Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I wish to object to the allocation of the site of SP2 for inclusion in the local plan.

This site is preferred to be allocated as Green Belt and this is supported by the Parish Council and residents. This site is needed to mitigate for Green Belt losses elsewhere in the District.

The NPPF require that local people should be included in taking decisions in forming their surroundings and this is stated in paragraph 150. This emerging local plan has not been inclusive of our local community. The Planning department are insistent on recommending this plan despite widespread objection, environmental and flooding concerns, no sewerage capacity and an identified negative visual impact on the area. Additionally this site has had a refusal by the Planning Committee in August 2016.

I would like to object to chapter 13 for SP2. This site is not sustainable. The planning department require sustainable drainage and any development here would have an unacceptable impact on the visual aspect of the area. Unsustainable pumps and tanks are not a solution.

I would like to add my objection to chapter 13. This site has a known and identified risk of surface water flooding and the NPPF states that development should be steered away from areas at risk.

I further point out and object to Chapter 13 by noting that there is no need for the site to be allocated to meet the housing need. This site has been added at a late stage without due consideration and without reasonable alternatives. Importantly, this allocation is against the Council's evidence that large extensions in the small village of Whitwell (only 371 homes currently) would have a negative and unacceptable visual impact to the surrounding countryside.

I would also like to object to Chapter 4. This plan is not sound because the isolated villages have no facilities and very little public transport (one bus per hour and no direct links to Harpenden). The NHDC should use travel to work patterns to better understand lifestyle trends and to establish sustainability of a village.

Most fundamentally, and objecting to Chapter 4, this plan is not sound as it provides too much housing that would be of detriment to the beautiful open valley countryside that attracts walkers and cyclists to relax and enjoy.

SP2 should be removed from this plan and instead be given over to Green Belt and alternative sites that do not have such limiting constraints should be investigated.

I wish to object to the allocation of the site of SP2 for inclusion in the local plan.

This site is preferred to be allocated as Green Belt and this is supported by the Parish Council and residents. This site is needed to mitigate for Green Belt losses elsewhere in the District.

The NPPF require that local people should be included in taking decisions in forming their surroundings and this is stated in paragraph 150. This emerging local plan has not been inclusive of our local community. The Planning department are insistent on recommending this plan despite widespread objection, environmental and flooding concerns, no sewerage capacity and an identified negative visual impact on the area. Additionally this site has had a refusal by the Planning Committee in August 2016.

I would like to object to chapter 13 for SP2. This site is not sustainable. The planning department require sustainable drainage and any development here would have an unacceptable impact on the visual aspect of the area. Unsustainable pumps and tanks are not a solution.

I would like to add my objection to chapter 13. This site has a known and identified risk of surface water flooding and the NPPF states that development should be steered away from areas at risk.

I further point out and object to Chapter 13 by noting that there is no need for the site to be allocated to meet the housing need. This site has been added at a late stage without due consideration and without reasonable alternatives. Importantly, this allocation is against the Council's evidence that large extensions in the small village of Whitwell (only 371 homes currently) would have a negative and unacceptable visual impact to the surrounding countryside.

I would also like to object to Chapter 4. This plan is not sound because the isolated villages have no facilities and very little public transport (one bus per hour and no direct links to Harpenden). The NHDC should use travel to work patterns to better understand lifestyle trends and to establish sustainability of a village.

Most fundamentally, and objecting to Chapter 4, this plan is not sound as it provides too much housing that would be of detriment to the beautiful open valley countryside that attracts walkers and cyclists to relax and enjoy.

SP2 should be removed from this plan and instead be given over to Green Belt and alternative sites that do not have such limiting constraints should be investigated.