Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Plan

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response 1 Mr Kenneth Moir Resident a) There is no point introducing traffic restrictions if these

cannot be enforced.b) Need coach park for touristsc) Need walkway and ramp on Riverside Parkd) Housing Policy H4-H5 Need more central car parking and School parking off Faringdon Road.e) Support for Housing Policies

a) Scheme will support controlb) Memorial Hall available for coach parking.c) Ramp project with CWP in handd) See proposed changes to policy 8/9 . Town Centre Project will identify additional parkinge) support noted

2 John and Maureen Rose Residents a)Plan for secondary school neededb)Support all Housing Objectivesc)Support Town Centre proposals – we need 20mph limitd)Support Green Spaces and Marina proposals

a) Secondary school available in nearby Fairfordb-d) Support noted

3 Mr Phil Tubbs Resident a)Support Green Spaces designationsb)Great piece of work to help Lechlade retain its character.c)Support Marina redevelopmentd)Include definition of Zone 1 and 2 Flood Zonese)Is there a demand for serviced office space?f)LEC HA2 – allocation of housing seems lowg)Support Town Centre proposals.

a) Support notedb) Noted

c) Support notedd) Agreed NDP to be amendede) Evidence needs to be reconsideredf) Housing provision is based on CDC evidence supplemented by local evidence – see proposed changes to Housing Policiesg) Support noted

4 Mrs Sue Moir Resident a) Support Reddies development, parking and leisure facilities.b) Support Town Centre proposals – how could it be made to work and be paid for?

a) Support noted

b) Support noted – next design phase will consider these issues

6 Mr Michael Gray Resident Support all NP proposals Support noted7 Mr L Vertessy Resident a) Provide area for motorhomes parking

b) Support Marina redevelopmenta) Local camp sites availableb) Support noted

8 Susan Humphries Resident a) Slowing down traffic will increase pollution.b) Concerned about removing traffic lights and pelican crossing. Need mini roundabout at Hambidge Lane junctionc ) As a cyclist I find the echelon parking in the High St

a)Stationary traffic produces more pollution. Concern noted.b) Scheme will address pedestrian safety. Hambidge Lane junction is an intervention point in the Town Centre

1 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Plandangerous. study.

Noted9 Mr Colin Barwick Resident A very impressive document and the Town Council is to

be congratulatedSupport noted

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response10 Clare Cordingley Resident a) Consider residents needs for parking at their own

properties if tourism and business trade increases.b) Sherborne Park Green Space wrongly marked on map.c) Some listed buildings in Town Centre in terrible condition.d) Town Council should not commit financial support to the Marina redevelopment.e) Consider promoting more local markets. Reducing Town Centre parking could impact retail trade. Need better parking signage.

a) Noted

b) Agreed NDP to be amended

a) Notedb) No financial support plannede) Market point agreed .Parking convenient for shops and signage will be considered in any proposals

11 Mr James Midwood Resident a) Well thought out and well presented documentb) Vital to preserve Green Spacesc) The Marina needs redevelopment and could be a major asset for Lechlade.d) Support for Town Centre project – enforce Ha’penny Bridge restrictions and make it impossible for long HGV’s to turn left into Thames Street.

a-c) Support noted

d) Support noted – will be considered in the scheme . CCTV may be introduced.

12 Mr Peter de Iongh Resident a) I support the proposed redevelopment of the Reddies. b) Support for all other sections of the NP and commend the Council for the hard work put into producing it.

a-b) Support noted

13 Mr Peter Usher Resident a) Support the proposalsb) H6 – a river frontage development is importantc) G1 – Green Space designation 8 should be considered in conjunction with the suggested development of Upper Reddies Farm.d) The care and maintenance of existing assets is equally important as new developments.

a) Support notedb) Noted- Policies do not prevent thisc) Noted – see proposed changes to green space policy

d) Noted14 On behalf of Roy Burton Lechlade Manor

Green and Co Solicitors Objects to proposed designation of Cricket Club ground as local Green Space. Council needs to support the proposed Barwood Development on the Manor Grounds

Objection noted – see proposed changes to green space policy

2 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planin order to secure the long term future of Lechlade Cricket Club. There are no proposals for the development of the Cricket Club grounds.Designation does not create an area of publically accessible open space.

