Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031

I object to the NHDC Local Plan for the proposed building of 2,100 homes on the Green Belt surrounding Cockernhoe, Mangrove Green, Tea Green and Wandon End on the following grounds:
• because of significantly increased grants of planning permissions and public announcements, Luton will be building around 14,700 houses through to 2031. compared to 8,500 stated in the LBC Local Plan;
• an updated analysis of Luton’s housing needs, carried out by Opinion Research Services in August 2020 at the request of the NHDC Inspector, showed that the previous housing requirement of 17,800 through to 2031 would now be reduced to 16,700;
• these two facts mean the unmet housing need from Luton drops to around 2,000 (16,700 -14,700), compared to 9,300 (17,800-8,500) in the Luton Local Plan;
• the Luton Inspector - when giving the go-ahead for the Luton Local Plan in 2017 - stated the ‘best fit’ for any unmet housing need was Central Beds which has committed to provide 7,350 dwellings. In fact, it has allocated 20 sites with capacity for at least 8,850 dwellings from which to provide that help. Hundreds of those houses are already built or under construction;
• had Luton carried out its Review, these figures would have come to light formally meaning that NHDC does not need to allow development at EOL;
• all this information is known to NHDC yet it signed a Statement of Common Ground in December 2020 (ED224) with Luton, Bloor Homes and the Crown Estate sticking to the out-of-date numbers to continue justifying its EOL plans. Central Beds - the most important neighbouring local authority to Luton - was not a party to this Statement;
• there is no evidence that NHDC officials and Councillors have carried out due diligence on Luton’s housing figures.

I wish to document my concern about the proposed building of 23 new homes on this site.
I have submitted the following comments to Osprey Homes:

1) While I accept the need for development of this site with the inclusion of some 'affordable' homes, the proposed number of 23 new homes is too high for a site of approx. one hectare (2.5 acres). A rough calculation shows that the development planned represents an increase in the Preston housing stock of nearly 20% squeezed into only about 5% of the area covered by the village. This density would render the site out of line with the very special character of our historic village; it would also act as a precedent for future planning applications on remaining plots of undeveloped land in the village.
2) The number of cars likely to be introduced by purchasers of the properties has adverse implications for road safety. The Templars Lane access road comes out - in either direction - onto quiet country lanes with no pavements or street lights (though the absence of light pollution is a benefit of living here). Butchers Lane so narrow that cars cannot pass in opposite directions without one or other reversing.
3) There is insufficient parking allocated in such a confined space. Even the one-bedroom properties are likely to have two cars but the commitment to more parking spaces is limited to the larger properties. Nine visitor spaces is woefully inadequate - other visitors will therefore need to park inappropriately on access streets. On Chequers Lane, residents of the Lutyens cottages already routinely park on the lane, requiring traffic to pass with care.
4) Is there a guarantee that the designated wild flower meadow will remain as an open space in perpetuity? At present it is unclear whether this part of the site could be built on in future.
5) In environmental interests, it would be preferable for the development to include heat pumps rather than gas.