Local plan scoping consultation

Basic overall comment
I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street
due to its likely adverse impact on local infrastructure, traffic, and the character of the
surrounding area. The scale of housing proposed risks increasing congestion on already
busy local roads, placing additional pressure on schools, healthcare services, and
community facilities. The development could also result in the loss of valuable green
space and harm the rural setting that contributes to the area's identity. Furthermore,
concerns remain regarding environmental impacts, drainage capacity, and the ability of
existing infrastructure to support significant population growth sustainably.
Infrastructure and lack of public transport-based comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to the lack of infrastructure required to support substantial residential growth. Local
roads already experience congestion and would be unable to accommodate the
significant increase in traffic generated by the development. Public transport provision
in the area is limited, with insufficient bus services and a lack of realistic alternatives to
private car use for commuting, education, healthcare, and daily activities. This reliance
on cars would worsen congestion and environmental impacts. Existing schools,
healthcare services, and community facilities are also under pressure, making the
proposal unsustainable without major infrastructure investment.
Traffic based comment
I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street
due to the significant impact it is likely to have on local roads, infrastructure, and the
character of the area. The development would generate substantial additional vehicle
movements, increasing congestion on Pepper Street and surrounding routes,
particularly during peak commuting and school run periods. This could lead to longer
journey times, reduced road safety for pedestrians and cyclists, and increased air
pollution. The proposal would also place further strain on existing schools, healthcare
services, and community facilities. In addition, the loss of green space and rural
character would be detrimental to the local environment and residents' quality of life.
Residents View focused comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to its likely adverse visual impact on existing residents and the surrounding landscape.
The scale and extent of the development would significantly alter the area's rural
character, replacing open green spaces with large areas of housing. Residents are likely
to experience loss of attractive views, increased urbanisation, and a reduction in the
sense of openness that currently defines the locality. The development could also
appear intrusive within the existing landscape, adversely affecting the visual amenity of
neighbouring properties and diminishing the character and quality of the area.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to concerns about increasing urbanisation and the resulting loss of the area's rural
character. The site currently provides an important sense of openness and serves as a
clear separation between existing settlements. Development of this scale would extend
the built environment into the countryside, creating a more suburban appearance and
eroding the distinct identity of the area. The proposal would replace open land with
dense residential development, reducing green space and altering the landscape
permanently. This gradual urbanisation would have a detrimental impact on local
character, amenity, and residents' quality of life.
Environmental Concerns comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to concerns about its environmental impact. The development would result in the loss
of open green space, reducing habitat availability for wildlife and diminishing local
biodiversity. Increased housing and associated infrastructure could place additional
pressure on natural resources and contribute to greater levels of noise, light, and air
pollution. The significant increase in vehicle use is also likely to worsen carbon
emissions and affect local air quality. Furthermore, development of this scale risks
altering the natural landscape and undermining the environmental character that
makes the area valuable

Basic overall comment
I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street
due to its likely adverse impact on local infrastructure, traffic, and the character of the
surrounding area. The scale of housing proposed risks increasing congestion on already
busy local roads, placing additional pressure on schools, healthcare services, and
community facilities. The development could also result in the loss of valuable green
space and harm the rural setting that contributes to the area's identity. Furthermore,
concerns remain regarding environmental impacts, drainage capacity, and the ability of
existing infrastructure to support significant population growth sustainably.
Infrastructure and lack of public transport-based comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to the lack of infrastructure required to support substantial residential growth. Local
roads already experience congestion and would be unable to accommodate the
significant increase in traffic generated by the development. Public transport provision
in the area is limited, with insufficient bus services and a lack of realistic alternatives to
private car use for commuting, education, healthcare, and daily activities. This reliance
on cars would worsen congestion and environmental impacts. Existing schools,
healthcare services, and community facilities are also under pressure, making the
proposal unsustainable without major infrastructure investment.
