HELAA Methodology

Please refer to accompanying HELAA Methodology Response Letter.

Typo: set out in …..

If a site is found to be unsuitable, it makes no sense to expend planning staff effort considering what could be repeated planning applications for development. This process should have planning weight, otherwise the current effort could be better deployed elsewhere.

In addition to flooding, you need to include the headings mentioned previously: proximity of employment, transport infrastructure, education, medical, shops and amenities etc.

Flood zone 2 should be similarly excluded.

Not just National policies, but local policies eg flood plain impact, availability of amenities, infrastructure etc

There should be an earlier stage, identifying broad areas that are (un)suitable for development. Factors such as location of the broad flood plain, not just the formal flood risk zones, taking account of how development could adversely affect downstream locations. Similarly for local amenities (major shops etc) - with a view to avoiding those areas where there is a shortfall. Similarly for education, medical facilities, employment and transport infrastructure. Locations adjacent to transport bottlenecks (eg A46) should be avoided until alternative provision is in place. There should be no repeat of piecemeal approval of sites for hundreds of homes without properly considering these implications.