Object

Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Representation ID: 528

Received: 29/01/2019

Respondent: Petrina Miliam

Representation Summary:

- School oversubscribed
- No doctor's surgery
- NHS dental practice oversubscribed
- No shop
- Public transport overcrowded in summer
- Fight to fund rural bus
- Development will encourage car use along the A259
- Traffic queues will increase with hamburger roundabout
- Noise and air pollution from standing traffic at unacceptable levels
- High water table being barely 6" below the surface.
- Habitat Review appears out of date
- Substantial wildlife across Bethwines Farm needs protection
- Bethwines Farm is agricultural land, should not be used for building
- Impact on Chichester Harbour SPA/SAC/Ramsar site

Full text:

Fishbourne does NOT require further development to sustain the services in our village. The school is already over subscribed with children travelling out to other schools, the pre-school is well supported. You are lucky to be able to make a booking in the Fishbourne Centre and St Peter's Place as they are so popular for local groups. The pubs are well used and valued. The Fishbourne Playing Field with all the local sports facilities and groups is the envy of many villages. The success of both WI groups and the recently formed Fishbourne Companions amongst other local groups is a testament to a vibrant, active population. The statement "promote the vitality of the village" with additional hosuing is a complete fabrication and wholly untrue.

However we have NO doctor's surgery, NO nurse led clinic, oversubscribed NHS dental practice, NO shop. The hospital services cannot keep pace with the increase in demand and in fact some surgical services have already moved to Brighton.

Our public transport link along the A259 with the 700 bus is good but overcrowded in summer with holiday makers and often difficult to find a seat. We fight to keep the funding for our rural 56 bus which serves the northern part of the village. Any development will only encourage car use and at 2 cars minimum per household that's another 500+ cars in the village alone without additional cars in the other Bourne villages along the A259. Your transport model is flawed according to the research conducted by our well-respected expert within our village.

The infrastructure of roads is wholly unsuitable for further development particularly in Blackboy Lane and Clay Lane. If all the proposed housing goes ahead with the installation of a new hamburger roundabout, the queues for the traffic lights will increase even further. Impatient drivers will naturally look to take the already overloaded rat runs through our village. Salthill Road has long been known as the western bypass. Noise and air pollution from standing traffic at the Tesco roundabout is at unacceptable levels now let alone with an increase.

The land in Fishbourne, particularly on Bethwines Farm has a really high water table being barely 6" below the surface. The ditches often cannot cope and property downstream on the A259 and in Blackboy have flooded, again recently despite maintenance by our excellent flood volunteers. Any additional building will place undue pressure on the drainage systems. The underground SUDS systems are unsuitable as the fresh cleansed water has to go somewhere. The sewage system at Apuldram is unable to cope with any more development in Fishbourne, Apuldram or Donnington. The Tangmere sewage system is as yet untested for the proposed White House Farm development.

The Habitat Review appears to be out of date and questionable given the development in an adjacent field in Clay Lane within Chichester area. When asked at an exhibition, one of the planning officers said that the proposed wildlife corridor along Clay Lane was not set in stone and could be moved. If that's the case, where is the validity in your report? There is substantial wildlife in the western part of the village across Bethwines Farm which is in need of protection.

Bethwines Farm is agricultural land of the highest grade and should not be used for building. Your own policy states that valued farmland should be sustained. We already import a lot of our food and with a growing population will need to provide more food ourselves. Once the land has gone, that's it. Lost forever with no turning back.

Any development to the west of Fishbourne does not protect "Potential landscape sensitivities, including protecting views to the South Downs National Park and Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and their settings". You can see Kingley Vale, Bow Hill and Stoke Clump from Blackboy Lane. Also vice versa that any development in the west of the village will be seen from these view points and interrupt views to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty of Chichester Harbour. Also the AONB is NOT to the south of Fishbourne but lies within the village. Any further development will seriously impact on Chichester Harbour SPA/SAC/Ramsar site.

Fishbourne has already done more to accommodate new housing than any other village in the area. We are pressed on three sides with Chichester to the east, the AONB to the south and the South Downs National Park to the north. Enough is enough!

I note that you intend "Protecting the separate distinct identity of Fishbourne in relationship to surrounding settlements, including Chichester City" but you seem to have very conveniently omitted preventting the coalescence of Fishbourne and Bosham!