Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I object strongly to the above Local Plan. I am particularly concerned about sites EL1, EL2 and EL3 (PA 16/02014/1 is included within this plan and is under consideration at the moment). The Local Plan will affect various settlements including Cockernhoe, Tea Green and Mangrove, Brick Kiln Lane, Putteridgebury, Wandon End, and Wigmore area.

My objections commence as follows -
1. INFRASTRUCTURE - UNABLE TO COPE
Roads within the given areas are under extreme strain already. Gridlock is common! Indeed there are roads used in the plan which are nothing more than narrow lanes! Speed, when drivers are under pressure due to frustration will cause fatalities. Traffic studies appertaining to this plan have proven to be totally inadequate. In the light of this, re-evaluation with professional, FAIR submission of figures is needed and is requested.

Correct Government controlled POLLUTION Studies are also requested for health safety of residents in the area. Correct figures can surely only be when the current EXPANSION of LONDON LUTON AIRPORT is complete? It is inevitable that with this expansion comes NEVER ENDING CONGESTION AND ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, POLLUTION AND ITS EFFECTS, plus NOISE!!! All on the doorstep of this NHDC Local Plan!
Theory and words are all too easy from our planners - only practice brings forth the difficulties, which in this case will be all too late!

1A. INFRASTRUCTURE - MEDICAL, EMERGENCY SERVICES, POLICING, SCHOOLS All the above are already absolutely under strain to this side of Luton. Can we be assured of extra adequate emergency and policing to cover the extra needs? Doctor's surgeries are a necessity and will be therefore needed for a large proportion of extra patients within the area - where will they register? Residents are completely frustrated at present with the inability and waiting to see their doctor when required.

SCHOOLS
Again, presently totally oversubscribed and under strain. Planners mention Cockernhoe, Someries and Wigmore Primaries. This must be a joke! Education for our children is so important. It is debatable how additional numbers can possibly be dealt with and be beneficial, and not detrimental and difficult to all concerned.

SHOPS
Consumers need adequate provision on a daily basis. This matter is not adequately addressed within the Local Plan. (The mention of a tiny, unattractive parade of a few shops situated in West Way, which is outside the suggested distance for shopping facilities, is laughable!)


2. LOSS OF GREENBELT
Land adjoins an AONB, so there are conservation issues - impact on wildlife and habitats, flora, and archaeological heritage. These are all paramount! Building on land adjoining an AONB is not advisable, as per government guidelines. It will destroy the visual and natural protected benefits within its boundaries.

Loss of this GREENBELT land should not be dismissed lightly. It's health and outside activity benefits for all in the area and beyond should not be taken away! (Health problems following sedentary lifestyle being, another government issue at present).

The villages nearby will lose their identities becoming part of Luton's urban sprawl. The government clearly does not advise this and states just that


3. CURRENT EXPANSION OF LONDON LUTON AIRPORT The additional NOISE, POLLUTION and CONGESTION increase is already underway! The final figures on all the mentioned will not be truly known u till completion. It is ludicrous and insane to even consider additional building to the East of Luton under these circumstances.

Another concern is the SUDS which are included in the NHDC Local Plan. There are rules in place to prevent BIRDSTRIKE where an airport is in existence. The distance of these SUDS suggested in proximity to an airport is 13 km. This Local Plan places SUDS on land, some of which is arable, (migration etc) and of which is very near to London Luton Airport. Who is responsible should BIRDSTRIKE occur?


4. BROWNFIELD SITES SITUATED IN LUTON
The Government states that brownfield sites should always initially be used before GREENBELT and green spaces. There are enough brownfield sites within Luton's OWN boundaries and they should be used before destruction of 'once gone, never to return ancient GREENBELT'! We SHOULD NOT and DONOT NEED this land outside of our own Luton boundaries! LBC should not and does not need to have accepted such a proposal!

The calculation of the number of New Homes needed within the area of Luton is questionable. LBC and NHDC should surely consider BREXIT? In the case of LBC it has always been debatable, without immigrants leaving. Are the numbers now reliable and correct?

I hope you are able to consider these points when dealing with the above NHDC Local Plan 2011 - 2031.

I want to participate in the Examination Stages for NHDC Local Plan 2011-2031, and wish to change parts of the Plan.