Object

Revised Development Strategy

Representation ID: 54890

Received: 29/07/2013

Respondent: Sue Stanton

Representation Summary:

Strongly objects to the proposal to build additional houses to the South of Hampton Magna as outlined in the RDS on the following grounds:

* against the Green Belt being further eroded by the plans outlined and proposed in the document. The village has already suffered its share of green belt erosion on all sides in recent years;

* the scale of the development is inappropriate in relation to the existing village population and infrastructure capacity. The services in the village are already fully utilised and will be negatively impacted through additional population growth. The school is already over-subscribed and is currently being extended to meet current demand;

* Of particular concern is the impact on traffic congestion. The fact that the main access to the village is via a single file traffic controlled road under the railway bridge does not appear to have been fully factored into the proposals; and

Full text:

I am writing in response to your Revised Development Strategy Document published June 2013.

I wish to register that I strongly object to the proposal to build additional houses to the South of Hampton Magna as outlined in the June 2013 Revised Development Strategy Document.

I am against the Green Belt being further eroded by the plans outlined and proposed in your document. The village has already suffered its share of green belt erosion on all sides in recent years.

I believe that the scale of the development is inappropriate in relation to the existing village population and infrastructure capacity. The services in the village are already fully utilised and will be negatively impacted through additional population growth. The school is already over-subscribed and is currently being extended to meet current demand.

Of particular concern is the impact on traffic congestion. The fact that the main access to the village is via a single file traffic controlled road under the railway bridge does not appear to have been fully factored into the proposals.

Finally, the land suggested for Gypsy sites are not appropriate - either for the traveller community or village residents. I am against the compulsory purchase of private land to facilitate Gypsy sites.