Draft Core Strategy January 2011

Draft Core Strategy January 2011

Responses

List of answers to the specified question
NameOptionTextDate
Michael Knox I have just returned from 3 months in Australia and missed the opportunity to comment on the core strategy. Given the amount of negative press you have been receiving, particularly about infrastructure projects, I would just like to give it my total support. I am very pleased that you have stuck to your position on the Witney Cogges Link Road which is essential and long overdue, and the proposal for Shores Green which I see as a welcome longer-term ADDITION to your proposals, NOT as an alternative to the CLR. 09 May 2011 10:00
Mark Booty What occurred to me in relation to the LDF and " Stand alone renewable energy development" pages 52/53 is that as these sites whether wind turbines or solar have considerable impact, and if somebody wanted to build a house in the middle of the countryside we would want a sustainable business plan, does it not make sense to have the same requirement for these developments. So I would like to see us only support these applications if they can show a sustainable business plan, and any Government subsidies only included in that plan for the period where they are guaranteed. Otherwise if the subsidy goes away, the site becomes unsustainable and shuts down, we are left with an eyesore. Our fallback on that is that if a site closes, then all equipment must be removed and the site restored to its original condition within 12 months. 25 Mar 2011 10:21
Tian Davidson Appleton and Eton PC Further to Paul Slater's letter dated 31 January 2011, the Appleton with Eaton Parish Council decided to make a comment as follows:

They did not think that it was necessary for them to comment for or against, as the developments are in areas outside our Parish and also outside our District.
16 Mar 2011 14:31
Concerned Filkinite I have concerns that the largest scale housing provision has been allocated to Carterton. In my opinion this should be directed to Witney which has the infrastructure and facilities to support such a large increase in population. 11 Mar 2011 21:11
Gillie Coghlan I object strongly to the proposed expansion of housing around Carterton, which is already a dormitory town, with very little employment, woefully inadequate road links and no rail network. 1. Shilton is in a conservation area, and an area of outstanding natural beauty, would be destroyed by the addition of new homes on its outskirts; the wonderful views to the south would be decimated. 11 Mar 2011 17:22
Pat Gibson no 11 Mar 2011 16:54
All Souls College, Oxford No 11 Mar 2011 16:34
Smiths Gore on behalf of a number of clients for whom we act and have made reps at an earlier stage of the LDF process, we support the revised broad allocation of housing over the plan period especially c. 800 dwellings in the ruarl areas and less at Chipping Norton in accordance with our earlier reps. we believe that particular focus should be given to the Eynsham/Woodstock sub area. Our clients have land in Aston,Eynsham, Minster Lovell, Standlake, Tackley and Wootton - all of which are either Local centres or villages where some new development will be considered on a limited scale. 11 Mar 2011 16:25
D Martin Housing should not be without provision for work. I see very little concern for local workplaces. As we are so near Oxford we should work in conjunction with the university, and offer potential small firms incentives to come to the area, especially Carterton. 11 Mar 2011 16:05
Crest Nicholson No 11 Mar 2011 13:09
Next pageLast page