BASE HEADER

No

ID sylw: 106041

Derbyniwyd: 23/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Alex Johnson

I strongly object to the inclusion of Site 160 (land off Hockley Road, Hatton Green, CV35 7LA) which is part of the B1 category of the SWLP.

This plan will create a highly undesirable urban sprawl, have a significant environmental impact, is unsuitable for development for several reasons and is in conflict with established planning principles:

Urban Sprawl / Green Belt Integrity
The development of Site 160 connects disparate areas and undermines the Green Belt's purpose. It would contravene the Green Belt’s fundamental
aim to prevent unrestricted urban growth and safeguard the countryside.

Environmental Concerns & Priority 3 Land
There is ancient woodland on Site 160 and I am particularly concerned about the impact on that. Ancient woodlands are habitats that cannot be replaced once lost andthat support biodiversity and numerous ecosystems. Building around these areas causes damage that can't be reversed and is in conflict with national and local planning policies prioritising their protection. Moreover, this site is designated as Priority 3 land, which indicates it's not suitable for development and further reinforces the argument against its inclusion in the Local Plan.

Mineral Safeguarding / Flood Risk
The HELAA assessment indicates that 81% of Site 160 falls within a Mineral Safeguarding Area, which raises serious concerns about potential conflicts between development and mineral extraction, as well as the potential for land instability and contamination. The site's proximity to Flood Zone 2 and 3 and its susceptibility to surface water flooding also pose significant
risks to future residents and infrastructure

Inconsistent Site Categorisation
The inclusion of Site 160 in the B1 category is inconsistent with the HELAA findings, as the site's numerous constraints - including being located within a Mineral Safeguarding Area and susceptibility to flooding - suggest that it is not suitable for development. Therefore it is hard not to wonder whether the selection process of the site been transparent and objective.

Conflict with Sustainable Development Principles
Finally, the development of Site 160 would be inconsistent with sustainable development principles. Building here would harm the environment and fail to promote a sense of place and community. Please reconsider the inclusion of Site 160 in the B1 category prioritize the protection of our Green Belt, ancient woodlands, and the principles of sustainable development.