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response15 Mr Don Seale Resident a) As former County and District Councillor – best

Neighbourhood Plan I have encountered.Support for all intentions except -b) Object – to restriction of HGV’s in Town Centrec) Object – to transformation of Town Centre from car park to market square.d) Object – to removal of pedestrian crossing on A361, narrowing of St Lawrence Rd and imposition of 20mph speed limit.

a) Support noted

b) Noted – but there was strong support for the proposals in the public consultations.c) Existing convenience parking will be retained.d) Scheme will address pedestrian safety. Text will be changed to remove this reference to pedestrian crossing

16 Mr Bruce Oliver Resident Making the Town Centre a pleasant place will add huge value to Lechlade’s environment and facilitate the success of all projects within the NP

Support noted

17 Mr Ron King Resident a) Completely support NP proposals.The Town Centre regeneration and shared space concept is fundamental to the whole plan.b) Consideration should be given to the small scale redevelopment of the Reddies as benefit is significant within the concept of the Town Centre regeneration.

a) Support noted

b) Noted

18 Mrs Janet Edwards Resident a) Excellent document – general support.b) The infrastructure of the Town cannot cope with more development than set out in the NP.c) H7 – local stone character housing neededd) Concerns over Riverside/ Marina redevelopment – needs careful defining of objectives.e) Support for Green Spaces designations. Against proposals for the development of the Reddies Farm- development could expand.f) Totally support Town Centre proposals – how will we discourage HGV’s and retain parking for the elderly population. Make start on improving signage, planting etc.

a) Support notedb) Housing Policy Objective 6 seeks to strike a balance between new development and infrastructure. c) Policy H5Policies H8 & H9 addresses this by seeking to ensure new developments reflects local character. Where the local character is Cotswold stone the Policy will seek to promote this.d) Notede) Green Spaces support notedf) Support noted

3 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Plan19 T Ward Resident a) Congratulate to the Council on document.

b) Support Town Centre proposals – should have 20mph limit in Conservation Area , narrow certain roads to slow down traffic , enforce bridge HGV limits.c) Can existing infrastructure support proposed developments ?d) Support redevelopment of the Marina.e )Support development of Upper Reddies Farm.

a) Support notedb) 20mph traffic speed will be achieved by ‘ shared space ‘ design rather than legal restrictionc) Housing Objective 6 seeks to strike a balance between new development and infrastructured-e) Support noted.

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response20 Mr D E Pledger Resident a) TC-1 Shared Space is dangerous to pedestrians.

Object to removal of pedestrian crossing by Medical Centre.b) TC-2 I would like the Market Place to remain as it is.c) TC-3 Strongly agree with 20mph limitd) TC-4 Object to removal of any echelon parking spaces in the High Street.e) TC-5 banning HGV’s would be unenforceable.f) Footpaths- Too much ‘ junk’ obstructing footpaths.g) Object to removal of traffic lights at Thames Street junction .h) Support improvement of visibility at Hambidge Lane junction.

a) The reference to the removal of the pedestrian crossing is to be deleted in the NDP.

b) Noted – but strong public support in the consultation.

c) Much evidence from completed schemes elsewhere that these fears are not justified.

d) Detailed project will examine all implications

e) Notedf) Notedg) Notedh) Support noted

21 Joan Tyrrell Resident New buildings should not be hidden by trees.Support for Upper Reddies Farm development.

Support noted

22 Rev GR Martin and family Resident We support designation of Green Spaces – especially the Reddies.Support – Town Centre and traffic proposals.Support – redevelopment of the MarinaSupport – all Housing PoliciesSupport – Core Objectives including maintaining Town’s individual character.

Support noted

23 Rev Andrew Kirk Resident a) Commend Town Council on excellent plan.b) Map on P7 shows Hotel next to Primary Schoolc) What is status of Green Spaces – we should include Manor House Grounds.d) Where does figure of 70mobile homes come from ?e) What is definition of Affordable Housing ?f) Figures for new housing vary in text.g) Flooding issues on LEC HA1

a) Support notedb) Refers to New Inn in Market Placec) Manor Grounds too large for designationd) See proposed amendment to housing sectione) Standard planning definition – normally refers to non – market social

4 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planh) Question ‘ enhanced parking in Town Centre’i) Object to removal of Pedestrian Crossing by Medical Centrej) Support new foot bridge over Thames and improved access to the river.k) What is a ‘qualifying dwelling’ for estimation of Primary School spaces ?l) Why not GP local evening and weekend coverm) Is increase in Dentist provision necessary?

housingf) Agreed – see proposed amendment to housing sectiong) Noted will be addressed in detailed planning applicationh) Will be addressed in next BHB studyi) This will be deleted in final NDP documentj) Support notedk) Standard planning definition – determined by education authority usually more than one bedrooml) Not in scope of NDPm) Will be reconsidered

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response24 Mr Keith Salway Resident a) Support – Shared space Town Centre proposals –

need to go ahead with detailed studies.b) Support – improvements to Town Centre – including removing clutter, trade waste, random signs and improving signage.c) Support – Green Spaces designations, including Cricket Ground and Reddies.d) Protect High Street Lime trees with preservation orders .e)Support – redevelopment of the Marina.

a-c) Support noted

d) Covered by existing conservation areac) Support noted .

