Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 1818
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: Mr Andrew Elliott
The usual planning language presenting as usual a fait accompli. The "making it nice" stuff is beside the point, which is that Fishbourne has had enough development.
6.66 how will you protect the separate district identity of Fishbourne when policy AL9 envisages an "extension of the existing built up areas"?
6.66 planning should also take into account noise exposure from the A259 and from Salthill Road, now overused , too narrow, used by farm vehicles, and to avoid Fishbourne roundabout.
1. Exactly how can an "extension" of the village be "integrated' with it? It's a contradiction in terms.
6.63 the modest services and facilities of Fishbourne are already very well used and hardly need another 250 houses to make them sustainable.
6.64 fishbourne playing field is a more than adequate open space.
6.6 "landscape sensitivities" etc have not in the last 20 years prevented insensitive developments blocking out views and taking away a sense of open space.
6.66 how will you protect the separate district identity of Fishbourne when policy AL9 envisages an "extension of the existing built up areas"? How can a major development on Bethwines Farm have "good access " to the railway station, school and pubs?
6.66 planning should also take into account noise exposure from the A259 and from Salthill Road, now massively overused , too narrow,used by huge farm vehicles, and used by those wishing to avoid the appalling Fishbourne roundabout.
AL9 - 1. Exactly how can an "extension" of the village be "integrated' with it? It's a contradiction in terms.
AL9 - 5,7,8 the fine words in these paragraphs have not prevented the relentless and accelerating overdevelopment of Fishbourne in the last 20 years.