LEGAL COMPLIANCE and SOUNDNESS

I object to the proposed site at Peasmarsh as the current infrastructure and amenities of the village will not support 45 additional homes.

RDC admit their current plans for (1) drainage and (2) access to the A268 are not adequate for their proposed site and they intend to evaluate these at the planning stage. This short sightedness surely goes against the planning process and should not be supported without proper preparation of a long-term proposal for two crucial
aspects of RDC's proposed plans.

(1) Drainage
RDC's proposed site already has significant drainage problems as flooding in Farley's Way and along Griffin Lane show. Their drainage proposal is the installation of SuDS which is a short-term solution at best on heavy clay soils such as that at Peasmarsh.

I should like to know how RDC will compensate me when flooding appears in my garden which is at the bottom of the hill from the proposed site.

(2) Access to the A268
The proposed access to the A268 is via the demolished site of 'Pippins'. This would include a single track 'pinch point' within the site with a traffic priority resulting in queuing to exit or enter the site. This will create a major road hazard close to the top of Cock Hill with drivers coming into the sun, traffic parked up awaiting entry to the site and, at peak times, nose to tail traffic exiting the site.

(3) Infrastructure
In addition, the over development of the village will have a detrimental impact on community cohesion through the adverse pressures on existing services and community structures of the village of Peasmarsh.

Peasmarsh is not a town it is a small village and does not have a town's facilities. The addition of 45 new homes will equate to at least 150 new residents and will substantially increasing the population density, not only without the necessary amenities and infrastructure in place, but people will be crammed in cheek by jowl and this is not sustainable for communal village life.