Isle of Wight MP Bob Seely has added his opposition to controversial plans for 130 new homes on greenfield land in Freshwater.
The Camp Road plans have already been met with over 80 objections from local residents. Island Roads and Badger Trust IW have also recommended the plans are refused with Hampshire Constabulary also stating they cannot support the application in its current form.
Mr Seely met with residents in Freshwater last week to listen to concerns and to share his own plans to tackle unwanted greenfield developments, which includes encouraging the Isle of Wight Council to claim that because of its exceptional circumstances, the Island should not have to meet Government-set housing targets.
He said:
“I would like to thank all the residents that shared their views on these plans.
“This is an exceptionally large development for a small rural town and one that is clearly not wanted by residents or justified by housing need.
“I am concerned about the impact of this development on existing residents, health services, infrastructure and the environment.”
Mr Seely is concerned the proposed development would cause traffic safety issues for pedestrians and other road users. He adds:
“It would cause havoc in a small town. Island Roads have recommended the application is refused and I share their concerns about significantly increased traffic volumes and the lack of thought that the developers have given to pedestrians and cyclists in the scheme.
“New housing schemes should give much greater consideration to green travel than this development has, and the safety of all residents and highway users should always come first.”
Bob has gone on to say:
“I share the concerns of Hampshire Constabulary about the opportunities the layout of the development creates for crime and disorder. It is clear that this development has not been thought through with the safety of residents in mind.
“These houses are planned on an agricultural field that is home to wildlife, and which provides a natural gap between existing houses. Residents have reported that the area is home to several bird species and bats, all of which will be disturbed by such a large development.
“Residents are also concerned about the potential risk of flooding with more houses in the area. I share their concerns and I urge the Planning Committee to carefully consider the potential flooding risks before deciding the application.”
Islanders have until Friday 24th September to comment on the application [21/01552/OUT].
Anyone can comment on a planning application up to the decision meeting but obviously it makes sense to comment as early as possible so that all the Councillors are aware of the comment before the meeting.
Anyone can comment but they ignore the comments if they have already decided they want the plans to go ahead and it won’t matter how many objections there are. Seen it time and time again. And when they talk about green fields as though it is only greenfields that should not be built on, well woodland should never be built on either and that is more important for the ecological system. Also many so called brownfield sites actually contain plants and trees beneficial to wildlife, so calling those particular sites brownfield makes them sound like an industrial wasteland when more often than not, they aren’t. NO MORE HOUSES fullstop!
Freshwater being slowly turned from a village into a town – no matter. Such developments seem such a minor matter now that Freshwater has fallen under the ‘County Lines’ drug running being carried on by youths on motorbikes each evening.
More houses means more customers for such and more disturbed individuals, leading to more crime.
Address the more important issues first !
I’d rather have a peaceful safe environment with however many houses..
This would make a great exposé on how corrupt and broken our planning system has become, a green field site is highlighted to be changed on the Island plan at the same time as a speculator (Not a developer) puts in plans for a major development, the plans do nothing to ease the housing issues as clearly they are designed around people retiring to the Island, or Air B&B holiday lets and second homes. Unfortunately or fortunately if you are going to profit from this, this can not be raised as an objection.
it would be simpler if the council stated –
“in light of the climate emergency and need to ensure that the island plays its part in providing as much greenfield and trees for C02 removal from the atmosphere, no applications for development on greenfield land will be accepted at all, ever”
that removes the planning dept need to even look at them.
Isle of wight council – you are there to ensure that the needs of the islanders are met and adhered to – we do not want greenfields built on, ever – implement our wishes or look for jobs elsewhere.
What makes the Isle of Wight special – it’s greeness, is slowly (well, not so slowly actually) being eroded away by greedy landowners and developers. Inner village green spaces (e.g. Camp Road), areas of outstanding natural beauty and just the odd horse and donkey fields (e.g. Alum Bay New Road) are dissappearing so fast that before we know it we will have allowed vast areas to be”concreted” over and lost forever. We have so many brown field sites just being sat on, presumably awaiting their values to rise, when our weak Planning Department and weak Council could put compulsory purchase orders on them insisting these are built on first.