We object to this damaging build
plan had some mention of a replacement but now it seems they have no intention of honouring their promises.
Having coached at this track since its opening I have seen the gradual running down of the facilities with maintenance work avoided or skimped leading to deterioration that then is declared ‘too expensive’ to repair!!
Horsham Blue Star has been a better club for having its own track but now it will be severely affected and its youngsters will suffer. STEVE KING Rusper Road
Horsham
A request for outline planning permission has been submitted, by the Norfolk estate, to build 90 new properties on a greenfield site on the outskirts of Arundel. This plan was submitted during the run up to Christmas and during a global pandemic.
This is a very unwelcome proposal to the majority of residents local to the land, a fact that we attempted to convey to the Duke by presenting him with a petition signed by c.700 residents.
This was an unsuccessful attempt to appeal to him, personally, to reverse his decision.
There are numerous objections to this proposal and it affects many people.
Firstly, and overwhelmingly, this is a greenfield site which has been used, for many years, as agricultural land. To destroy yet more of our environment at this time of catastrophic climate change is unacceptable.
‘Climate change is an existential threat to humanity. Without global action to limit greenhouse gas emissions, the climate will change catastrophically with almost unimaginable consequences for societies across the world’.
Not my words, but a message endorsed by David Attenborough, Greta Thunburg, and many others.
The Prince of Wales, in his ‘Earth Charter’ says: “As we strive to imagine the next 800 years of human progress, the fundamental rights and value of nature must represent a step-change in our ‘future of industry’ and ‘future of economy’ approach.”
Covering greenfield land with concrete would be an action to increase greenhouse gas emissions and does not represent a ‘step-change’.
The UK government already have in place legislation to protect greenfield/green belt land. They are currently reviewing and strengthening such legislation to bring into place world leading actions to limit emissions.
The Ford Road,in Arundel, is already dangerous and congested, with one death right by the entrance to the proposed site.
Extra traffic (200+ cars from 90 homes) will cause much more disruption on the Ford Road approaching Arundel. Maxwell Road, Torton Hill Road, Tortington Lane, Priory Lane and other surrounding roads, will become more heavily used as rat runs.
The additional lighting, noise and domestic pets will completely destroy the natural wildlife in the area. No amount of bird or bat boxes will compensate.
The development is elevated and so will be visible for everyone, altering Arundel’s picturesque vista.
Flooding occurs regularly on the Ford Road and, with this natural soakaway being concreted, the flooding will be far greater.
It is outside the current boundaries of Arundel and will encourage urban sprawl, setting a precedent to destroy yet more greenfield sites.
There are no provisions for increased infrastructure to support the additional 200+ residents, such as schools and doctors.
The area is not linked to Arundel town centre and stations so residents will have to use cars adding to the traffic on Ford Road.
The density of the houses is far, far greater than any of the surrounding roads – this is not a development in keeping with Arundel’s existing residential roads and is wholly unsuitable for this area.
Objections to this damaging build must be submitted to Mr Michael Eastham, Arun District Council Planning Applications Dept, BN17 5LF, before January 28, 2021. MARK AND CAROL STEVENS High Ridge Close
Arundel