South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18)

Comment ID 1608
Document Section South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Rural Centres Infrastructure Text Block View all on this section
Respondent Celia Hastie View all by this respondent
Response Date 18 Sep 2019

In the Preferred Options doc. P 122, 8.67 Wessex Water have also advised that there may be limited drainage in the area which could cause additional sewers flooding from groundwater, yet digging up the field will certainly impact on the ability to absorb rainfall whilst the demand will be heavier on existing Victorian drains.

Regarding environmental sustainability I can see no planned commitment to it in the proposed development. Despite the increasing number of residents, there have been no improvements to public transport, and unfortunately, just last year a local bus route has been withdrawn from service. Neither are there plans for additional cycle routes, which could encourage a reduction in car use, and help to reach carbon emission and climate change targets. I firmly believe all these aspects and anomalies should be addressed before granting full planning permission for this site, let alone expanding it to the adjoining field, which looking at the plans seems to also remove the line of beautiful Poplars that currently form the boundary along the footpath.

I believe the council pay lip service to the benefit of ‘green spaces’ and the mental health and wellbeing of us all. How many residents will be affected by yet more housing development? I am not against houses being built but they need to sited in areas that have the potential for employment and where there are roads that can cope with the additional traffic and parking, and that are wide enough to facilitate safe walking. In this document on pages 119-122 it states what a Rural Centre is. We only meet this criteria for Community Services because of the work of a brilliant team of residents maintaining sports clubs and community events. Even the funding has been removed for our library, although perhaps we should be grateful for a library bus. (Although that is problematic taking spaces up in a car park that is already too small to meet the needs of the cars without the potential for another 280 cars in the proposed households.)

Milborne Port has had a lot of really good development but there is a limit!

Celia Hastiev