Traffic based comment
I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street
due to the significant impact it is likely to have on local roads, infrastructure, and the
character of the area. The development would generate substantial additional vehicle
movements, increasing congestion on Pepper Street and surrounding routes,
particularly during peak commuting and school run periods. This could lead to longer
journey times, reduced road safety for pedestrians and cyclists, and increased air
pollution. The proposal would also place further strain on existing schools, healthcare
services, and community facilities. In addition, the loss of green space and rural
character would be detrimental to the local environment and residents' quality of life.
Residents View focused comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to its likely adverse visual impact on existing residents and the surrounding landscape.
The scale and extent of the development would significantly alter the area's rural
character, replacing open green spaces with large areas of housing. Residents are likely
to experience loss of attractive views, increased urbanisation, and a reduction in the
sense of openness that currently defines the locality. The development could also
appear intrusive within the existing landscape, adversely affecting the visual amenity of
neighbouring properties and diminishing the character and quality of the area.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to concerns about increasing urbanisation and the resulting loss of the area's rural
character. The site currently provides an important sense of openness and serves as a
clear separation between existing settlements. Development of this scale would extend
the built environment into the countryside, creating a more suburban appearance and
eroding the distinct identity of the area. The proposal would replace open land with
dense residential development, reducing green space and altering the landscape
permanently. This gradual urbanisation would have a detrimental impact on local
character, amenity, and residents' quality of life.
Environmental Concerns comment
I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due
to concerns about its environmental impact. The development would result in the loss
of open green space, reducing habitat availability for wildlife and diminishing local
biodiversity. Increased housing and associated infrastructure could place additional
pressure on natural resources and contribute to greater levels of noise, light, and air
pollution. The significant increase in vehicle use is also likely to worsen carbon
emissions and affect local air quality. Furthermore, development of this scale risks
altering the natural landscape and undermining the environmental character that
makes the area valuable

Basic overall comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing allocation on land between Ryecroft Lane and
Pavement Lane. This development would result in the loss of valuable open
countryside, eroding the rural character and setting of the area. The site is poorly served
by existing infrastructure, with local roads already experiencing congestion and limited
capacity to accommodate additional traffic. Increased housing would place further
pressure on GP services, schools, and other community facilities. The proposal could
also harm local biodiversity, wildlife habitats, and landscape quality. More sustainable
brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing greenfield land for residential
development in this location.
Infrastructure based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane due to its significant impact on local infrastructure and the
environment. The surrounding road network is already under pressure and lacks the
capacity to accommodate increased traffic, leading to congestion, road safety
concerns, noise, and air pollution. Local schools, GP surgeries, and other essential
services are stretched and would face additional demand. The development would also
result in the loss of greenfield land, harm biodiversity, fragment wildlife habitats, reduce
natural drainage, increase surface water runoff and flood risk, and weaken the rural
character of the area.
Traffic based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The local road network is narrow, poorly suited to increased traffic,
and already experiences congestion at peak times. Additional vehicles would worsen
road safety concerns for residents, cyclists, and pedestrians. Footpath provision in the
area is limited and inadequate, making safe access to local services difficult and
increasing reliance on cars. The development would generate significant additional
traffic on roads that lack the capacity to accommodate further growth. It would also
increase noise and air pollution while placing further pressure on already stretched
local infrastructure and services.
Residents View focused comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purposes of the Green Belt, replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would result in the loss of the area's distinctive rural character,
transforming an open, agricultural landscape into a suburban housing estate. The visual
impact would be considerable, with new homes, roads, lighting and infrastructure
creating an intrusive urban presence. Residents would lose valued countryside views
and a sense of openness, while the development would erode the rural setting,
landscape quality and local identity that make this area unique.
Village Character and Identity comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purpose of the Green Belt by replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would erode the area's distinctive rural character and village charm,
qualities that are highly valued by residents and contribute to the village's unique
identity. The peaceful countryside setting, attractive views, and sense of separation
from larger settlements would be lost. Housing, roads and lighting would create an
intrusive urban presence, diminishing the village's character, setting, sense of place and
long-established rural appeal.
