Comment or question: Q235
| General comment or question | |||
| Comment no.: | Q235 | Date: | 14/09/2014 17:39 |
| Comment by: | Justin Beveridge | Post code: | NN9 6AR |
| Following last nights presentation, it got the old grey cells going. I am still in support of development along Caldecott road on the RHS as you approach the village from Church House up to the horse chestnut tree at the junction to Bidwell Lane for the reasons outlined in my email last week and in addition it would reinforce the one sided development that is seen as a key characteristic of our two settlements. I therefore challenge the LGS category applied to the affected area of the Church House field, however my key development is set out below: Bidwell Lane is seen as a rat run? Why not enlist the two land owners that boarder the road up to the thirty mile limit and ask them to install a footpath on the church side of the tree line and in so doing provide a safe footpath for walkers without enhancing the roadway which would inevitably increase and not decrease traffic volumes. In addition provide a dedicated seated viewing area to properly appreciate the views of the listed church and take a wide enough strip of land to allow planting of a tree lined walk up to the cottages at the corner. The provision of such path would be a condition of development of the Dutchy’s proposed new houses and the development along Caldecott road at some point beyond the 20 year term of the current NDP assuming there is a concencus at that time. I think that addressees a lot of issues! |
|||