Local plan scoping consultation

5.91 Rail: Support a new high speed rail link, with a reasonable design speed, between Birmingham and Manchester.

5.112 All road junctions in town centres should be adapted so they can be easily negotiated by users of mobility scooters. In suburbs where curbs are often lowered to allow off-street parking, this is not necessary.

5.113 The use of air-conditioning, including utilizing heat pumps and in cars, should be discouraged, except for medical reasons. Use of (ceiling) fans should be encouraged.

5.114 The use of air-conditioning, including utilizing heat pumps and in cars, should be discouraged, except for medical reasons. Use of (ceiling) fans should be encouraged.

5.115 The use of air-conditioning, including utilizing heat pumps and in cars, should be discouraged, except for medical reasons. Use of (ceiling) fans should be encouraged.

5.117 The use of air-conditioning, including utilizing heat pumps and in cars, should be discouraged, except for medical reasons. Use of (ceiling) fans should be encouraged.

5.129 The consultation document mentions a ‘buffer zone’ but the current Local Plan does not, but it mentions a Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope Consultation Zone, which the consultation document does not. Are they different terms for the same thing?

The historical and scientific value of the Jodrell Bank Telescope is recognized. However, there are telescopes in Germany and the USA which can now match or exceed the capabilities of the Lovell Telescope. This is in reality a working museum piece. It is used for training, and for scientific work that can be done, maybe better, elsewhere.

Can the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope Consultation Zone be justified today? The HQ for the SKA was recently built adjacent to the telescope, 10MW locomotives pass within 250 metres of it and an increasing number of powerful electric vehicles enter the site. How can new domestic development at Goostrey railway station, a mile away, be refused in these circumstances? Is the Town and Country Planning (Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope) Direction 1973 still technically up-to-date, 53 years on? Does the recent downgrade of the site in the scientific hierarchy mean nothing?

5.130 The consultation document mentions a ‘buffer zone’ but the current Local Plan does not, but it mentions a Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope Consultation Zone which the consultation document does not. Are they different terms for the same thing?

The historical and scientific value of the Jodrell Bank Telescope is recognized. However, there are telescopes in Germany and the USA which can now match or exceed the capabilities of the Lovell Telescope. This is in reality a working museum piece. It is used for training, and for scientific work that can be done, maybe better, elsewhere.

Can the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope Consultation Zone be justified today? The HQ for the SKA was recently built adjacent to the telescope, 10MW locomotives pass within 250 metres of it and an increasing number of powerful electric vehicles enter the site. How can new domestic development at Goostrey, a mile away, be refused in these circumstances? Is the Town and Country Planning (Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope) Direction 1973 still technically up-to-date, 53 years on? Does the recent downgrade of the site in the scientific hierarchy mean nothing?