Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 2690

Received: 06/02/2019

Respondent: Mr Stewart Holmes

Representation Summary:

Objection to Loxwood allocation:
* Loxwood sewage infrastructure has no more capacity to such an extent that holding tanks have had to be installed on the new nursery site .
* Loxwood is prone to surface water flooding
* There are no employment opportunities in the local area, therefore the traffic on the roads will vastly increase.
* Loxwood does not have a public transport system - not even linking it to local railway stations.
* The village school is already full to capacity.
* Loxwood surgery would be more than stretched with such a large increase in population.

Full text:

I wish to strongly object to the proposed increase in housing as outlined in the Draft Local Plan.

* Loxwood sewage infrastructure has no more capacity to such an extent that holding tanks have had to be installed on the new nursery site .
* Loxwood is prone to surface water flooding
* There are no employment opportunities in the local area, therefore the traffic on the roads will vastly increase.
* Loxwood does not have a public transport system- not even linking it to local railway stations.
* The village school is already full to capacity.
* Loxwood surgery would be more than stretched with such a large increase in population.

Not withstanding the above, it is clear that any increase in housing is a breach of the Loxwood Neighbourhood plan agreed by Chichester Council (and upheld by a Court of appeal when development was attempted on site known as HLX0007 in the High Street.)

The proposed developments for Loxwood are excessive when comparing planned numbers for new properties in Plaistow, Kirdford & Wisborough Green- Loxwood seems to risk becoming vulnerable to uncontrolled future development.

The desire for new developments already seems to be waning with fliers offering discounts, free stamp duty and furniture awards being posted locally!

Just because landowners are prepared to sell land to builders/developers does not mean that the Council should rubber stamp approval for a requirement that is out of place and not now required.