Please see attached letter for full comments made by The British Horse Society.

Overall Priority 2 – Live Well Locally, Paragraphs 2.9, 2.10, 4.1, 4.2 & 4.3

Walking, wheeling & cycling routes should be truly inclusive multi user routes. Leisure use extends the value of routes provided primarily for commuting and school journeys. Where away from the roadside, new routes should be created at bridleway or restricted byway status. These
provide the best benefit to tax payers as they include more users, thus providing more health and wellbeing benefits as well as providing more opportunity for those with a disability to enjoy the routes on horseback or (on byways) in a carriage.

Proposed Policy LWL3: Walking, Wheeling, Cycling and Public Transport (Outside the Site)
(A) All major development proposals for new dwellings must meet the following criteria:

Walking, wheeling & cycling routes should be truly inclusive multi user routes. Leisure use extends the value of routes provided primarily for commuting and school journeys. Where away from the roadside, new routes should be created at bridleway or restricted byway status. These provide the best benefit to tax payers as they include more users, thus providing more health and wellbeing benefits as well as providing more opportunity for those with a disability to enjoy the routes on horseback or (on byways) in a carriage.

Further, proposed “improvements” to existing infrastructure must be an improvement for every user. For example, tarmacking a bridleway to provide a “cleaner” path to school would result in a less safe and amenable path for other users as it would be more slippery for horse riders and would result in faster movement of bicycles putting slower moving users at risk. Access to the coast should be improved for all wherever possible. Whilst a pleasant provision for walkers, the coastal path currently mostly provides nothing for those on a bike or a horse.

Proposed Policy LWL3: Walking, Wheeling, Cycling and Public Transport (Outside the Site)
B) All development proposals of more than 50 homes must meet the following criteria:

Walking, wheeling & cycling routes should be truly inclusive multi user routes. Leisure use extends the value of routes provided primarily for commuting and school journeys. Where away from the roadside, new routes should be created at bridleway or restricted byway status. These provide the best benefit to tax payers as they include more users, thus providing more health and wellbeing benefits as well as providing more opportunity for those with a disability to enjoy the routes on horseback or (on byways) in a carriage.

Further, proposed “improvements” to existing infrastructure must be an improvement for every user. For example, tarmacking a bridleway to provide a “cleaner” path to school would result in a less safe and amenable path for other users as it would be more slippery for horse riders and would result in faster movement of bicycles putting slower moving users at risk. Access to the coast should be improved for all wherever possible. Whilst a pleasant provision for walkers, the coastal path currently mostly provides nothing for those on a bike or a horse.

As explained above, off site routes should include all VRUs and those away from the road side should be created as bridleways or restricted byways.

Proposed Policy LWL4: Walking, Wheeling, Cycling & Public Transport (Within the Site):

Connecting beyond the site, filtered permeability, “safe routes accessible to all”, junctions, crossings, shared use routes, should all include equestrians

The snappy punchline of 'Green to the core' and 'Live well locally' is a bold attempt to show a commitment to protecting rural communities and local ecology but your HELAA land allocation of CAT0001 and potential site CAT0016 in Catsfield fly in the face of these claims/promises. The proposal of 60 new houses (some proposing to be built on protected AONB land) in this small rural village (doubling the size of the main village), is absolutely shocking and I object strongly to these sites being included for allocation in this plan. These proposals would not only destroy ancient woodland, biodiversity and protected wildlife habitats, they would also severely impact the lives of local residents with increased pollution and a serious decline in the already insufficient utilties and local infrastructure.
See further comments on HELAA Part 2 Chapter 3.