Environmental Concerns comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The scheme would result in the unnecessary loss of greenfield
land, damaging the rural character and landscape of the area. Development would
increase surface water runoff, flood risk, noise, air pollution, and carbon emissions
from additional vehicle traffic. It could lead to the loss and fragmentation of wildlife
habitats, negatively affecting birds, mammals, pollinators, and protected species.
Mature trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity corridors may also be harmed. Furthermore,
local roads, schools, healthcare services, and other infrastructure are already under
pressure and may struggle to accommodate further growth.

Basic overall comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing allocation on land between Ryecroft Lane and
Pavement Lane. This development would result in the loss of valuable open
countryside, eroding the rural character and setting of the area. The site is poorly served
by existing infrastructure, with local roads already experiencing congestion and limited
capacity to accommodate additional traffic. Increased housing would place further
pressure on GP services, schools, and other community facilities. The proposal could
also harm local biodiversity, wildlife habitats, and landscape quality. More sustainable
brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing greenfield land for residential
development in this location.
Infrastructure based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane due to its significant impact on local infrastructure and the
environment. The surrounding road network is already under pressure and lacks the
capacity to accommodate increased traffic, leading to congestion, road safety
concerns, noise, and air pollution. Local schools, GP surgeries, and other essential
services are stretched and would face additional demand. The development would also
result in the loss of greenfield land, harm biodiversity, fragment wildlife habitats, reduce
natural drainage, increase surface water runoff and flood risk, and weaken the rural
character of the area.
Traffic based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The local road network is narrow, poorly suited to increased traffic,
and already experiences congestion at peak times. Additional vehicles would worsen
road safety concerns for residents, cyclists, and pedestrians. Footpath provision in the
area is limited and inadequate, making safe access to local services difficult and
increasing reliance on cars. The development would generate significant additional
traffic on roads that lack the capacity to accommodate further growth. It would also
increase noise and air pollution while placing further pressure on already stretched
local infrastructure and services.
Residents View focused comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purposes of the Green Belt, replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would result in the loss of the area's distinctive rural character,
transforming an open, agricultural landscape into a suburban housing estate. The visual
impact would be considerable, with new homes, roads, lighting and infrastructure
creating an intrusive urban presence. Residents would lose valued countryside views
and a sense of openness, while the development would erode the rural setting,
landscape quality and local identity that make this area unique.
Village Character and Identity comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purpose of the Green Belt by replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would erode the area's distinctive rural character and village charm,
qualities that are highly valued by residents and contribute to the village's unique
identity. The peaceful countryside setting, attractive views, and sense of separation
from larger settlements would be lost. Housing, roads and lighting would create an
intrusive urban presence, diminishing the village's character, setting, sense of place and
long-established rural appeal.
Environmental Concerns comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The scheme would result in the unnecessary loss of greenfield
land, damaging the rural character and landscape of the area. Development would
increase surface water runoff, flood risk, noise, air pollution, and carbon emissions
from additional vehicle traffic. It could lead to the loss and fragmentation of wildlife
habitats, negatively affecting birds, mammals, pollinators, and protected species.
Mature trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity corridors may also be harmed. Furthermore,
local roads, schools, healthcare services, and other infrastructure are already under
pressure and may struggle to accommodate further growth.

Basic overall comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing allocation on land between Ryecroft Lane and
Pavement Lane. This development would result in the loss of valuable open
countryside, eroding the rural character and setting of the area. The site is poorly served
by existing infrastructure, with local roads already experiencing congestion and limited
capacity to accommodate additional traffic. Increased housing would place further
pressure on GP services, schools, and other community facilities. The proposal could
also harm local biodiversity, wildlife habitats, and landscape quality. More sustainable
brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing greenfield land for residential
development in this location.
