Issue 6 

AECOM Site suitability Assessment for Site 512, The Paddock, has factual errors

Question 5

Is the land classified as the best and most versatile agricultural land (Grades 1,2, or 3a)? Yes-Grade 3 (no specification between 3a and 3b)

Site 512 is listed as Grade 3 land. This is incorrect. You can’t just dream up the Agricultural Land Classification, you must use the best possible data source. Site 512 is identified on the 1969 MAFF agricultural Land classification map as "Land predominantly in urban use" and on the Defra 2004 Predictive Best and Most Valuable Land Assesement map, Site 512 is classified as " Urban/Industrial" . In the absence of an Agricultural Land Classification survey of the site this is the best data available and should have been used  by AECOM and the RNPSG. It is not acceptable to just make it up. Should be green. 


Source Guide to assessing development proposals on agricultural land - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

 

Likelihood of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Agricultural Land -  map Eastern Region (ALC020)

 

http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/5208993007403008

 Published 2017/10/04

Aerial view of Riseley June 2019

Easy to see where the arable cropping ends

PF  School playing field

GA Garden (Gell)

G -grass, never cultivated for arable crops

512 The Paddock- rough grass never cultivated for crops

Question 6 

Does the site contain local wildlife-rich habitats?

A preliminary ecological survey including GCN eDNA and a reptile survey found nothing of note. The full PES is attached. The ecologist commented that because of its proximity to houses on three sides, the site is clearly patrolled by domestic cats who suppress any wildlife. Should be green

A link to the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal report is below


Question 15

Are there any significant trees within or adjacent to the site?

There are no significant trees within or adjacent to the site – should be green.

Question 18

Would development of the site cause loss of social, amenity or communal value?

In reality there is no loss of social, amenity or communal value by developing the site as proposed.  The next question 19 re loss of visual amenity is correctly answered No.  The answer to question 18 should be no - green

Question 19

Is the site low, medium or high in terms of landscape?

The answer should be low and therefor should be green.