Petitions
Monday 13 October 2008
Communities and Local Government
Parking (Halifax)
The Petition of supporters of increased parking facilities for shoppers in Halifax town centre,
Declares that more parking facilities are needed for shoppers in Halifax town centre
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to call on Calderdale Council to ensure that provision is made for extra parking in Halifax town centre for shoppers and to guarantee that, should the car park on Broad street be developed on, a parking and shuttle bus service be provided for the Eureka site.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Mrs. Linda Riordan , Official Report, 21 July 2008; Vol. 479, c. 621.] [P000247]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and LocalGovernment:
The Secretary of State acknowledges the concerns of the petitioners in relation to parking facilities in Halifax.
It is understood that a reserved matters planning application for a mixed use development including retail, residential, leisure and a multi storey car park (478 spaces with 46 being allocated as residential) at Broad Street, Halifax was approved in July 2008.
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 ‘Transport’ sets out the Government's planning policy for promoting more sustainable transport choices, including parking standards. Planning Policy statements and guidance are expected to be fully reflected in the policies contained in both regional strategies and local development plans and documents and are important material considerations when planning applications are being determined. Local planning authorities are required to have regard to Government guidance in determining applications and the Secretary of State would expect her guidance to carry considerable weight as important statements of Government policy. However, Parliament has made local planning authorities responsible for what is in their view proper planning for their area and they are entitled, in appropriate circumstances, to take the view that other material considerations are of greater weight in particular cases. It is our policy to allow authorities to exercise this responsibility with the minimum of intervention from central Government, and to intervene only when issues of more than local significance are raised.
These are not matters in which the Secretary of State would become involved. However, there is still some potential that the Broad Street planning application could be subject to an appeal by the applicant to the Secretary of State, for instance against the imposition of a particular condition. It would not therefore be appropriate for the Secretary of State to offer any comments or observations on the propositions raised by this petition.
Planning (Hampshire)
The Humble Petition of Botley and Hedge End residents,
Sheweth that they object to the proposed Strategic Development Area to the N/NE of Hedge End and the inadequacy of the consultation and selection process.
They represent the views of 312 residents who signed a similar petition during a public meeting on 12 June 2008 at Botley Church, and reflect the widespread views of local residents.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House shall urge the Department of Communities and Local Government to withdraw the proposed Strategic Development Area in order to embark on proper consultation and a full consideration of the alternatives.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c. —[Presented by Chris Huhne , Official Report, 1 July 2008; Vol. 478, c. 836.] [P000221]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
The Secretary of State acknowledges the concerns of the petitioners regarding the inclusion of a Strategic Development Area north of Hedge End.
The proposals were included in Proposed Changes to draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East (The South East Plan) which was published for consultation on 17 July 2008. The consultation period runs until 24 October 2008.
I would urge all interested parties to raise their objections through the formal process to enable representations to be considered.
Details of how to respond to the consultation can be found on the Government Office for the South East website: www.gos.gov.uk/gose/planning/regionalPlanning
Planning and Development (Essex)
The Petition of Brian Keeler, Mr and Mrs Patel, the residents of Castle Point and others,
Declares that they object to the proposed demolition of the two shops at 1 to 5 High Street Benfleet, to make way for a commercial development with seven 2 bed flats in an unsympathetic and unattractive 2 and 3 storey development above shops, with only seven parking spaces, putting unacceptable pressure on alternative local public parking facilities which are increasingly inadequate, that this development would further spoil the Conservation Area and create unacceptable stress on the existing infrastructure, including roads, schools, rail, doctors, dentists, etc. Further-declares that they urge Councillors to reject this development for these and for many other valid planning reasons, and to ensure that this application is decided by Councillors rather than officers, given the importance to the wider community, of protecting their unique Conservation Area.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press Castle Point Borough Council, the three Boyce Ward Councillors and all mainland Councillors in particular, to reject this planning application and to substantially protect the unique St Mary's Conservation Area.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Bob Spink , Official Report, 23 June 2008; Vol. 478, c. 119.]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
Parliament has entrusted local authorities with responsibility for development control in their areas. It is for them to decide, with particular regard to the provisions of the County Structure and Local Plans, any relevant views expressed by neighbouring occupiers, local residents and other third parties (although they are not bound to accept those views) and any other relevant material considerations which fairly and reasonably relate to the application concerned, whether or not a proposal should be given planning permission. The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intervenes in this responsibility only in the most exceptional circumstances and then only when issues of national or regional importance are involved. To do so more often would undermine the responsibility given to local planning authorities.
