Strategic planning consultations

You can view all available strategic planning consultations. To make a comment on a current consultation you must sign in to your account.

Representations on New Local Plan Options - Testing the Options

Representation ID: 4998

COMMENT Mr John McDermott


Before looking at long term options for Lutterworth we need to recognise existing shortcomings:
- Unacceptable weight of traffic in Lutterworth town centre;
- Most polluted place in Leicestershire;
- Very busy motorway running along the town's border;
If Lutterworth is an important part of HDC it should be provided with pedestrianised areas to enhance the shopping experience, larger open market spaces, improved circular walkways and cycle paths and more in-town green spaces.

Outside influences must be considered:
- Expansion of DIRFT;
- Development at Rugby old masts site
In light of the above and assuming Magna Park doubles in size in the next 15 years the Gibbet Cross roundabout on the A5 and the airplane roundabout on the A428 will both be extremely busy (before any new housing is considered).

Representation ID: 4843

COMMENT Mr Stephen Lucas


A full landscape evaluation must be undertaken on all the options.

Representation ID: 4749

COMMENT Oadby and Wigston Borough Council (Mr Adrian Thorpe)


The part of the Leicester PUA where the Borough and Harborough adjoin is particularly important in a strategic planning context due to the pressures for growth and pressures on the existing infrastructure to the south and south east of the PUA. In particular this is a result of the limitations on the ability to improve and increase capacity the existing road network which already experiences congestion. Oadby and Wigston BC would wish to work closely with HDC, as well as Blaby DC, Leicester City Council and Leicestershire County Council under the Duty to Co-operate both in terms of preparing its own Local Plan and the Local Plans of neighbourhing Councils.

Representation ID: 4514

COMMENT Mrs Hazel Taylor


Although Kibworth residents have known for many years of the need for our village to have a by-pass, a traffic survey earlier this year confirmed this to anyone bothered to read the figures. However, our County Council just respond by claiming 'there is no money for a by-pass'. I am greatly concerned that a route for this much needed road be ring fenced before any more major development takes place which will cover what seems to be the most sensible route for a by pass.

Representation ID: 3660

OBJECT Mr Simon Smith


i object

Representation ID: 3492

OBJECT Mr Graham Logan


As currently presented, the Lutterworth SDA negative effects outweigh the potential benefits. An integrated strategic growth plan for Lutterworth would be needed. I am extremely concerned about increased traffic on an already at-capacity A426; the SDA resulting in 2 separate disjointed communities; a direct contradiction of the consultation's proposed visions on sustainable development, in particular transport; the risk of the relief road not being built immediately; a motorway service station that can only be accessed from one direction putting undue stress on M1 J20; the risk of existing residents moving out of Lutterworth due to the numerous negative impacts.

Representation ID: 3195

COMMENT Dr Janet Riley


There needs to be assessment of housing need (by location, not just overall), and most importantly, assessment of where the jobs are and where the opportunities for economic growth are. These are fundamental to sustainability and transport considerations.

Representation ID: 3035

SUPPORT Mr Ian Clarke


I like the idea of using evidence of the deliverability and suitability of the different options. Good idea.

Representation ID: 2086



Both Kibworth and Lutterworth could potentially support further expansion as they are quite large to start with in comparison to other options

Representation ID: 1156

OBJECT Mr Lewis Freeman


My concern across all these options is the already assumed provision for the further development of Magna Park! Surely this development is still in the planning stage as are alternative sites and no decisions have been made (or have they?) The proposed huge extension would have a detrimental effect on the area as previous comments have suggested. Employment, traffic, air quality etc all need to be considered.

Representation ID: 1111

SUPPORT SWINFORD Parish Council (Katherine Clarke)


Lower levels of housing in Swinford were identified as being important to villagers in Swinford as evidenced in the village survey. People sited parking issues, lack of infrastructure, services and facilities. The density proposed by SHLAA for the 4 proposed sites in Swinford is contrary to the character of the village as it currently exists.

Representation ID: 1019

SUPPORT KIBWORTH HARCOURT Parish Council (Dr Kevin Feltham)


I would have liked to see these reports before the options consultation was started. The evidence from these studies may well significantly alter the perspective of where the best locations for future development should be. Why is there not an updated housing needs assessment on the list? Where is the Community Infrastructure and Amenity Plan?

Representation ID: 912

COMMENT Mr Robert Mitchell


I know that all landowners have not been asked if they want to develop their land. Only those who are developers or who have land agents have been approached. This is inequitable.

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult