Comment

Representation ID: 297

Received: 30/06/2021

Respondent: Mr Brian Falk

Site SN3019SL: (12 dwellings) It is vital this site should not be developed, but form part of the current and hopefully to be protected open landscape between cluster 1 and 2. The fact that a pavement exists is no reason to justify new housing. It is used twice daily for delivery and collection of children to the school. Adding housing would create considerable traffic and personnel danger to pedestrians and children. A more effective minor improvement would be to provide a parking road behind the pavement which would provide a safer delivery pattern and keep School Road free of parked cars. But the main reason for rejecting this site is that it adds toi ribbon development.
Sites SN2079 and 2054: Agreed that these are unsuitable for development as being an essential part of the open landscape and should be protected as such. Sit SN2079 is important to keep free of development as it provides an open vista of landscape from the war memorial.
Sites SN3010 and SN 3036 and SN 3038 are already in employment uses and should be retained as such.
Site SN3038 (in Roydon) may later be added to the employment zone, but at this stage it is premature to consider any development.
SN4026, SN3023SL are unsuitable as both are beyond the settlement boundary
SN4033 has difficult access and adverse landscape impact
Site SN 4037: only to be included if absolutely essential and justified by local housing need as, although development in depth, it is also an extension of ribbon development along Fersfield Road. But preferable if this site were not to be developed