26 Mrs Hazel Wilkinson Resident a) Support – flooding problems and adequate parking should be priorities.b) Traffic pollution and speeding are an issue. Enforce HGV limits on Ha’penny Bridge.c) Parking enforcement and Public Transport are poor.d) H1 – support flood risk assessmentse) M1 – support Marina redevelopmentf) Town Centre – removal of traffic lights will create major problems.

a-e) Support noted

f) Noted- to be assessed as part of BHB scheme design

25 Mr and Mrs J Brothwell Residents a) Support – Housing policies and Marina regeneration ( currently a disgrace ) .b) Support – Town Centre project- too much retail rubbish and clutter on pavements.c) A really well thought out and sensitive, exciting plan-

a-c) Support noted

5 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planlooking forward to its implementation..

26 Mr Martin G West Resident a) Set target dates for implementation of each project.b) L18A housing site incorrectly markedc) Footpath audit has incorrect text ( ref 7 )d) M1 Support – Marina should be ‘ compulsory purchased ‘e) Support Project TC1 – shared space design needs to take into account the visually impairedf) Project TC3 – no evidence to support 20mph speed limit.g) TC5 – need both length , width and weight limits on Ha’penny Bridge.

a) To be set as part of project delivery planb-c ) See proposed amendment to housing sectiond) Notede) Noted and agreed

f) Will be achieved by design not signageg) Noted but needs evidence

27 Teresa Griffin ( Clerk ) Kempsford Parish Council

Full support from Kempsford Parish Council.Very concise and detailed document with good public feedback and consultation.

Support noted

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response28 Mark Mathews – Town Planning Manager

Thames Water Water Comments –a) It is anticipated that any development equivalent to a 20% increase in the population would require some upgrades to the existing water supply infrastructure. More detailed modelling work would likely be required to be undertaken to determine the full extent of the limitations on the system and possible solutions to provide additional capacity, dependent upon the precise type , scale and location of development proposed.Wastewater comments –Lechlade Sewage Treatment Works is nearing its theoretical treatment capacity and development equivalent to a 20% increase in population would mean that upgrades would be required in our next business plan period between 2015 to 2020.All development sites coming forward through the planning process will need to be assessed in detail to understand the impact on both the sewerage network and the treatment work.

b) Policy H11 – proposed revised wording –Planning permission will only be granted for developments which increase the demand for off-site

a) Noted

b) The additional wording helps clarify the position. The Policies will be reviewed and the proposed

6 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planservice infrastructure where :1 Sufficient capacity already exists2 Extra capacity can be provided in time to serve the development which will ensure that the environment and the amenity of local residents are not adversely affected.New supporting text also suggested.

wording considered . See proposed amendment to housing sectionnew policies INF1 and INF2.

29 Luke Sparkes Resident a) Support Policy H2 – Agree with criteria set out for occupation of new Affordable Homes.b) Support Policy M1 – redevelopment of the Marina, consider retail and A3 users.c) Project TC1 – consider impact of fewer parking spaces in Town Centre. Need better parking signage.d) Use land at Wharf Lane for additional parking. Need dedicated coach parking.

a-b) Support noted

c) Parking spaces will not be fewer. Scheme will achieve equivalent parking. See also response 8.d) Wharf Lane is private land and not available.Coach parking available at Memorial Hall.

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response30 Anna Woodward Resident a) Support – Policy G1 – protect the Reddies as a Green

Space , opposed to any development.Also the Cricket pitch should be protected.b) Support – TC1 – 9 Town Centre proposals and shared space concept. Need to re-instate balance between pedestrians and traffic.

a) Support noted . See proposed new policy G1

b) Support noted.

31 Patricia Adams Resident Town Centre project – why not take down the awful overgrown lime trees on the High Street and remove the badly kept grass verges and convert them into parking spaces.

Lime trees part of conservation areaand town character.

32 Mr Bruce Oliver Resident a) I strongly support the NP , it’s breadth and strategic direction.b) Support – current known housing development proposals.c) Support –Town Centre proposals and BHB shared space concepts. We need detailed parking proposals to reduce residents perceptions that there will be reduced parking and maybe vote against the whole NP.

a-b) Support noted

c) Support noted . Next design phase of scheme by BHB will fully address these issues.

33 Christine Davidson Resident a) Town Centre proposals look too complicated.b) Housing developments should not be allowed to spoil the entrances to Lechlade ( pleased that the Barwood Development was rejected ).c) Support – designation of Green Spaces –especially

a) Support noted . Scheme design will clarifyb) Noted

7 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planthe beautiful Reddies field. The Manor House grounds should also be designated a Green Space to protect it from development.

c) Support noted . Manor House grounds protected as a part of the setting of a Listed Building

34 Nicholas Waloff Resident a) G1 – Green Spaces - include the Manor House grounds. I support the designation of the Reddies as a Green Space.b) Introduce a policy for promoting ‘ Green Tourism ‘ – would help distinguish Lechlade from its competitors.c) NP does not address the issue of youth employment and apprenticeships as a means of retaining its young people.d) Policy E4 ( p 41 ) may stand in the way of potential investors by limiting specialist shops.e) Define the term ‘ Café culture ‘ – blend with a wider range of attractions..

a) Support noted – see above

b) To be considered by Tourism Group as possible project but outside the scope of the NDPc) Outside the scope of the NDPd) Agree- Policy E4 may be attempting to do too much and should be revised to reflect Objective 4 more accurately. See proposed changes to Policy E4e) Agreed , land use policies should relate to use classes. In this case use class 3 .

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response35 Carole Davis Resident a) Support – walking and cycling routes.

b) Vision Statement should include ‘ a wide range of upgraded accommodation achieved ‘

c) Traffic Management – shared space proposals need careful consideration. Project TC5 vital.Project TC6 is strongly supported.

a) Notedb) Agreed NDP will be amended

c) Support noted

36 Mark Serle Antiques Centre Burford Street

Limiting parking further would be detrimental to businesses.We need relaxation of parking restrictions – further reduction and restrictions may result in businesses moving out of town.

Detailed scheme will maintain at least equivalent parking

37 David Stuart English Heritage Already responded at SEA screening stage.Community commended on its NP – support policies H5 and E2. Look at undesignated heritage assets – individual identification and local list for example.

Support Noted

38a Jennifer Britton Resident To achieve the Tourism aims the empty premises in the Currently only empty retail is ex

8 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Plancentre of town need to be put back into use and the Marina redeveloped.We need more sheltered housing.

Antiques Centre – now sold for redevelopment . See revised policy E4Noted

38b Brian Britton Resident a) HGV’s should be restricted crossing the Ha’penny Bridge – install CCTV to enforce.b) Support – Green Spaces designations.c) Developments should not be beyond the capacity of the town’s existing infrastructure.d) Support the Marina redevelopment with visitor accommodation, will be an asset to the town.

a) Noted – CCTV to be consideredb) Support noted

c) Noted- key part of NDP. See revised policy policies H11INF1 and INF2

d) Support noted

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response39 Rob NiblettPlanning Officer

Gloucestershire County Council

a) TPO’s better placed on page 16 than 6-7b) No need to show Special Area of Conservationc) Use parking management to control parkingd) CDC LP policy LEC3 for public car park off Wharf Lane .e) Housing Objective 9 repeats Objective 6f) Very low new housing numbers noted ( H1b ).g) Policy H8 – parking provision must be based on national government policy.h) Policy TC1 ,TC3 and TC5 change Gloucester Highway to ‘GCC as the local highway authority’i) Policy TC2 street furniture must comply with the GCC enhanced material policy.j) TC4 Community parking cannot be sought for transport related impact , therefore this must be sought by the town council.k) Traffic Management proposal – advise that the town council enter into early discussion with the local highway authority. More detail and estimates of shared space is required.l) Policy TC9 – multi use path will require the consent of

a) Agreed NDP amendedb) Notedc) Agreedd) Wharf Lane site privately ownede) Objective 6 relates to design and Objective 10 to infrastructuref) In line with emerging Local Plang) Agreed – See revised policies in Housing Section

h) Agreed NDP amendedi) Noted

j) Noted

k) Noted – early discussions held in February 2015. General support obtained. More detail at nextScheme design phase