Infrastructure based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane due to its significant impact on local infrastructure and the
environment. The surrounding road network is already under pressure and lacks the
capacity to accommodate increased traffic, leading to congestion, road safety
concerns, noise, and air pollution. Local schools, GP surgeries, and other essential
services are stretched and would face additional demand. The development would also
result in the loss of greenfield land, harm biodiversity, fragment wildlife habitats, reduce
natural drainage, increase surface water runoff and flood risk, and weaken the rural
character of the area.
Traffic based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The local road network is narrow, poorly suited to increased traffic,
and already experiences congestion at peak times. Additional vehicles would worsen
road safety concerns for residents, cyclists, and pedestrians. Footpath provision in the
area is limited and inadequate, making safe access to local services difficult and
increasing reliance on cars. The development would generate significant additional
traffic on roads that lack the capacity to accommodate further growth. It would also
increase noise and air pollution while placing further pressure on already stretched
local infrastructure and services.
Residents View focused comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purposes of the Green Belt, replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would result in the loss of the area's distinctive rural character,
transforming an open, agricultural landscape into a suburban housing estate. The visual
impact would be considerable, with new homes, roads, lighting and infrastructure
creating an intrusive urban presence. Residents would lose valued countryside views
and a sense of openness, while the development would erode the rural setting,
landscape quality and local identity that make this area unique.
Village Character and Identity comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purpose of the Green Belt by replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would erode the area's distinctive rural character and village charm,
qualities that are highly valued by residents and contribute to the village's unique
identity. The peaceful countryside setting, attractive views, and sense of separation
from larger settlements would be lost. Housing, roads and lighting would create an
intrusive urban presence, diminishing the village's character, setting, sense of place and
long-established rural appeal.
Environmental Concerns comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The scheme would result in the unnecessary loss of greenfield
land, damaging the rural character and landscape of the area. Development would
increase surface water runoff, flood risk, noise, air pollution, and carbon emissions
from additional vehicle traffic. It could lead to the loss and fragmentation of wildlife
habitats, negatively affecting birds, mammals, pollinators, and protected species.
Mature trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity corridors may also be harmed. Furthermore,
local roads, schools, healthcare services, and other infrastructure are already under
pressure and may struggle to accommodate further growth.

Basic overall comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing allocation on land between Ryecroft Lane and
Pavement Lane. This development would result in the loss of valuable open
countryside, eroding the rural character and setting of the area. The site is poorly served
by existing infrastructure, with local roads already experiencing congestion and limited
capacity to accommodate additional traffic. Increased housing would place further
pressure on GP services, schools, and other community facilities. The proposal could
also harm local biodiversity, wildlife habitats, and landscape quality. More sustainable
brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing greenfield land for residential
development in this location.
Infrastructure based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane due to its significant impact on local infrastructure and the
environment. The surrounding road network is already under pressure and lacks the
capacity to accommodate increased traffic, leading to congestion, road safety
concerns, noise, and air pollution. Local schools, GP surgeries, and other essential
services are stretched and would face additional demand. The development would also
result in the loss of greenfield land, harm biodiversity, fragment wildlife habitats, reduce
natural drainage, increase surface water runoff and flood risk, and weaken the rural
character of the area.
Traffic based comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The local road network is narrow, poorly suited to increased traffic,
and already experiences congestion at peak times. Additional vehicles would worsen
road safety concerns for residents, cyclists, and pedestrians. Footpath provision in the
area is limited and inadequate, making safe access to local services difficult and
increasing reliance on cars. The development would generate significant additional
traffic on roads that lack the capacity to accommodate further growth. It would also
increase noise and air pollution while placing further pressure on already stretched
local infrastructure and services.
Residents View focused comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purposes of the Green Belt, replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would result in the loss of the area's distinctive rural character,
transforming an open, agricultural landscape into a suburban housing estate. The visual
impact would be considerable, with new homes, roads, lighting and infrastructure
creating an intrusive urban presence. Residents would lose valued countryside views
and a sense of openness, while the development would erode the rural setting,
landscape quality and local identity that make this area unique.
