LETTER: Negative impacts of Ifield plan

Your letters
Your letters

The fact of Horsham District Council’s unequivocal rejection of the monstrous ‘West of Ifield’ development proposal (“Council should seize opportunity”, WSCT Letters, September 5, 2013), is clearly difficult for a coastal resident to accept.

Angmering’s Stephen G. Coppen has a problem in facing certain facts; clearly laid out in “Horsham District Planning Framework - Interim Sustainability Appraisal Environmental Report of the Preferred Strategy - August 2013” (copy in Horsham Library):

Fact 1 - Leisure & Recreation: Negative Impact

Fact 2 - Biodiversity: Negative Impact

Fact 3 - Landscape: Negative Impact

Fact 4 - Archaeology & Cultural: Negative Impact

Fact 5 - Environmental Quality: Negative Impact

Fact 6 - Climate Change & Resources: Negative Impact

Fact 7 - Flooding: Smaller Negative Impact

Fact 8 - Drainage: Smaller Negative Impact

Fact 9 - Waste: Likely Negative Impact

Fact 10 - Transport: Negative Impact

Richard W. Symonds MCIPD

The Ifield Society

Lavington Close, Ifield