Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

The development of these sites would have a severe negative impact on the surrounding areas in many ways. I have serious concerns regarding the road infrastructure and its ability to cope with such an increase in traffic. The roads from the proposed development site to the M1 are a bottle neck in the area with no alternative routes to the motorway, the same can be said for access to the A505 along Wigmore Lane as the tight country lanes are woefully inadequate in supporting any amount of traffic to these main roads. An increase in traffic would push more cars past schools in the area as people utilise "rat runs" to avoid the arterial roads to the motorway and A505.

The proposed developments would add further strain to many other amenities and public services in the area, these issues include local doctor surgeries where making an appointment is near on impossible without a two week wait. Where appointments can be made on the day they become fully booked within ten minutes of the phone lines being opened at 8:00 a.m. The only large supermarket area(ASDA) is completely saturated with customers at the weekends and evenings with it being impossible to get parked most weekends at peak times. The area simply cannot cope with developments of this size and nature.

The proposed developments go against the National Planning Policy Framework(NPPF), the proposed developments fall short of items listed in sub paragraph 80 within section 9 "Protecting green belt" of the NPPF:
"80. Green Belt serves five purposes:
●to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
●to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
●to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
●to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land."
I believe the proposal contravenes this government guidance. The NPPF clearly states that green belt should not be built on except in very special circumstances, unmet housing needs are stated as being unlikely to satisfy the "very special circumstances" test to allow development on green belt land.
This area is very important to the local community, it serves as an open space retreat from the industrialised sprawl of Luton, people walk their dogs, go running, cycling, take their children through the fields and footpaths exploring. To even consider wiping out this immediate area and to swallow up mangrove and Cockernhoe village in the process baffles me.

The development of these sites would have a severe negative impact on the surrounding areas in many ways. I have serious concerns regarding the road infrastructure and its ability to cope with such an increase in traffic. The roads from the proposed development site to the M1 are a bottle neck in the area with no alternative routes to the motorway, the same can be said for access to the A505 along Wigmore Lane as the tight country lanes are woefully inadequate in supporting any amount of traffic to these main roads. An increase in traffic would push more cars past schools in the area as people utilise "rat runs" to avoid the arterial roads to the motorway and A505.

The proposed developments would add further strain to many other amenities and public services in the area, these issues include local doctor surgeries where making an appointment is near on impossible without a two week wait. Where appointments can be made on the day they become fully booked within ten minutes of the phone lines being opened at 8:00 a.m. The only large supermarket area(ASDA) is completely saturated with customers at the weekends and evenings with it being impossible to get parked most weekends at peak times. The area simply cannot cope with developments of this size and nature.

The proposed developments go against the National Planning Policy Framework(NPPF), the proposed developments fall short of items listed in sub paragraph 80 within section 9 "Protecting green belt" of the NPPF:
"80. Green Belt serves five purposes:
●to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
●to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
●to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
●to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land."
I believe the proposal contravenes this government guidance. The NPPF clearly states that green belt should not be built on except in very special circumstances, unmet housing needs are stated as being unlikely to satisfy the "very special circumstances" test to allow development on green belt land.
This area is very important to the local community, it serves as an open space retreat from the industrialised sprawl of Luton, people walk their dogs, go running, cycling, take their children through the fields and footpaths exploring. To even consider wiping out this immediate area and to swallow up mangrove and Cockernhoe village in the process baffles me.