Village Character and Identity comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and
purpose of the Green Belt by replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built
development. It would erode the area's distinctive rural character and village charm,
qualities that are highly valued by residents and contribute to the village's unique
identity. The peaceful countryside setting, attractive views, and sense of separation
from larger settlements would be lost. Housing, roads and lighting would create an
intrusive urban presence, diminishing the village's character, setting, sense of place and
long-established rural appeal.
Environmental Concerns comment
I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane
and Pavement Lane. The scheme would result in the unnecessary loss of greenfield
land, damaging the rural character and landscape of the area. Development would
increase surface water runoff, flood risk, noise, air pollution, and carbon emissions
from additional vehicle traffic. It could lead to the loss and fragmentation of wildlife
habitats, negatively affecting birds, mammals, pollinators, and protected species.
Mature trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity corridors may also be harmed. Furthermore,
local roads, schools, healthcare services, and other infrastructure are already under
pressure and may struggle to accommodate further growth.

Basic overall comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development. The site is poorly positioned for significant residential growth due to its
proximity to the railway, which may result in increased noise, disturbance, and reduced
residential amenity for future occupants. Development would also place additional
pressure on local roads, services, and infrastructure that are already stretched. The loss
of open land would adversely affect the character of the area and could have negative
impacts on local wildlife and biodiversity. Alternative sites should be prioritised before
this location is considered for housing.
Infrastructure based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the significant pressure it would place on local infrastructure.
Existing roads in the area already experience congestion, and additional housing would
increase traffic volumes, worsening journey times and road safety concerns. Local
services, including GP surgeries, schools, and public transport, are already under strain
and may struggle to accommodate further population growth without substantial
investment. There is no clear evidence that the necessary infrastructure improvements
would be delivered alongside development. Approving this site risks overburdening
community facilities and reducing residents' quality of life.
Traffic based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the adverse impact it would have on local traffic conditions and
highway safety. The development would generate a substantial increase in vehicle
movements on roads that already experience congestion, particularly during peak
hours. Increased traffic would lead to longer delays, greater pressure on local junctions,
and reduced road safety. There are also concerns for pedestrian safety, as additional
traffic would increase risks for those walking to local amenities, schools, and public
transport stops. Without significant highway improvements, this development would
create unacceptable traffic and pedestrian safety issues.
Green Belt focused comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because it would result in the loss of valuable Green Belt land. The Green
Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the openness of the
countryside, and safeguarding the character and identity of surrounding communities.
Development of this site would erode this essential buffer, setting an unwelcome
precedent for further encroachment into rural areas. The site currently contributes to
the visual amenity of the area and provides environmental benefits, including wildlife
habitat and green space. Housing should instead be directed to previously developed
sites wherever possible.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because of the harm it would cause to the village character and local
identity. The site forms part of the rural setting that distinguishes the village from
surrounding urban areas and contributes to its unique sense of place. Development
would introduce a substantial area of housing that is out of keeping with the existing
scale and character of the settlement, resulting in a more urbanised appearance. The
loss of open countryside would diminish important views and the attractive
environment enjoyed by residents. This proposal would fundamentally alter the village’s
character and erode its distinctiveness.
Airport Proximity Concerns comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to its proximity to the airport and the resulting environmental impacts.
Future residents would be subjected to regular aircraft noise from arrivals and
departures, including early morning and late evening flights, which could disrupt sleep,
reduce quality of life, and adversely affect wellbeing. Noise levels may be particularly
noticeable during periods of high airport activity and could limit enjoyment of outdoor
spaces. In addition, aircraft emissions and airport-related traffic may worsen local air
quality, increasing exposure to pollutants that can negatively affect public health,
particularly among vulnerable groups.

Basic overall comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development. The site is poorly positioned for significant residential growth due to its
proximity to the railway, which may result in increased noise, disturbance, and reduced
residential amenity for future occupants. Development would also place additional
pressure on local roads, services, and infrastructure that are already stretched. The loss
of open land would adversely affect the character of the area and could have negative
impacts on local wildlife and biodiversity. Alternative sites should be prioritised before
this location is considered for housing.
