|
 |
| Bury Free Press, 17 January 2006 |
|
| Villagers have spoken of their disbelief after a council approved a number of new homes on a site identified as a flood risk. |
|
|
|
| Under the plans, three two-storey houses will be built near Church Green Lane, in Wattisfield, despite a raft of objections from local residents. |
|
|
|
| Almost 60 people signed a petition opposing the project, pointing to a history of flooding and a dangerous access point to the site. |
|
|
|
| But councillors ignored these pleas when they gave the scheme the green light last Monday - much to the annoyance of those leading the protest. |
|
|
|
| Speaking after the decision, resident Ann Telford said: "We have tried to fight this decision all the way and we simply cannot believe what the council has done. |
|
|
|
| "This site is renowned as a flood risk - nine out of 19 insurers told me they were not even prepared to offer a quote - so how can it be considered a sustainable site?" |
|
|
|
| Along with the loss of 15 trees, residents also raised concerns over access to the site, which is via an old track that it is claimed is not wide enough for two cars to pass. |
|
|
|
| "The footpath is used by children, dog-walkers and villagers as a popular cut-through, yet these plans could see up to another 12 cars using it," said Mrs Telford. |
|
|
|
| "And access from the site is on a blind corner, which is an accident waiting to happen. |
|
|
|
| "It just seems as though the whole scheme has been decided upon on a nod and a wink." |
|
|
|
| Wattisfield Parish Council, the Ramblers Association, Environment Agency and David Ruffley, MP for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, all objected to the plans. |
|
|
|
| But councillors on Mid Suffolk District Council's northern area planning committee approved the plans, despite refusing a similar scheme in September last year. |
|
|
|
| Speaking at the meeting, Cllr Alec Russell said: "I am not at all happy with this application - very little has changed from the plans we turned down and the flood risk will not go away." |
|
|
|
| However, members were unable to take the issue of flooding into account as outline planning permission for the site had already been granted in 2003, before the flood risk was known. |
|
|
|
|
|
