Vivien Pomfrey
BSc (Hons) (Open)
DipNatSci (Open)
MSc (Science) (Open)

Local Development Framework ‘Issues and Options’ (North Cornwall District Council) consultation

The Draft Statement of Community Involvement is at http://www.ncdc.gov.uk/media/adobe/8/t/SCI%20Web%20Report.pdf

Reports arising from the consultation are at http://www.ncdc.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=14334

Response to Draft Statement of Community Involvement

Q1. Fairly clear

Q2. Fairly clear

Q3. Yes

Q4. The sequences of events leading to the adoption of the SCI and DPD are unclear (page 1 and paras 2.5.11 and 6.1.2).  A numbered sequence, perhaps giving the drafts different names and/or numbers, would make it clearer.  The document seems to state that comments can continue to be submitted after the first draft has been submitted to the Secretary of State.  So does the Secretary of State get to see the final version? What statement is sent to the Planning Inspector – one that has been revised in the light of the further comments, or does the Inspector do the revising? Or does the Inspector instruct the council to perform the revisions? Would it perhaps make more sense to gather the further comments before submission to the Secretary of State?

Para 2.5.5 needs to clarify what is meant by ‘criteria based’.
Para 2.7.3 does not make sense: “The results...will be taken...”
Para 3.1.1 does not make sense: “The need...is of benefit...”
In para 4.1.2, if ‘Examination’ means ‘Independent Examination’, this should be stated.

Q5. Yes

Q6. I am concerned that there is inadequate emphasis on wildlife habitat and sustainability in paras 1.3.2-1.3.4.  Natural beauty is a vital feature of Cornwall and the ‘need’ for human-focused development must not be allowed to override the needs of other species; if it does, the quality of life for all will be diminished.  Sadly, this is already happening.

I would like to see disabled access included in para 1.3.4.

Q7. Yes

Q8. The Empty Homes Agency: http://www.emptyhomes.com/
The Association for Environment Conscious Building: http://www.aecb.net/
Centre for Alternative Technology Consultancy Services: http://www.cat.org.uk/consultancy/PDF/EcoBuild.pdf
Transport 2000: http://www.transport2000.org.uk/
Cornwall Rural Community Council: http://www.cornwallrcc.co.uk/asps/extra12.asp

Q9. No

Q10. ‘Hard to reach groups’ are often not involved in the forums referred to, so individual notification should be carried out (e.g. via leaflets through doors).  ‘North Cornwall Matters’ might fulfil this role if it were published sufficiently frequently.

Good places to place posters and other material include doctors’ surgeries, hospitals, care homes and day centres.

Q11. Fairly clear

Q12. You need to state what ‘DCCP’ is in Appendix 3.
Neighbour notification should be mandatory for all applications, not discretionary (Appendix 4).

Q13. Para 3.2.1 acknowledges that categorising applications is ‘not easy’.  In the light of this, it presumably needs to consult specialist bodies to aid such categorisation.  If this is not currently practised, it should be.

Re para 3.2.2, where there is uncertainty, an application should be assumed to fall into the category of ‘significant planning applications.’

Name: Vivien Pomfrey BSc (Hons) (Open), Dip. Nat. Sci. (Open)

| top |