Infrastructure based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the significant pressure it would place on local infrastructure.
Existing roads in the area already experience congestion, and additional housing would
increase traffic volumes, worsening journey times and road safety concerns. Local
services, including GP surgeries, schools, and public transport, are already under strain
and may struggle to accommodate further population growth without substantial
investment. There is no clear evidence that the necessary infrastructure improvements
would be delivered alongside development. Approving this site risks overburdening
community facilities and reducing residents' quality of life.
Traffic based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the adverse impact it would have on local traffic conditions and
highway safety. The development would generate a substantial increase in vehicle
movements on roads that already experience congestion, particularly during peak
hours. Increased traffic would lead to longer delays, greater pressure on local junctions,
and reduced road safety. There are also concerns for pedestrian safety, as additional
traffic would increase risks for those walking to local amenities, schools, and public
transport stops. Without significant highway improvements, this development would
create unacceptable traffic and pedestrian safety issues.
Green Belt focused comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because it would result in the loss of valuable Green Belt land. The Green
Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the openness of the
countryside, and safeguarding the character and identity of surrounding communities.
Development of this site would erode this essential buffer, setting an unwelcome
precedent for further encroachment into rural areas. The site currently contributes to
the visual amenity of the area and provides environmental benefits, including wildlife
habitat and green space. Housing should instead be directed to previously developed
sites wherever possible.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because of the harm it would cause to the village character and local
identity. The site forms part of the rural setting that distinguishes the village from
surrounding urban areas and contributes to its unique sense of place. Development
would introduce a substantial area of housing that is out of keeping with the existing
scale and character of the settlement, resulting in a more urbanised appearance. The
loss of open countryside would diminish important views and the attractive
environment enjoyed by residents. This proposal would fundamentally alter the village’s
character and erode its distinctiveness.
Airport Proximity Concerns comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to its proximity to the airport and the resulting environmental impacts.
Future residents would be subjected to regular aircraft noise from arrivals and
departures, including early morning and late evening flights, which could disrupt sleep,
reduce quality of life, and adversely affect wellbeing. Noise levels may be particularly
noticeable during periods of high airport activity and could limit enjoyment of outdoor
spaces. In addition, aircraft emissions and airport-related traffic may worsen local air
quality, increasing exposure to pollutants that can negatively affect public health,
particularly among vulnerable groups.

Basic overall comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development. The site is poorly positioned for significant residential growth due to its
proximity to the railway, which may result in increased noise, disturbance, and reduced
residential amenity for future occupants. Development would also place additional
pressure on local roads, services, and infrastructure that are already stretched. The loss
of open land would adversely affect the character of the area and could have negative
impacts on local wildlife and biodiversity. Alternative sites should be prioritised before
this location is considered for housing.
Infrastructure based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the significant pressure it would place on local infrastructure.
Existing roads in the area already experience congestion, and additional housing would
increase traffic volumes, worsening journey times and road safety concerns. Local
services, including GP surgeries, schools, and public transport, are already under strain
and may struggle to accommodate further population growth without substantial
investment. There is no clear evidence that the necessary infrastructure improvements
would be delivered alongside development. Approving this site risks overburdening
community facilities and reducing residents' quality of life.
Traffic based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the adverse impact it would have on local traffic conditions and
highway safety. The development would generate a substantial increase in vehicle
movements on roads that already experience congestion, particularly during peak
hours. Increased traffic would lead to longer delays, greater pressure on local junctions,
and reduced road safety. There are also concerns for pedestrian safety, as additional
traffic would increase risks for those walking to local amenities, schools, and public
transport stops. Without significant highway improvements, this development would
create unacceptable traffic and pedestrian safety issues.
Green Belt focused comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because it would result in the loss of valuable Green Belt land. The Green
Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the openness of the
countryside, and safeguarding the character and identity of surrounding communities.
