Comment

Representation ID: 10569

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Dave Jackson

I agree that a strategic plan is needed but the balance between a 15 year + view of housing need completely outweighs the lost forever decisions that impact the greenbelt.
The paper appears to decide that greenbelt must be sacrificed and has allocated new build in these areas already. I object to this.
I think a rolling wave approach should be introduced with reviews done every 5 years. Only in the last period should green belt be considered for development and only if extreme conditions persist and are forecast to further persist. I believe that many more brownfield sites will become available in the first 10 years and must be prioritised for redevelopment.
The paper describes keeping the new green belt permanent, but how can this be trusted when decisions have already been made to sacrifice it ?
I use the greenbelt regularly for recreation, walking, running, cycling or just sitting and enjoying the views, its one of the reasons I live in the area and would seriously consider moving away if it were reduced.
The use of greenbelt is an easy way out and the drive for economic growth is outweighing the benefit of living close to the green belt.

Green belt not to be built in in first 10 years and must be reassessed in the period 10-15 years.