Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 6575

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Gooding

Agent: Mrs Caroline Gooding

Representation Summary:

I object owing to the fact that the location of the site is too far removed from the central amenities. This is turn will cause more traffic on the roads, which the village cannot cope with and which will endanger the lives of pedestrians. The bypass should be built first before any further development.
As soon as development begins, the wildlife will flee! This should remain greenbelt land and the wildlife should be protected by the Council.
Assuming the development goes ahead, the trees on the northern boundary bordering the extension to Kelsey Court should be protected.

Full text:

I object to this site being developed and at least until a bypass is put in place to cater for the through traffic passing through the village, thereby allowing for the existing infrastructure to cater for increased traffic from new residents. If this goes ahead, it will become extremely difficult for residents in Kelsey Lane to exit their drives safely in the morning!

This site is also, from practical experience, having lived in the village for over 30 years, significantly too far away from the central amenities in the village, which will therefore promote the use of more cars on the road. Most people would consider it too far to walk to the station to catch the train to work, or to walk to the village shops and back, for example. Indeed, there isn't even a pavement down half of Meeting House Lane, which new residents living nearer Windmill Lane would use to walk down and drive down to the village centre. I consider walking down Meeting House Lane already to be extremely unsafe.

The car parking in the centre of the village is already at absolute capacity and needs sorting for existing residents, let alone for new residents in addition.

The site is greenbelt land and in view of the beautiful trees and wildlife which occupy the land, should be sorely protected by the Council. As soon as any development and the associated noise begins, the wildlife (including the newts), will flee and who can blame them! Developing the land, will also have a significantly adverse impact on the many trees in the area, in particular those trees which already have a tree preservation order on them.

In particular, and assuming the site will be allocated for development, I strongly believe that the rural feel of the area should be maintained as much as possible. For example, there is a long row of trees behind 64B Kelsey Lane, separating Highcross Farm from the land behind Kelsey Court, which should remain. This would also serve as a natural barrier between several different conurbations. The trees should, if at all possible, be granted tree preservation status or at the very least, be the subject of planning conditions within any planning approval associated with the proposed low density housing to the rear of Kelsey Court.