Respondent name
Selina Gribben
Responses
Respondent Type
Resident
Policy Name/Part of plan
GB1
Legally Compliant
No
Sound
No
Compliant with the Duty to Co-operate
No
Oral Examination
No
Why you consider the Draft Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate

Releasing greenfield in this volume means that developers are likely to prioritise over brownfield sites
I don?t believe that the likely decline in requirements for office space given the move to working from home has been considered as a potential option
There hasn?t been enough consideration given to alternatives to using greenfield sites
The damage done to the character of Wright?s green will be significant
There are no plans for managing the volume of traffic generated from these areas
There is no justification for predicted growth
Air quality in the the region will be significantly impacted
There is a lack of rail station, hospital and adequate leisure facilities in the area as is meaning increased commuting
The use of green belt should be an absolute last resort given its irreversible nature.
The existing green belt boundary was confirmed only 7 years ago and was supposed to be good for 20 years.

Modification if applicable

Green Belt should be removed from the plan all together and all other avenues developed first.

Independent contractors should be brought in to assess plans - there are far too many conflicts of interests for the people making these decisions