Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 3733

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The consultation should provide greater clarity about how responses will be used to shape the new Local Plan, particularly in relation to the scale and location of future development. Please explain how residents’ views on protecting existing communities, green spaces, agricultural land, wildlife and the natural environment will be balanced against future housing and infrastructure requirements. It would also be helpful to explain when and how residents will be able to suggest or challenge potential development sites, given that sites cannot be submitted at this stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 3735

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

Please ensure that the scoping consultation is accessible to residents who may not be able to engage effectively with a lengthy online document. The council should provide clear, plain-English explanations of the key issues, sufficient time for residents to consider the proposals, and accessible opportunities to participate in person as well as online. Please also confirm how feedback from local communities, including parish and town councils, will be recorded, considered and reflected in the development of the new Local Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 3736

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

Please confirm that all responses received by email and post will be given the same weight and consideration as responses submitted through the online consultation portal. The preference for online responses should not disadvantage residents who are unable or unwilling to use the portal. Please also explain how responses will be recorded, published and used to inform the next stages of plan preparation, including how individual comments will be acknowledged and how respondents will be able to see how their views have been considered.

Comment

Representation ID: 3741

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The scope of the Local Plan should explicitly recognise the protection of existing communities, agricultural land, biodiversity, wildlife and valued landscapes as strategic priorities, rather than focusing primarily on accommodating growth. The plan should also consider the cumulative impact of development on existing communities, including pressure on roads, schools, healthcare, drainage and other local infrastructure. Please clarify how the Council intends to balance the need for new development with protecting the character, environmental quality and long-term sustainability of existing settlements.

Comment

Representation ID: 3745

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The increased housing requirement of 2,530 homes per year should not be treated as an automatic target. The Local Plan should demonstrate that this level of growth is deliverable and sustainable, considering capacity of roads, schools, healthcare, water and drainage infrastructure. Development should prioritise suitable brownfield land and sustainable locations before greenfield and agricultural land. The Council should also assess the cumulative impact of development on existing communities, biodiversity, wildlife and landscape, and clearly explain how significant environmental or community harm will be avoided, mitigated or justified

Comment

Representation ID: 3747

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

Please provide greater transparency about the evidence gathered through the previous calls for sites, including how submitted sites will be assessed and when the results will be made publicly available. The Council should also ensure that transport, infrastructure, environmental and Green Belt evidence is sufficiently detailed and up to date before decisions are made on the spatial strategy. Given the 30-month timetable, please explain how there will be adequate opportunity for meaningful community scrutiny at each stage and how responses will influence the emerging plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 3750

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

Please clarify what is meant by a “positive approach to delivering growth” and ensure this does not result in growth being prioritised over environmental protection or the needs of existing communities. The Local Plan should demonstrate that sustainable development means development that is genuinely sustainable, taking account of infrastructure capacity, climate change, biodiversity, wildlife, agricultural land, landscape and community wellbeing, as well as housing and economic needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 3751

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The Council should not assume that the 2,530 homes per year figure automatically represents a deliverable or sustainable housing requirement. The significant increase should be subject to robust assessment of infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, brownfield availability and actual housing delivery rates. Please explain what evidence will be used to determine whether this level of growth is realistic and how the Council will prevent short-term housing pressures from overriding the protection of Green Belt, agricultural land, wildlife, landscape and existing communities.

Comment

Representation ID: 3755

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The updated Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment should be completed and published before decisions are made on site allocations. The assessment should use robust, current evidence to establish the genuine level and location of need, while considering infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, landscape, Green Belt and the impact on existing communities. Please explain how communities will be consulted on any proposed sites and how the Council will ensure that identified need is met in suitable, sustainable locations.

Comment

Representation ID: 3756

Received: 31/08/2026

Respondent: Dr Gemma Jackson

The Local Plan should prioritise brownfield and previously developed land before considering Green Belt release. Any proposed Green Belt boundary changes or use of “grey belt” land should be based on transparent, site-specific evidence and full assessment of cumulative impacts on wildlife, biodiversity, landscape, agriculture, infrastructure and existing communities. Please clearly identify what “other reasonable options” have been considered and demonstrate why Green Belt release is necessary, rather than assuming grey belt land should be developed simply because it meets the definition.