Object

Preferred Site Allocations 2018

Representation ID: 19232

Received: 03/03/2018

Respondent: Mr Mark Phillips

Representation Summary:

The council has failed to give the development plan the careful consideration its duty bound to do. This council is used to getting its own way and it is clear it has become lazy in its approach.

Full text:

I am writing to object to the above proposed development being included in the Local Development Plan for the following reasons:

1. Honeypot lane already has an issue with dangerous speeding traffic. 20mph limit signs were erected a few years ago, but it has not been policed despite repeated requests. It is reasonable therefore, to assume that speeding will continue for the foreseeable future.
2. Much of developed part of Honeypot lane only has a pedestrian path on one side of the road because it is so narrow.
3. The lane narrows down still further before reaching the proposed development site.
4. Development of this proposed area has been turned down by the council before, as it did not meet the government's "Spacial Strategy" requirements. It is clear from the government's guidelines, this site still does not meet these requirements.
5. This development is proposed on green belt land. The government still stresses the importance of protecting green belt land. National planning guidelines state that only in exceptional circumstances can development take place on greenbelt land, and housing is not considered exceptional circumstances.
6. There are 2 significant developments planned, which are within ΒΌ mile of Honeypot Lane.
One is on the site of the Police station (70 units), and a large office block in Hubert Road which is being converted to flats. Both developments will have access to London Road. I'm pretty sure nobody in Planning has considered the extra traffic flow that these new developments will create in addition to any as a result of a development in Honeypot lane.
7. The proposed development is a mile from the town centre. There is no bus service in Honeypot Lane, and it wouldn't be practical (see points 1-3). Residents at the proposed development would have no alternative other than to use their cars. This does not meet the governments sustainability targets. If there are infrastructure solutions suggested, I for one no nothing about them.

In Summary, the council has failed to give the development plan the careful consideration it is duty bound to do. The proposed site is wholly unsuitable for development anyway. It has severe flooding issues, and has a stream running through it. This council is used to getting its own way and it is clear it has become lazy in its approach. I wholeheartedly object to the proposed Honeypot Lane development.