9 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planall relevant landowners.m) The county historic environment record (HER) contains 118 references to listed buildings and 5 scheduled monuments, a registered park and garden and central conservation areaNote that archaeological mitigation strategies will be required in advance of all developments

l) Noted

m) Noted

40 Hal Moggridge Resident--Consultant Landscape Architect

a) Town Centre proposals – refreshing but essential to retain 24 parking spaces, suggested plan attachedIt is essential to keep the existing echelon parking .b) Green space designation 8 should be extended to the edge of Wharf Lane.c) Housing site L23 (under construction) needs to consider the impact of its surface water run-off down to St Johns mobile home site.

a) Support notedTo be assessed in detailed scheme designb)Area already on maximum sizec)Currently being submitted as part of detailed design

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response41 Elizabeth Marjoram Bird Wilford and Sale

Solicitors on behalf of Barwood Securites Ltd and Roy Burton landowner of Lechlade Manor

a) 2.8 Ha land and 41 dwellings adjacent to Lechlade Cricket Club and in Lechlade Manor grounds ( application 13/04265/OUT rejected by CDC and Lechlade Town Council in December 2013 – March 2015 Appeal withdrawn by developer)b) Objects to land not being included as ‘ allocated residential site ‘ in emerging CDC Local Plan and draft LTC Neighbourhood PlanThis development will support the NP objectives and significant infrastructure needs of LechladeHousing need must take into account the needs of the wider housing market area.A significant increase needs to be made to the overall housing target of the Cotswold District.An increase in housing requirement for the housing market area will unquestionably require additional allocations to be made in Lechlade.No evidence base has been published to explain the choices made in the draft NP.Allocation of Barwood site only way to preserve the

b) The objection raises concerns relating to the NDP process. The Town Council considers this has been properly addressed. Nonetheless see proposed changes to the Hosing Section and policies which clarify the NDP position.

10 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood PlanCricket Club grounds and long term club future..

42 Darren BellSenior Associate

David Lock Associates on behalf of developer Hallam Land Management Ltd

On behalf of New College Oxford who own and are promoting the development of the land north of the Wern , LechladeHLM supports the Vision Statement for Lechlade but objects to the reference / vision to provide 10% new homes by 2031.In allocating this low level of housing proper regard has not been given to national policy or to achieve sustainable development. This will also not meet the affordable housing requirement or generate enough Section 106 / CIL income to achieve the Vision.Land north of the Wern would provide 120 dwellings on 7 Ha and should be included in the Local Plan and Lechlade NP as an allocation or as reserve land.Changes suggested to policy H5 ,H12 , E2 and E3

As above

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response43 Claire HambletonStrategic Planner

Persimmon Homes Wessex a) Persimmon congratulates LTC on the preparation of such a comprehensive and considered plan. Persimmon wish to develop the land south of Butlers Court (LEC HA2 ) which is an allocated site in the NP.Site is 1 Ha and 9 dwellings are identified in the Local Plan and NP for this site.b) Persimmon wish to change the allocation to ‘ up to 35 dwellings ‘

This is a prominent site with significant potential but also environmentally constrained. It may have the potential for more housing. If it can be demonstrated that a larger scale development can be achieved the Town Council may support it. See proposed changes to the Housing Section and policies which should clarify the NDP position.

44 Joseph WalkerCommunity Partnerships Officer

Cotswold District Council a) Changes suggested to pps 4-5 for clarity and conformity.b) Vision pps 8-16 changes to wording suggestedc) Vision Statement and Core Objectives pps 18-23 changes to wording suggested.d) Section 2.1 Policies.H1 – windfall numbers are not accurate.e) Question need for Masterplans to be submitted with outline planning applications..f) Question Affordable Housing policies.

