Object

Representation ID: 67381

Received: 11/12/2014

Respondent: Sara Bennett

Having attended a drop-in clinic it felt like the Council were trying to keep it as low key as possible. Both sessions were planned within working hours making it impossible for a large proportion of the local residents to attend. The event was not signposted, and information boards with standard information regarding the proposal were not available. I attended organised meeting where representatives from the council were invited to attend but declined. In short, I do not believe the consultation process has been meaningful.
Not moral to add more residents nearer to the smells from the sewage works. If mitigation is possible to reduce the effects of the sewage works what is the cost associated with this and who will pay
Site is currently only accessible via a small farm track unsuitable for the purposes of these residents and the inevitable traffic they will bring.
The proposed site is currently also only accessible via a very dangerous bend; adding yet more traffic to this bend, turning vehicles, poses a serious danger to drivers
Tournament Fields, remains both undeveloped and unoccupied. Gypsy and Traveller site will jeopardise future employment opportunities.
The site is on a designated flood plain. What cost is associated with mitigating this risk and who will fund this? Putting families in an area between a river and the M40 is immoral.
Impact on local facilities - schools, doctors etc. Aware of existing pressure on local schools and doctors that Chase Meadow has brought.