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 - Assessment of impacts of Strategic Distribution Options

Representation ID: 5077

COMMENT IDI Gazeley represented by Now Planning (Ms Nora Galley)


A narrow local approach to matters of strategic consequence that extend beyond district boundaries is contrary to the NPPF. HDC is obliged to meet the needs of business in its area - with joint working to meet development requirements which cannot wholly be met within the district. Without such an approach - to strategic logistics development as well as to housing - the new Local Plan will not be found sound.

Representation ID: 5076

COMMENT IDI Gazeley represented by Now Planning (Ms Nora Galley)


OCP is misleading in its partial account of the tests (NPPF Para 14) of what constitutes sustainable development which extend to social and economic as well as environmental gains - not just adverse environmental impacts. HDC is obliged to pursue gains across all three and to do so jointly and simultaneously

Representation ID: 5075

COMMENT IDI Gazeley represented by Now Planning (Ms Nora Galley)


HDC is obliged to take into account the Strategic Economic Plans (SEP's) of 4 Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP's) covering the strategic distribution market, when preparing its Local Plan.

Representation ID: 4950

COMMENT Leciestershire County Council (Mrs Sharon Wiggins)


Transportation Comments:
* Provision for Strategic Distribution: The County Highway Authority recognises the distribution sector's importance to the economy of Leicester and Leicestershire. Each of the three options listed represents a substantial expansion of provision close to Lutterworth and the A5 Trunk Road. AECOM's Strategic Traffic Assessment of 'plus Magna Park' Scenarios highlights the risk of potential link capacity issues arising from the impacts of distribution growth and housing growth at Lutterworth. It is therefore pleasing that in paragraph 137: the need to assess these options in further detail is acknowledged; the potential highway impacts are recognised; and the potential interactions with Housing Options 6, 8 and 9 are also acknowledged. Unless and until this assessment work is completed, the County Highway Authority has no further comments.

Representation ID: 3313

OBJECT Mrs Rachael Edgley


There is no need for any more Magna Parks on our doorstep. the Footprint should stay as it already is. Please see additional comments that are in Option A

Representation ID: 3280

COMMENT MR Michael Wilcox


assessment should be national in conjunction with other areas and strong priority to rail led

Representation ID: 1500

OBJECT Mrs Karen Farnsworth


We do not need any further Magna Park expansion.
Pressure to infrastructure of roads not suitable for increase volume.
Increase to traffic light noise air pollution.
What about DIRFT Crick keeping haulage off roads? Only 10mins from Magna Park.
Why not expand Leicester Forest East and East Midlands Parkway.
Take into account Warwickshire's developments of distribution parks around M6 10mins from Magna Park.

Representation ID: 971

OBJECT Claybrooke Magna Parish Council (Mrs J P Butcher)


The presumption of development at Magna Park flies in the face of local people's views. The reasons for no more expansion as per the Core Strategy stand. If there is a need for this sort of development a more suitable less damaging location must be found.

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

Powered by OpusConsult