Object

Main Modifications to the Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 21440

Received: 27/09/2013

Respondent: Mr & Mrs John Attewell

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Majority of Catsfield residents do not wish major developments in Catsfield. In 2009 Catsfield produced a Local Action Plan, which stated the majority did not want extra development, only normal in-filling. This Plan lasts until 2014.
Catsfield does not have the infrastructure for large development. It is also possible that large developments could cause major flooding problems, as sites specified are subject to underground springs.
The main road is totally unsuited for more traffic.
One planning application for two houses was refused because additional ground was required which would encroach on an AONB and an SSI.

Full text:

Majority of Catsfield residents do not wish major developments in Catsfield. In 2009 Catsfield produced a Local Action Plan, which stated that the majority did not want extra development, only normal in-filling. This Action Plan lasts until 2014.
Catsfield does not have the infrastructure for large development eg. School already full, possible drainage problems, no gas supply, bus service probably to be cut. It is also possible that large developments could cause major flooding problems, as sites specified are subject to underground springs.
The main road is totally unsuited for more traffic, because already during peak periods the road is one gigantic traffic jam causing many vehicle accidents and a nightmare for pedestrians, especially children, to cross, despite there being a pedestrian crossing.
One planning application for two houses was refused because additional ground was required which would encroach on an AONB and an SSI. Although we are not allowed to mention specific council planning sites, one of these is specified.