Noted – the Town Council has met with CDC to resolve these objections.

a) Changes made to NDPb) Changes made to NDPc) Changes made to NDPd) Agree – see proposed

revisions to Housing Section and policies

e) Agree – see proposed changes to Housing Section

11 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Plang) Wording of Policies H3 – H12 , E2 , E3 , M1 and M2 questionedh) Projects TC1 – TC4 commented on.i) Policy TC6 supported , TC8 consider TPO’sj) Comments on CIL and IDP.

and policiesf) See proposed changesg) Noted – see proposed

changesh) Noted and revisions madei) Notedj) Agreed – CIL and IDP

removed from NDP

45 Stewart Bruce Resident a) Detailed comments on text.b) Implement Town Centre project now.c) Draft NP needs further editing to ensure a consistency in the structure of the contents.

a) Noted – will be assessed in next editb) Noted – next phase study underwayc) Next edit underway for Submission version

46 Tim Yeoman Resident a) BHB plan shows incorrect parking area next to Memorial Hall.b) The junction of Thames St and Ha’penny bridge will cause difficulty unless HGV use of this junction is prevented.c) Suggest a summary of salient points to make the NP easier to read.

a) Agreed NDP to be amendedb) Noted – detailed scheme design will assess and propose controls. CCTV will be investigatedc) Will be provided in separate document for residents

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response47 Alan Garnell Resident a) Excellent work , well reasoned and evidenced.

b) Support development of land south of Butlers Court ( LEC HA2 )c) Designate all the Lechlade Manor Grounds as Green Space( Policy G1 ). Green Space 7 Sherborne Park incorrectly located.Green Space 8 – The Reddies , I consider the proposed development to be unsustainable, flawed and totally inappropriate for the site. Extend the designated area up to Wharf Lane.d) Support Town Centre and traffic proposals, but are

b) Support noted

c) See proposed changes to Policy G1

d) Support Noted

12 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planunlikely to significantly reduce the numbers of vehicles.

48 Nigel PearceChairman

Lechlade Cricket Club a) Object to proposed designation of the Cricket Club grounds as a Green Space –Will not address club’s future needs for costly infrastructure investment.The Town Council must support the Barwood development next to the Cricket Club so that the club can benefit from a longer lease ( from current 16 years to 30 years ) and infrastructure contributions.Does not feel there has been adequate engagement and consultation.b) Green Spaces designation will prevent the club from securing planning consent for a new pavilion.

Objection noted – See proposed changes to Policy G1 and additional policies G2 and G3

49 Colin Bunkham Resident Congratulations to all concerned in producing this document. The Manor Grounds have been enjoyed by players and spectators for 125 years , please extend the Green Space designation to cover the ‘ Barwood ‘ site. Please ensure the historic town of Lechlade is not blighted by future development.

Support notedManor Grounds protected as part of the setting of a listed building

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response50 Jeremy FlawnPartner

Bluestone Planning on behalf on Colin Harries owner of the farm land known as The Reddies to the east of Lechlade and south of Faringdon Road.

a) The response documents sets out reasons why the NP and Local Plan should allocate the Reddies site for a mixed development of 20 dwellings on a 1.2 Ha site , a community swimming pool , a car park , a walled community allotment and 25 acres of publically accessed grassland..b) Comments include the need for the NP to provide a rigorous comparative analysis of a range of potential allocation sites.c) The document sets out reasons why the Reddies should not be allocated as a Green Space

a-b) Objections noted - See proposed changes to the Housing Section and policies which clarify the NDP position.c) See revised policy G1

13 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Pland) Object to Policy H1B as no development boundary is shown in the plan.e) Object to Policy H2 – policy will not workf) Object Policy H5 – provide a full planning application for residential developments.g) Object PolicyH12 – environmental assessmenth) Object Policy E3 – already allocated in emerging Local Plani) Object Policy M1 and M2 – Marina – no comparative assessment carried out.j) Object Policy G1 designation of Reddies a Green Space.

- Too big at 21 Ha- Not local in nature- No right of access- Map changed after public consultation- Clear evidence not provided

d)See revised policy H1

e) Notedf) Noted

g) Notedh) Noted – see proposed changes to employment section and policies

i) Noted this is not an allocation policy but supportive. – Policy M1& M2 deleted . New Policy E4 M2 amended

j) See proposed changes to policy G1

51 John and Hazel Watkins Residents a) Plan very well done , good layout and informative. We agree with most of the proposals except the traffic calming as we think these will be ineffective.

