Development opportunity
The indefatigable John Urquhart (Cities 4 People) writes:
|
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 22:07
Subject: Comments for Planning Application 2019/0666/01/OUT
Mr John Urquhart,
You have been sent this email because you or somebody else has submitted a comment on a Planning Application to your local authority using your email address. A summary of your comments is provided below.
Comments were submitted at 10:06 PM on 02 Dec 2019 from Mr John Urquhart.
Application Summary
|
Address:
|
Land To The West Of Brunton Lane, North Of Brunton Bridge And East Of Sunniside Newcastle upon Tyne
|
Proposal:
|
Outline application for the erection of up to 900 dwellings (Class C3), primary education facilities (Class D1), a village centre (Class A1 and A3), public open space, access, car parking, landscaping and associated infrastructure and demolition of agricultural building with all matters reserved except for points of access
|
Case Officer:
|
Sarah Davitt
|
|
|
Customer Details
|
Name:
|
Mr John Urquhart
|
Email:
|
|
Address:
|
|
Comments Details
|
Commenter Type:
|
Public Organisation
|
Stance:
|
Customer objects to the Planning Application
|
Reasons for comment:
|
|
Comments:
|
Dear Sir
We wish to object to the planning application for Kingston Village, reference number 2019/0666/01/OUT on the following grounds:
1. The application contravenes Core Strategy Policy NN4 - an increase of 400 houses over and above what was agreed in the Core Strategy
2. The development would compromise important wildlife corridors.
3. The application site is one of the last strongholds in Newcastle for Brown Hare, a protected species and priority species in the Biodiversity Action Plan.
4. The application site is home to Red and Amber listed species of breeding/wintering birds including Lapwing, Linnet, Skylark, Starling, Yellowhammer, Grasshopper Warbler, House Sparrow, Grey Partridge, Fieldfare and Reed Bunting.
5. The proposal would put yet more pressure on the delicate ecosystems within Havannah and Three Hills Local Nature Reserve by increasing footfall and disturbance from human activity and domestic pets.
6. The proposed removal of protected trees and hedgerows contravenes Policy CS18, EN3, DM 27, DM28, Policy T1 and T8 of the Newcastle City Council Tree Strategy Policy and NN4 Newcastle Great Park.
7. There are no wholly exceptional circumstances to justify the detrimental impact on ancient semi-natural woodland, therefore the proposals are contrary to the NPPF.
8. Proposed open space provision does not accord with with the standards set out in the local plan. The 'village green' has shrunk considerably since plans were provided for community engagement.
9. There are no detailed comments from the Council's ecology officer
10. The uplift in housing numbers will place undue strain on existing infrastructure, resulting in increased traffic congestion and air pollution. This, coupled with insufficient provision of open space, will have an adverse effect on the health and wellbeing of residents, contrary to CSUCP Policy CS14.
11. Housing numbers should be reduced to minimise harm on biodiversity, Green Belt and open space.
No account has been taken of the impact of increased traffic on roads into Newcastle or whether the bus services would have capacity at peak times. In view of the city's commitment to a climate emergency and the need to reduce air pollution, these problems must be factored into any planning application first before proceeding further.
John Urquhart
Cities 4 People
|
Best wishes
John Urquhart
|
|
|
Copyright © 2019 Cities 4 People, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email as you have previously shown interest in local environmental matters.
Our mailing address is:
Cities 4 People
Bridle Path
Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE3
United Kingdom
|
|
|
Many thanks to Mr Urquhart for kind permission to re-publish this correspondence.
The scale of new house building on the edge of this city defies rational explanation. Who is buying all these houses? Almost none are in the 'affordable' category and 'social housing' (leprosy to developers) never.
'Who benefits'?
My latest understanding is that Newcastle's recent demographic expansion stems from two main sources: Students and refugees. As my informant suggested, neither of these groups are, in the main, a source of home buyers on this scale. If someone reading this has an answer to this mystery, please let me know.
Latest: Some of the new housing rattled up in the past few years has experienced flooding after this Autumn's prolonged wet weather. Fancy that! Warnings by objector's to some of these schemes have proved well founded. My heart goes out to those who bought in good faith to have their dream home affected from a cause that was predicted before one brick was placed upon another on some green belt silver meadow. They deserve immediate and full compensation and re-dress.
No comments:
Post a Comment