Comment
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Representation ID: 22217
Received: 14/02/2017
Respondent: Mr Kelvin Fosberry
Given arguments for site rejections are often spurious.
Favour BO9-recent successful linear development to west. Better safe access than BO16, landscape buffer to south no less pertinent than for BO16, BO17.
Favour BO10,11,13. As a combined site within heart of village. Impact depends on design quality, landscaping. Access off B2089. Combining negates constraints.
Favour BO15, adjacent to established community. Impact depends on siting, design.
Favour part BO14. Why BO14 so large? Serves to satisfy the given reasons for rejection. South corner, access off Northiam Rd. Arguments/solutions little different to BO16.
BO12 ribbon?! Good sight lines onto 30mph. Screening also relevant.
Given arguments for site rejections are often spurious.
Favour BO9-recent successful linear development to west. Better safe access than BO16, landscape buffer to south no less pertinent than for BO16, BO17.
Favour BO10,11,13. As a combined site within heart of village. Impact depends on design quality, landscaping. Access off B2089. Combining negates constraints.
Favour BO15, adjacent to established community. Impact depends on siting, design.
Favour part BO14. Why BO14 so large? Serves to satisfy the given reasons for rejection. South corner, access off Northiam Rd. Arguments/solutions little different to BO16.
BO12 ribbon?! Good sight lines onto 30mph. Screening also relevant.