The Petition of Brian Keeler, Mr and Mrs Patel, the residents of Castle Point and others,
Declares that they object to the proposed development of the area between No's 3 to 7 The Close, Benfleet, to construct a building providing two 2 bed flats in a 2 storey development, which being on a pedestrian pathway only, has no parking spaces, no refuse collection facilities, no access for the development, in either removing spoil or, delivering materials for the building, as these would have to be craned into the site, either from the High Street, over existing properties, or by once again utilising the local School Lane Car Park for builders vehicles and mobile crane, once again putting unacceptable pressure on alternative local public parking facilities which are increasingly inadequate, that this development would further spoil the Conservation Area and create unacceptable stress on the existing infrastructure, including roads, schools, rail, doctors, dentists etc.
Further declares that they urge Councillors to reject this development for these and for many other valid planning reasons, and to ensure that this application is decided by Councillors rather than unelected unaccountable officers, given the importance to the wider community of protecting their unique Conservation Area.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press Castle Point Borough Council, the three Boyce ward Councillors and all mainland Councillors in particular, to reject this planning application and to substantially protect the unique St Mary's Conservation Area.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Bob Spink , Official Report, 14 July 2008; Vol. 479, c. 111.]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
The application to Castle Point Borough Council was in respect of the construction of a 2-storey development providing two 2-bed flats on land between 3 to 7 The Close, Benfleet. The application was withdrawn on 4 August 2008.
Health
Hospital Closures (Cornwall)
The Petition of the People of West Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly
Declares that our support for the cross-party (and non-party political) campaign to:
Oppose any plans to reduce or close hospital services at St Michael’s or Penzance; Express our dismay that NHS money is being used to build up and support private hospitals while the Trust is contemplating the closure of the excellent St Michael’s Hospital; Object to the waste of money on administrative gimmicks rather than frontline public services; Demand an Independent Review of hospital services and for fair funding; Support an increase in emergency as well as acute and diagnostic services in the West of Cornwall.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Secretary of State for Health to ensure the maintenance of hospital services at St Michael’s or Penzance, two of west Cornwall’s most crucial public services.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Andrew George , Official Report, 22 July 2008; Vol. 479, c. 23P.] [P000250]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Health:
It is for the local National Health Service to decide how best to allocate funding and to commission health services for their local communities. Therefore, my Department will bring this to the attention of Cornwall & The Isles of Scilly Primary Care Trust (PCT).
South West Strategic Health Authority has advised that there are currently no plans to close St Michael's Hospital or West Cornwall Hospital. Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly PCT confirmed its commitment to a future for both hospitals in its “A Healthy Future” publication.
Queen Elizabeth Resource Centre (Dartford)
The Petition of the Bridge Court Action Group at the Queen Elizabeth Foundation Resource Centre in Dartford
Declares that the Queen Elizabeth Resource Centre in Dartford gives disabled people a chance to develop their skills for IT, Health and Fitness, Sports, Sign Language plus other skills, to aid disabled people get back to independent living.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Secretary of State for Health to support the Bridge Court Action Group in its efforts to keep the resource centre open.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Dr. Howard Stoate , Official Report, 22 July 2008; Vol. 479, c. 24P.] [P000260]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Health:
The issue raised in the petition is a matter for Kent County Council who, I understand, owns the building which the Resource Centre back from them. I am advised by the South East Coast Strategic Health Authority that West Kent PCT does not commission any services from the Queen Elizabeth Resource Centre.
| Index | Home Page |