BASE HEADER

A significant proporation of the proposals in the Local Plan run counter to the guidance in the NPPF.
The majority of the mismatch lies in the Section 9 - The Green Belt. The following issues are relevant:
Para 80 bullet point 1 - green belt serves to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas;
Para 80 bullet point 2 - green belt serves to assist ion safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
Para 80 bullet point 4 - (especially relevant at the north side of Warwick) - green belt serves to preserve the special character of historic towns;
Para 83 - green belt should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. A model based on data which the WDC has accepted at public meetings should be revisited can not possibly result in 'exceptional circumstances';
Para 87 - Inappropriate development is by definition harmful.
The NPPF also gives guidelines that brown and white field sites should be used ahead of green belt land. Why has this not been done? I have attended 3 public meetings and have not yet been convinced by the reponses to this question.