Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Mr Nigel Naden search
New searchComment
Local plan scoping consultation
Identifying and assessing sites
Representation ID: 4369
Received: 01/09/2026
Respondent: Mr Nigel Naden
Many of the sites in this area have been comprehensively reviewed in the new towns Strategic Environmental Assessment and have already been found to be strategically unsuitable for development on a number of grounds.
Furthermore, whilst I understand the need for development, every effort must be taken to protect our green belt and green spaces. We live amongst nature and green spaces are vital to local habitats and mental wellbeing.
Comment
Local plan scoping consultation
Green Belt
Representation ID: 4370
Received: 01/09/2026
Respondent: Mr Nigel Naden
Many of the sites in this area have been comprehensively reviewed in the new towns Strategic Environmental Assessment and have already been found to be strategically unsuitable for development on a number of grounds.
Furthermore, whilst I understand the need for development, every effort must be taken to protect our green belt and green spaces. We live amongst nature and green spaces are vital to local habitats and mental wellbeing.
Comment
Local plan scoping consultation
Green Belt
Representation ID: 4371
Received: 01/09/2026
Respondent: Mr Nigel Naden
Please do not use Grey belt as a way of distroying greenbelt
Comment
Local plan scoping consultation
Development in the countryside
Representation ID: 4372
Received: 01/09/2026
Respondent: Mr Nigel Naden
Many of the sites in this area have been comprehensively reviewed in the new towns Strategic Environmental Assessment and have already been found to be strategically unsuitable for development on a number of grounds.
Comment
Local plan scoping consultation
Affordable housing
Representation ID: 4375
Received: 01/09/2026
Respondent: Mr Nigel Naden
"National policy changes place greater emphasis on delivering affordable housing, particularly those for social rent, and may require higher levels of affordable housing on sites released from the Green Belt" How utterly ridiculous. By nature, more affordable developments require reduced construction costs. Building on greenbelt, which is typically remote and underdeveloped, entails not only higher infrastructure costs but also higher living costs for residents. Surely, the use of brownfield sites makes greater sense for low-cost development.