From: Julie Shea Sent: 16 June 2008 14:55 To: DC Secretaries Subject: FW: PublicAccess for Planning - Application Comments (08/01187/F) -----Original Message----- From: publicaccess@cherwell-dc.gov.uk [mailto:publicaccess@cherwell-dc.gov.uk] Sent: 14 June 2008 22:50 To: Public Access DC Comments Subject: PublicAccess for Planning - Application Comments (08/01187/F) PublicAccess for Planning - Application Comments (08/01187/F) "Charles and Judith Pettit" has used the PublicAccess for Planning website to submit their comments on a Planning Application. You have received this message because you are the Case Officer for this application or because this is a designated mailbox for PublicAccess comments submissions. Comments were submitted at 14/06/2008 22:49:43 Application Summary ------------------- Application Number: 08/01187/F Address: OS Parcel 9078 And 9975 Adjoining Stocking Lane And North Of Rattlecombe Road Stocking Lane Shenington Oxfordshire Proposal: Change of use of land from Agricultural to Equestrian use to include the creation of new access onto Rattlecombe Road Case Officer: Jane Dunkin Customer Details ---------------- Name: Charles and Judith Pettit Address: Leys View Cottage Shenington Banbury Oxon Postcode: OX15 6LZ Comments -------- Submission Type: Customer objects to the Planning Application. Comments: Dear Ms Dunkin, Thank you for writing to alert us the owners of a neighbouring property to this planning application (08/01187/F). Many of the comments we made on the previous application for a change to equestrian use on this site still apply (08/00119/F). However, as this is technically a completely new submission, we will cover these, as well as the significant additional concerns raised by the application in its revised form. As the land in question is almost opposite the front of our house, we are of course concerned both about both any adverse effect on our immediate environment, and the wider effect on the village as a whole. Clearly a field with equestrian buildings, jumps, horse boxes and so on will give the inhabitants of our house and neighbouring houses in Rattlecombe Road a less attractive view than the current one over open agricultural fields, and it is difficult to believe that in practice the area would not became cluttered with all sorts of associated items in the course of time. The fact that this area is high land will clearly increase the adverse effect on the village as a whole as it will be visible from large parts of the village. Our concerns have been greatly increased by the main feature that distinguishes this plan from its predecessor: the moving of the entrance from Stocking Lane to Rattlecombe Road. Stocking Lane may be narrow, but with the plethora of new building there (health centre, school, new houses) at least the volume of traffic means that vehicles drive slowly, and at least there is now a pavement for most of its length. Moving the entrance to Rattlecombe Road appears to us a major mistake, and we regard with considerable surprise the approval apparently given by the Highway Authority. The proposed new entrance is almost opposite the entrance to The Level, and at a point near the end of the village where observation suggests that many vehicles entering the village are only just starting to slow down, and where there is very poor visibility, as it is close to a corner. Horse boxes are cumbersome and unwieldy, and are bound to take some time to manoeuvre into the proposed field entrance. For this to happen at a point with restricted visibility, where traffic is going fairly fast, and almost opposite another turning, seems to us to create a significant risk of accidents. We note that a survey of traffic speed is referred to in the application. We have no personal knowledge of any such survey, and would like to know more about it. If, as others have indicated, the survey was taken at The Green, that it is clearly inapplicable to the point in question, which is at a quite different spot on the road where traffic travels faster. It must also be noted that the level of the field is well above that of the road. Drivers of vehicles exiting the field, plus riders in that part of the field, will therefore have a grandstand view into the windows of the houses opposite, infringing their privacy. With an entrance into Stocking Lane this would have been less of an issue, since traffic movements would have been at the far end of the facility, and only a small proportion of the riding would have been near Rattlecombe Road. The move of the entrance to Rattlecombe Road will inevitably move the focus of the facility, and all vehicle movements, to the point immediately opposite, and looking down on, people's houses. When we wrote about the previous application, we stated that the additional information from the applicants submitted late in the process had reduced the level of concern we felt when receiving the original letter and checking the details on your website, since it made clear that the proposal was only for 3-4 horses, with vehicle movements being restricted to one private car daily. We note that this has not been stated in the new application. We hope that the application is still for a facility of this small scale. If however, the proposal is for a larger, more commercial-scale facility, with large numbers of vehicle movements, and the collection and return of horse from events etc., then our concerns would be increased greatly. It is essential that this point is clarified. On the website there is a copy of the poster produced to be placed on site. We are concerned to find that no such poster is displayed on the Rattlecombe Road frontage of this proposed facility. We have been alerted to the application by your letter. How are the many village people who walk or drive along Rattlecombe Road supposed to find about this planning application if not alerted by a poster at one of the two main frontages, and indeed at the proposed new entrance? We would suggest that a poster is installed along Rattlecombe Road, and the closing date for comments extended. As long-standing local residents we are of course well aware of the number of development proposals that have been submitted over many years for this site, which previously have been for varying numbers of houses to be built, and which included a proposed entrance in just the spot now proposed for this equestrian facility. While this application is not inappropriate to the extent that a housing development would be, it would still mean deterioration in the local environment, and would in our view create a major traffic hazard if the entrance were to be into Rattlecombe Road. We therefore object to this application. We would further urge that, if planning permission is granted, the position of the entrance is re-considered, and that any permission is given only on the basis that if at any time the equestrian facility should come to an end, the land would have to revert to agricultural use, so that the change from agricultural use to equestrian use could not be used as a means of more easily obtaining planning permission in the future for a residential development, with an inappropriate entrance ready-made. Yours sincerely, Charles and Judith Pettit PublicAccess for Planning. (c) CAPS Solutions Ltd.