GD7 Clause 2, criteria a

If the Nature reserve is withdrawn it will greatly effect the local wildlife environment, we have seen Monk jac Dear, sparrows, hawks, bats, pheasants, partridge, foxes, rabbits, hares, kingfisher, magpies, crows, blackbirds and snakes.

We have had an increase of these animals as trees down covert lane have been destroyed due to recent houses being built and this status is under threat for even more houses! WHY??
A report has been done by a Leicester City council which confirms if this status is withdrawn then it WILL effect the local wildlife.

However, I am concerned that allowing recreational facilities, particularly school playing fields, may restrict access to green wedge by members of the public, counter to the aims of the proposal

Objections re: Green Wedge Reduction

4.13.4 The Scraptoft Neighbourhood Plan map 2016 which was agreed by Harborough Council clearly shows the golf course and nature reserve as essential Green Wedge.

4.13.1 clearly states that "Green Wedges are strategic areas of land" and "are aimed not just at preventing the merging of settlements but also guiding development providing a "green lung" into urban areas and facilitating recreational opportunities." Scraptoft Golf Course provides both of these things already - including a footpath for walkers and ramblers linking people from Leicester (along Keyham Lane West and Hamilton Lane) directly to the countryside. The nature reserve provides a peaceful and open space for both residents and wildlife to enjoy - essential for good mental wellbeing. Building on both of these key parts to the Green Wedge would therefore be highly detrimental to both Scraptoft and Leicester residents. The Leicester residents in question do not even seem to have been informed about this potential destruction of their "green lung"!

4.13.3 NPPF says that open land should be incorporated within it but the concentration of 1200 houses plus a primary school, G.P. surgery, retail premises and the road layouts proposed does not seem to leave any space available (except the narrow strip of Nature Reserve being retained). Therefore the plan is not fit for purpose as contrary to benefitting residents by allowing open space for sport/recreational and health and wellbeing aspects the plan takes these things away! The footpath will be made into a road, the wildlife will be forced out and away from our village and it will become a concrete jungle!

This Green Wedge is also essential to prevent flooding as already the new developments have increased the water running off into the brook as well as flooding on areas of Scraptoft's roads.

Scraptoft is an important village with a rural history and a conservation status. Harborough should be fighting to retain this for us or else we might as well be ceded over to Leicester City Council.

4.13.9 states that "the only types of land use that will normally be considered appropriate for these areas are those were the predominantly open and undeveloped nature of the land is retained." Which clearly does not fit with the building of 1200 houses plus primary school, G.P. surgery, retail premises and roads.

The building of such a concentration on this area also leads me to believe that developers will either insist that more of the Green Wedge land be given over to them for housing or they cannot build the necessary infrastructure half way through - as has happened before in Scraptoft with developers not held to account by Harborough Council.

Surely the importance of the Green Wedge and areas of separation surrounding Scraptoft outweigh the need for housing to be built on it during the next 15 years by Harborough? Other areas VERY nearby such as Hamilton and Barkby Thorpe are already in the process of being developed or have had plans passed for such development to help Leicester fulfil its quota. Harborough need to be standing up and fighting for us as a village.

Vision and objectives: Support
promote healthy and safe lifestyles.

- There will be better access to the countryside and an improved range
of open spaces for local people to enjoy
- increased provision for walking and cycling, and improved access to public transport for new development will have contributed to a reduction in the District's carbon footprint.
- Communities will have access to improved social, recreational, sports, health and
educational facilities.

Key Issue - growth in the economy and Objective 2. Employment:
Sport England would advise of our economic value of sport toolkit
https://www.sportengland.org/research/benefits-of-sport/economic-value-of-sport/
and more generally
https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157347/report.aspx

Objective 4 Infrastructure: Support

Objective 9 Design: Support. With particular reference to bringing forward strategic development areas of East Lutterworth and Scraptoft (policy SC1) with regard to
Active design - Sport England, in conjunction with Public Health England, has produced 'Active Design' (October 2015), a guide to planning new developments that create the right environment to help people get more active, more often in the interests of health and wellbeing. The guidance sets out ten key principles for ensuring new developments incorporate opportunities for people to take part in sport and physical activity. The Active Design principles are aimed at contributing towards the Government's desire for the planning system to promote healthy communities through good urban design. Sport England would commend the use of the guidance in the master planning process for new residential developments. The document can be downloaded via the following link:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-sport/planning-tools-and-guidance/active-design/

Support Policy GD3 - b. outdoor sport and recreation and associated buildings

Support GD7 2a. permitting development if it relates to outdoor leisure, sporting or recreation facilities including school playing fields, cycleways, footpaths or bridleways;.

Support policy GD8 - Design which in explanation refers to our guidance on active design. We would ask if the use of active design would be made stronger by reference in the policy. (also covered in policy IN2) also should be referenced in SC1, MH1, MH2 and LH1

Support in principle Policy HC2 - Evidence who demonstrates that a facility is no longer required. We are unsure what evidence is available to understand the demand, supply and needs for built sports facilities. This is even more relevant with regard to policy IN1.

G12 this policy is supported in principle particularly around the use of the emerging Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 which details not only the provision requirements but also quality improvements which could meet the demands generated by development. (please see attached) We are concerned with regard to the reference to and accessibility standard 4km or 10mins drive/bus this is not appropriate in all circumstances and not for all sports. The catchment for football is different to that for cricket and other sports. The emerging playing pitch strategy will provide more information on this aspect. The playing pitch strategy should also be the evidence needed for the robust assessment referred under G12.2.a. with regard to playing fields.

It is not clear if the plan fully details with the needs for new or replacement built sports facilities particularly sports halls and swimming pools (leisure centres) having regard to Para 70 of NPPF and the requirement to plan positively
.