Local plan scoping consultation

I wish to strongly object to the proposed allocation of land for 130+ new homes on Green Belt land.
While I recognise the need for appropriate housing development, this should not come at the expense of valuable Green Belt land, established wildlife habitats, protected trees and the character of the local area. The scale of the proposed development raises significant concerns about whether this is genuinely sustainable development or simply an expansion of the urban area into countryside.
Environmental and ecological concerns
The proposed site is particularly environmentally sensitive. It is home to a range of wildlife, including great crested newts, deer and barn owls, all of which should be given proper consideration before any decision is made to develop the land.
There are also Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) in the area, demonstrating that trees within and around the site are considered to have significant amenity and/or environmental value. These protected trees and the wider established tree cover should be properly surveyed and protected. Development on this scale could result in the loss or damage of trees, root systems and established habitats, even where trees themselves are not directly removed.
The presence of protected species, TPOs and established wildlife habitats makes it essential that comprehensive, up-to-date and independent ecological and arboricultural surveys are undertaken before this land is considered suitable for such a substantial development.
Flooding and the high water table
There are also significant concerns regarding the high water table on the site.
Building more than 130 properties in an area with existing drainage constraints could increase surface-water runoff and the risk of flooding, potentially affecting both the development itself and neighbouring properties.
The Council should require robust evidence demonstrating that the development would not worsen existing drainage or flood-risk problems. This should include consideration of the cumulative impact of additional development in the surrounding area, rather than assessing this proposal in isolation.
Brownfield land should be prioritised
Before releasing Green Belt land for development, the Council should demonstrate that all reasonable opportunities for brownfield development, regeneration and the reuse of previously developed land have been fully explored.
Green Belt should not be treated as an easy solution to housing targets simply because it is available. Once countryside is built upon, it is permanently lost. The Council has a responsibility to protect the environment and the character of existing communities while meeting housing needs in an appropriate and sustainable way.
The impact of the A555 and urban sprawl
I am also concerned about the way development appears to be progressing around the A555.
The A555 was originally promoted with assurances that it would not simply encourage or facilitate urban sprawl. However, the continued proposal of substantial housing developments around the corridor gives the impression that exactly this is now happening.
There needs to be proper consideration of the cumulative impact of these developments. It is not sufficient to assess each housing proposal in isolation. The Council should consider how successive developments are changing the character of the area, increasing traffic, putting pressure on infrastructure and services, and gradually extending the urban footprint into what was previously open countryside.
If Green Belt land continues to be released for large housing developments along this corridor, it is difficult to see how this can be reconciled with the original intention of preventing the A555 from becoming a catalyst for urban sprawl.
Infrastructure and sustainability
A development of 130+ homes would inevitably place additional pressure on local roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, public transport and other services.
The Council should demonstrate that the necessary infrastructure can genuinely accommodate this level of additional development before allocating the site.
Sustainability should mean more than simply being able to reach a major road. It should mean creating communities in locations where infrastructure, services, transport, drainage and the environment can support the additional population without causing unacceptable harm.
Laura Hardman