I am the new Chairman of the Leatherhead and District Countryside Protection Society. Our stance on the Green Belt sites up for grabs at the moment is as follows: The primary objective of the Leatherhead and District Countryside Protection Society is ‘To preserve from injury and disfigurement the rural scenery… and in particular to defend, sustain and protect from development the Metropolitan Green Belt.’ We are therefore extremely concerned about, and must object to, any loss of Green Belt designation and any potential development threat to the Green Belt sites in Mole Valley currently the subjects of the MVDC Housing and Traveller Sites Plan: Consultation 2014. Removal from the Green Belt of any one of the sites proposed would undermine the foresight and careful decisions of our predecessors. A key characteristic of the Green Belt is its permanence, and a dangerous precedent would be set by eroding it: “The NPPF makes clear that one of the most important characteristics of the Green Belt should be its permanence. Tinkering with the Green Belt boundaries unnecessarily creates the impression in the minds of developers that anything might be up for grabs.” London Green Belt Council, 31st January 2014 The Coalition government elected in May 2010 made clear its commitment to maintain the Green Belt, and this commitment should be honoured. The packed meetings across the District in the last few weeks are indicative of the strength of local opinion. People clearly value the remaining green spaces of Mole Valley greatly, on many counts, and feel that these precious areas are already under strain from surrounding over-development and an increasing population; concern is expressed for the pressure on essential infrastructure and services, and, particularly where large sites are under review for high-density dwellings, for the impact on rainwater drainage in the light of recent widespread flooding in Mole Valley. We acknowledge the pressure that Mole Valley District Council is under to provide set numbers of homes by set dates. However, that quotas and deadlines exist begs the question: What happens when the next quota and deadline are set in a few years’ time? Will the sites saved in this round be the first to go next time, thus condemning the District to a kind of limbo (and the sites to neglect) in the meantime? We are also concerned that, in the sad circumstance of any sites being lost from the sanctuary of the Green Belt, the bulk of the development proposals appear to be for standard housing by well-known mainstream developers. Must Mole Valley lose its unique character and become a facsimile of ‘any other town’ in England? This would be a tragedy for an area world-famous for its picturesque countryside, its distinctive towns and villages, its irreplaceable eco-systems and its extraordinary cultural heritage. If any of the Green Belt sites are sacrificed, the immediate and consequential social and environmental losses are obvious to all; any short-term economic gain is also likely to be at the expense of long-term economic robustness. “The Green Belt is the most popular planning policy in England and the envy of the world. It helps regenerate our cities and stops them sprawling into rural areas. As a result, no one is ever too far from true, green English countryside. “In times of economic slowdown, politicians can sometimes be tempted by the false promise of an easy construction boom. But destroying the countryside is not the path to lasting economic prosperity. Sustainable economic improvement can only come from the sort of urban regeneration that has already done much to rejuvenate many of our largest cities.” Paul Miner, Senior Planning Officer, CPRE We therefore urge Mole Valley District Council to do everything in its power to vigorously defend all Green Belt sites featured in the consultation. L&DCPS, February 2014
Posted on: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 23:18:37 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015