As mentioned above I do not know whether the local plan is legally sound etc as I do not have a legal background so I am not able to provide any response as to how to make the local plan legally compliant or sound.

I would however, like to discuss the issue for which I have raised this representation.
There are a number of reasons why the SE Employment Area should be removed from the plan:
1. Traffic - development of this location will put junction 20 of the M6 under enormous strain. This junction is already congested, especially at rush hours. Adding 100s of additional HDVs and many more cars onto this already strained part of the network would cause these roads to grind to a halt.
2. Air Quality - this area (the M6 and M56 corridors) are designated as an Air Quality Management Area. This increase in traffic volumes will result in increased emissions and therefore increase concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in this sensitive location. The additional vehicles will also increase pollution levels at nearby sensitive receptors (houses, schools and nurserys) with the potential for associated health impacts for Residents.
3. Green belt - the loss of this green belt would be detrimental to the local area and this proposal seems as though it is a sly way of getting the Six 56 development to be granted permission (a development by Langtree which could be considered to be a conflict of interest for WBC). It just seems as though WBC are trying to remove the green belt status of this land because the Six 56 development (and not forgetting the recently rejected Eddie Stobarts application) are not able to provide good enough justification to allow them to be built upon green belt, so WBC are proposing to remove the green belt status purely to allow these developments to go ahead without the green belt hurdle.