Object

Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 3930

Received: 09/03/2023

Respondent: Mr & Mrs William and Susan Cantello

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Objection against development in Loxwood. Reasons including:
- lack of consideration of impact of development in village in neighbouring district (Dunsfold);
- lack of existing infrastructure - shops and amenities;
- lack of public transport, dependency on cars;
- lack of capacity within education facilities;
- limitation of utilities infrastructure;
- environmental impact

Full text:

Re. Proposed Forward Plan 2021 to 2039 effect on Loxwood.

Loxwood has had a lot of development over the past decade and with that has come a LOSS OF AMENITIES no GAIN. After all this development which is still ongoing there must be a period of time left before further development and it seems reasonable that Planners should give an approximate time plan for any future release of permission. I believe little if any attention has been given to the fact that Loxwood is on the
border with Surrey and the very large development at DUNSFOLD has COMMENCED. Development on villages bordering other Counties MUST BE CONSIDERED as it effects infrastructure, particularly roads, drainage and services.

The proposal goes against many of the National Guidance considerations in that there is extremely little local industry, so the vast majority of new residents will need to travel by car to work and leisure. Piecemeal development of local Villages is an opt-out of providing enhanced facilities for existing residents as well as new residents as has been seen over the past decades. Planning for the future needs to be bold and select a place for a new small town or a big development to an existing village as this then provides finance to assist with the improvement of roads, infrastructure, Schools, services and amenities for existing residents and future residents. It also means many lovely small villages remain without any big development in the near future.

Now coming specifically to Loxwood, which has had piecemeal development has:-­ LOST ITS GENERAL STORE, LOST ITS POST OFFICE, NO FACILITY TO
DRAW CASH, NO CAFE, and NO PHARMACY (except for prescriptions). PUBLIC TRANSPORT is almost non existent and could easily be lost totally (one bus per day to Billingshurst and one to Guildford).

SHOPPING the nearest towns are Horsham and Guildford. Billingshurst has very limited facilities. Therefore Residents are dependant on a Car for Business and Leisure.
TEENAGERS - NO FACILITIES AT ALL.
EDUCATION- Primary School is over grounded and lacks any further adjacent space to expand. Secondary School is in Billingshurst and really that is at capacity and lacks any adjacent space to expand.
Whilst Loxwood has a VILLAGE HALL AND ADJACENT PLAYGROUND this is NOT CENTRAL and it fronts the very busy road through the village which only has very narrow pavements. NOT IDEAL for walking to for younger children at all.

In the plan it seems very little consideration, if any, has been given to Infrastructure Like many Villages, water (supply, use and deposal) and electricity need to be considered very carefully as majority of housing depends on OIL for heating. Lastly but certainly very important is limiting environmental damage to this area of Northern Villages.

Piecemeal development as in the past is NO SOLUTION.

Attachments: