Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Chris Frankland search
New search
New search
Local plan scoping consultation
Identifying and assessing sites
Respondent: Chris Frankland
Representation Summary:
I am concerned that the approach to development does not adequately consider its wider and long-term consequences. Ashley is a small community whose countryside and agricultural land contribute to the wellbeing of surrounding urban areas. I believe greater priority should be given to bringing empty properties back into use, regenerating brownfield land and exploring alternative solutions with community involvement before pursuing significant development. Ashley’s existing infrastructure is already under pressure and large-scale growth could cause irreversible harm. I recognise that some change is inevitable and believe modest, proportionate growth could potentially be accommodated through a community-led approach without fundamentally damaging the village and surrounding countryside.
Full text:
I have attended numerous meetings and listened to numerous justifications and objections. It has hit me how this whole process appears to be blinkered in the direction of poorly thought-out opportunities for the few at the expense of many under the banner of looking after the many, while ignoring the bigger picture.
Ashley, as with many other villages on the edge of suburbia, is crucial for the wellbeing of suburbia. We need government at all levels to be more efficient and creative with what we have instead of fostering consumption in all its forms as the answer to all ills. Our economy and indeed the world, cannot afford this.
It appears that the government wishes to solve an incredibly complex problem with what might sound to some, as a simple solution.
What we seem to have is a proposal to give massive payouts for a few and a promise of a land of milk and honey for the masses. The irreversible damage to communities and what little food-growing land we have comes at an eyewatering cost that has a high probability of catastrophic failure. [REDACTED]
There are so many better solutions that would provide the homes we need. Could the government put pressure on the landlords of empty properties first? Could the government regenerate the real brownfield sites first? Other options should first be maximised with community involvement and ownership. This dash of a PR vanity stunt is likely to lead to a national embarrassment worse than HS2.
Meanwhile the country is wasting millions of hours of productivity time trying to protect its democracy.
I would urge the decision makers at CEC to show integrity while they can and take a very considered look at the consequences of all the proposals to date.
Ashley, as is clear, is a small community with less than a hundred dwellings. We are all aware that change is inevitable and we all must play our part. Our infrastructure is already struggling so even a twenty to fifty percent rise in dwellings would be a challenge, but it would be one we could work on as a community. It would fit in far more aptly with the other alternatives mentioned above without committing to irreparable damage.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.