Support notedPublic consultation strongly supported the proposed scheme

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response52 Ron Dennish Resident a) Initial proposals of the BHB Town Centre review

strongly supported.b) Preserve current echelon parking in High StSupport removal of traffic light where possible.c) Do not support 20mph limit – increases accidents. VAS are more effective.d) Support shared space concept.e) Support the redevelopment of the Marinaf) Detailed document editing still required

a) Support noted

b-d) The detailed scheme design will consider these issuese) Support notedf) Agreed – will be done when preparing Submission document

53 Martin and Jane Hall Residents a) Sherborne Park p 36 shown incorrectlyb) Look forward to seeing master plan for Town Centre.

a) Noted – will amend NDPb) Support noted . Detailed scheme

14 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood PlanParking has to be a concern.Why doesn’t BHB favour town entrance gates?Will roundabout at High St / Thames St work ?c) We found the document interesting and informative – but wordy.

design will address these issuesc) Editing still required

54 Alastair Gilmour Resident a) Broadly support the plan especially the Marina redevelopment.b) HGV traffic over Ha’penny Bridge needs sorting out.Very interested in setting up small artisan workshops.

a) Support notedb) Part of detailed traffic study

55 Sue Wilkinson Resident a) Section M1 – Marina redevelopment how can this be achieved.b) Project TC1 - I don’t understand shared spacec) I support keeping the echelon parking.d) I support retaining the traffic lights at Thames Street / High Streete) Plan needs more publicity/ explanation

a) Noted – Marina privately owned but NDP can set vision for redevelopmentb) Public consultation did support scheme.c) Echelon parking to be assessed in detailed scheme.d) Design should obviate need for lights but will be assessed.e) Publicity agreed

56 Dr Michael Keegan Resident a) Congratulate LTC on producing a well presented and thoughtful draft plan.b) I do not support the speculative proposals for development of the Reddies. Inappropriate location.c) I do not think the case for additional parking has been justified.d) Comments about Parish footpaths and closure of public footpath around Bowmoor Lake.

a) Support noted

b) No Planning Application yetc) Will be further consultation

d) New proposals recently put forward

57 Denver Keegan Resident I object to any development on the land known as the Reddies to the east of Lechlade. It would spoil the views in both directions , it is a valuable green space and very close to a flood plain and conservation area.

Noted. No Planning Application submtted

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response58 Linda Kent Resident a) A comprehensive and well presented document –

hard work and effort much appreciated. I generally support the policies and projects.b) Support the BHB Town Centre proposals.Is it possible for the 20mph limit and HGV traffic to be addressed soon ?c) I support the designation of Green Spaces particularly the Reddies. Could you also include the Manor Parkland as a Green Space

a) Support noted

b) Support noted – next design phase underway

c) Support noted

15 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Pland) Please provide a map showing the development boundary.e) P10 Canal opened in 1789Isabel de Mortimer founded the St John’s nunnery . P33 footways not footpaths

d) Will be included in next NDP revisionsee revised policy H1

e) Noted – text will be revised59 Rachel Bayless Resident a) Concerns about proposal to remove the pelican

crossing by the Medical Centreb) Concerns about removal of Thames Street traffic lights , parking linked to new development on Faringdon Road and reduction in Town Centre parking.c) Can we put a weight restriction on the Ha’penny Bridge ?

a) See note to response 8

b) Detailed scheme design will address these issues

c) We will discuss with GCC Highways

60 Melvin JamesAdvisor – South Mercia Team

Natural England a) Confident that site allocations in plan are deliverable without impacting on designated environmental sites.b) Policy H12 – should not normally be allowedc) SEA is not required.d) Incorporate measures in plan to ensure significant effects are avoided in order to secure compliance with the Habitats Regulations .e) Further Habitats Regulations Assessment in not required.

a) Noted

b) Noted – see revised Housing Policy H12 H14c) Notedd) See revised Housing Policy H12H14

e) Noted61 Gillian Kirk Resident a) Fully support BHB Town Centre proposals.

b) I do not support the development of the Reddies to the east of Lechlade.c) I object to the retail rubbish on the pavements / roads – outside Londisd) No more dwellings except the odd infill.

e) Comments about the telephone box and the ugly sign outside the church.

a) Support notedb) Noted. No Planning Application submittedc) Noted - not in scope of NDPd) The NDP has to be in general conformity with the Local Plan and allow for growth it is not a means for preventing developmente) Noted – not in scope of NDP

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response62 Terry Adams Resident a) Support the removal of cars from the Market Square

and the development of the Marinab) Why not compulsory purchase the land off Wharf Lane for conversion into a pay and display car park.c) Widen Burford Road by removing the grass verge and

a) Support noted

b) Noted – private land – not available

c) Noted – scheme design will

16 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood PlanLime trees – use for parkingd) Welcome the NP – good work.

