586/556584 Fax: 01423 556540 Email: ldf@harrogate.gov.uk
|
| Name: Sarah Clerk | Location: Harrogate | Date Added: 14/03/2008 | | Subject:
Gospel Festival at Ripon Cathedral | Comment:
Gospel Festival at the Cathedral!
You might imagine that in the 1300 years of its various existences there would be nothing new under the sun that might happen at Ripon Cathedral - but you would be wrong!
And it is something so exciting that we had to tell you about it, and ask you to spread the word round your parish, your friends, your diocese.
On the 26th April we shall be putting on a Gospel Festival, in the Cathedral, at 7pm. Three choirs from Leeds and Bradford will be putting their hearts and souls into giving us a really wonderful evening of song and dance - and if you haven't heard gospel music before you have a real treat ahead of you. It's full on, it's full of soul, it's full of life, it's exceedingly tuneful, and above all it's full of love and joy. Don't miss this opportunity to hear wonderful sounds in a wonderful place.
As if this wasn't enough, in the afternoon there will be workshops of African dance, African Drumming and Gospel Singing. These workshops will be as much fun for adults as for children.
These Events are to help raise funds for the Vision Project - which will give, literally, a new look to our much loved Cathedral. It will enable all visitors to see properly for the first time the breathtaking beauty of the details of the structure - as well as being able to read their hymn sheets! This is really exciting and lastingly worthwhile. It is one of the most exciting and certainly the most visible improvement that has been carried out in living memory.
Please help us make this event the success it deserves - put the details on your village website, in your parish magazine - on your noticeboard - and we will have a wonderful evening for you on the 26th April.
Tickets from Ripon City Music, 01765 607661. More Information from Margaret Hammond on 01765 603583
|
1
|
