MM96

Showing comments and forms 1 to 1 of 1

Comment

Allocations: Schedule of modifications

Representation ID: 33068

Received: 10/01/2014

Respondent: Raven Group

Agent: Pomery Planning Consultants

Representation Summary:

The respondent agrees that the sentence should be omitted as it contradicts the requirement to provide a landscaped buffer between site's BFR1 and NEL 2 and the need to avoid amenity conflicts between the two uses. As the amended location of the allocation, which abuts site BFR1, rather than includes it, is similar to that put forward by the respondent, this modification is supported.

Full text:

The respondent agrees that the sentence should be omitted as it contradicts the requirement to provide a landscaped buffer between site's BFR1 and NEL 2 and the need to avoid amenity conflicts between the two uses. As the amended location of the allocation, which abuts site BFR1, rather than includes it, is similar to that put forward by the respondent, this modification is supported.