address this with tree retentiond) Support noted

63 John Elsey Resident a) Unless alternative parking can be found the Town Centre proposals will not work. It will have a negative impact on visitors and church users. Why not buy the land adjacent to Wharf Lane for parking.b) Object Project TC1 – to the removal of the Thames St traffic lights. Suggest you trial it.c) NP – text contains too much jargon and is not easy to read.Deliver a brochure in a simpler format

a) See 62 above

b) Project scheme design will assess viability. Disabling lights would not be a relevant trial

c) Noted edit being undertaken 64 Dianne Carnegie Resident a) Support M1 – develop the Marina

b) Support Green Spaces 1-7 Object the 8 Reddies and support the development proposed by Mr Harris.c) Support Town Centre proposals but need an alternative central car park. Leave at least 12 spaces.d) Support building a footbridge over the Thames. Can you compulsory purchase the land next to Wharf Lane for carparking ?e) Need better car parking signage.f) It is refreshing to have this interesting plan for Lechlade.

a) Support notedb) Noted . No Planning Application submittedc) Support noted

d) See 62 above

e) Noted – part of next design phasef) Support noted

65 Paul and Sandra Dennis Residents a) Town Centre project – while this is a good idea visitors will not stop if there is no parking. Will traffic calming consider needs of schoolchildren crossing the road.b) SF1 Outdoor fitness equipment is a waste of money . Upgrade cricket and football club facilities. More community facilities.

a) Parking numbers will be maintained

b) Public consultation showed demand and GCC funding received

66 Ian and Jan Taylor Residents Support NP proposals. Congratulate LTC on producing such a well thought out document. Totally against any development that would be detrimental to the town.

Support noted

67 Rosalind Pledger Resident Object strongly to TC1 and proposal to remove the pelican crossing next to the Medical Centre.

This text will be removed in next revision of NDPTC1 supported in Public Consultation

Name of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response68 E Hamilton Harvey Resident Please leave the echelon parking on Burford Street and

leave some parking in the Market Square.Noted

69 Margaret Hing Resident Marina at present has permission for 1 resident – most of the poor state of the area is due to boat owners why

Noted .Although the Marina is in private

17 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood Planlive aboard and have junk around their boats. Question the NP proposals for ‘live – aboards ‘ .To have it open to the public would not encourage moorers. Hire charges for boats are now so high it will be difficult to encourage boat tourism. I support the redevelopment of the Marina but there is some confusion over the nature of such a business.

ownership the Town Council wish to set out a vision for its future development in the NDP

70 No name a)TC2 We need to work towards a tidier environment . b) Support TC1-9 Need traffic calming. Support BHB Town Centre proposalsc)LTC should continue to ensure that flood impact is considered for any development.

a) Notedb) Support notedc) In Housing policies

71 Malcolm and Diana Ord Residents a) Many thanks to the Town Council for all your efforts in producing the NP. Results very comprehensive and much appreciated.b) Support – G1 designation of Green SpacesSupport – need for smaller properties for older people. c) Support Town Centre proposals.d) Support 114 new dwellings with no harm to open spaces such as Manor grounds.

a-d) Support noted

72 DV Huxley Resident a) Retain beautiful vista approach from Faringdon Road. b) Oppose development of Manor Grounds and Reddies.c) Leave Market Place as it is. Oppose reduction of speed limit from 30mph to 20 mph

a) Notedb) Noted No Planning Application submittedc) Public Consultation supported the proposals and achievement of 20mph flows by design not signage. Parking numbers to be retained

73 Dr Michael Read Resident a) I appreciate the work that has gone into the NP. Restrict new developments so Lechlade can remain an urban environment we don’t have the infrastructure. b) Need to enforce the Ha’penny Bridge length restrictions. Use CCTV to enforce. Concern over parking in residential streets.c) Need to improve the Marina.

a) Support noted

b) CCTV proposal will be investigated

c) Noted

18 | P a g e

Consultation on the Draft Lechlade-on-Thames Neighbourhood PlanName of Consultee Organisation Point Raised Response

74 Kate Trotter Resident a) I support the objectives related to Housing.b) I agree with implementation of a 20mph speed

limit. Please enhance cycling routes.c) Although local sports facilities are very good any

improvement is very important.d) I support BHB Town Centre proposals but want

to keep echelon parking.

a) Support notedb) See response 72

c) Noted – see proposed changes to policy G1 and new policies G2 & G3

d) Support noted75 Ben Catley- Richardson Broadband campaign officer

ResidentCorrection required to statements about broadband – cabinets have already been installed and does not require additional funding..

CIL will be amended but no longer included in NDP

19 | P a g e