Homes site proposal call

Madam,

After the consultation on ‘Housing Options’ in the four market towns by Amber Valley Borough Council which ended October, 2011, a ‘Summary Report’ was produced based on the representations that were received – this was called the ‘Options For Housing Summary Report’.

Of the 1,179 representations received by the council, we are of the understanding that GH2 Hardy Barn/Langley Greenbelt, located to the East of Heanor, was represented by 490 objections and was the largest single issue within the consultation period (representing approximately 42 per cent of the borough’s total responses). Although the number of objections far exceeds any support for GH2, (we conservatively estimate in excess of 95 per cent), we cannot quote a precise value since the council has been unable to provide all the necessary figures.

Why was this information not noted in the update on the Core Strategy and proposed next steps (contained in the Summary Report)? More specifically why is this not noted under the town’s section of Heanor in Appendix 1?

It appears to us that issues that generated the most public response have not been highlighted.

There is no objective analysis of the information contained in the representations, surely this is critical for a true and fair analysis?

A response of 490 opinions is a significant reaction from the public that should be reflected in the report and that the public’s opinion has been ignored.

We would like to ask ‘who is driving this report’? It is obvious from Amber Valley Borough Council’s summary that 490 respondents weren’t! Therefore, to produce a true Core Strategy, does Amber Valley intend listening to its electorate and report in a true manner? Something it has clearly not done in relation to this consultation! We therefore call upon the council to withdraw, with immediate effect, GH2 Hardy Barn as a proposed strategic site, as is the request of the local community.

Leonie George

Heanor Green Belt Action Group