Development of this site would erode this essential buffer, setting an unwelcome
precedent for further encroachment into rural areas. The site currently contributes to
the visual amenity of the area and provides environmental benefits, including wildlife
habitat and green space. Housing should instead be directed to previously developed
sites wherever possible.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because of the harm it would cause to the village character and local
identity. The site forms part of the rural setting that distinguishes the village from
surrounding urban areas and contributes to its unique sense of place. Development
would introduce a substantial area of housing that is out of keeping with the existing
scale and character of the settlement, resulting in a more urbanised appearance. The
loss of open countryside would diminish important views and the attractive
environment enjoyed by residents. This proposal would fundamentally alter the village’s
character and erode its distinctiveness.
Airport Proximity Concerns comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to its proximity to the airport and the resulting environmental impacts.
Future residents would be subjected to regular aircraft noise from arrivals and
departures, including early morning and late evening flights, which could disrupt sleep,
reduce quality of life, and adversely affect wellbeing. Noise levels may be particularly
noticeable during periods of high airport activity and could limit enjoyment of outdoor
spaces. In addition, aircraft emissions and airport-related traffic may worsen local air
quality, increasing exposure to pollutants that can negatively affect public health,
particularly among vulnerable groups.

Basic overall comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development. The site is poorly positioned for significant residential growth due to its
proximity to the railway, which may result in increased noise, disturbance, and reduced
residential amenity for future occupants. Development would also place additional
pressure on local roads, services, and infrastructure that are already stretched. The loss
of open land would adversely affect the character of the area and could have negative
impacts on local wildlife and biodiversity. Alternative sites should be prioritised before
this location is considered for housing.
Infrastructure based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the significant pressure it would place on local infrastructure.
Existing roads in the area already experience congestion, and additional housing would
increase traffic volumes, worsening journey times and road safety concerns. Local
services, including GP surgeries, schools, and public transport, are already under strain
and may struggle to accommodate further population growth without substantial
investment. There is no clear evidence that the necessary infrastructure improvements
would be delivered alongside development. Approving this site risks overburdening
community facilities and reducing residents' quality of life.
Traffic based comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to the adverse impact it would have on local traffic conditions and
highway safety. The development would generate a substantial increase in vehicle
movements on roads that already experience congestion, particularly during peak
hours. Increased traffic would lead to longer delays, greater pressure on local junctions,
and reduced road safety. There are also concerns for pedestrian safety, as additional
traffic would increase risks for those walking to local amenities, schools, and public
transport stops. Without significant highway improvements, this development would
create unacceptable traffic and pedestrian safety issues.
Green Belt focused comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because it would result in the loss of valuable Green Belt land. The Green
Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the openness of the
countryside, and safeguarding the character and identity of surrounding communities.
Development of this site would erode this essential buffer, setting an unwelcome
precedent for further encroachment into rural areas. The site currently contributes to
the visual amenity of the area and provides environmental benefits, including wildlife
habitat and green space. Housing should instead be directed to previously developed
sites wherever possible.
Village Character and Identity comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development because of the harm it would cause to the village character and local
identity. The site forms part of the rural setting that distinguishes the village from
surrounding urban areas and contributes to its unique sense of place. Development
would introduce a substantial area of housing that is out of keeping with the existing
scale and character of the settlement, resulting in a more urbanised appearance. The
loss of open countryside would diminish important views and the attractive
environment enjoyed by residents. This proposal would fundamentally alter the village’s
character and erode its distinctiveness.
Airport Proximity Concerns comment
I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing
development due to its proximity to the airport and the resulting environmental impacts.
Future residents would be subjected to regular aircraft noise from arrivals and
departures, including early morning and late evening flights, which could disrupt sleep,
reduce quality of life, and adversely affect wellbeing. Noise levels may be particularly
noticeable during periods of high airport activity and could limit enjoyment of outdoor
spaces. In addition, aircraft emissions and airport-related traffic may worsen local air
quality, increasing exposure to pollutants that can negatively affect public health,
particularly among vulnerable groups.