Appendix A Rejected Options
A.1 Northampton Rejected Options
Northampton Option 2 (Northampton East)
A.1.1 Please refer to Northampton - Options assessed for future growth
Justification for rejecting options
- Expansion in this location would not represent the most sustainable option for growth compared to the other options around Northampton. It would represent an elongation rather than a compaction of the emerging urban form.
- Development in this location could have a significant impact on the quality of the Green Infrastructure network in this area and beyond. There are a number of sensitive water/wetland sites to the east of Northampton, which include a number of Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP) standing water habitats. However, the most notable site to the east of Northampton is the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and potential Special Protection Areas (pSPA), which is considered to be of exceptional significance for the variety and quality of breeding birds associated with the opens water and marginal habitats.
- Medium-cultural sensitivity areas include extensive areas of prehistoric and Romano-British occupation in the vicinity of Ecton ridge. High visual sensitivity areas include the prominent landform of the Ecton ridge. Strategic gaps, which prevent the coalescence of Northampton with villages to the east are also considered to be of high sensitivity. Development in this location could therefore be seen to significantly compromise the spatial objectives in relation to achieving sustainable growth compared to other less sensitive locations adjoining Northampton.
Why this option does not meet the vision and objectives if the Emergent Joint Core Strategy
- This option would be unlikely to complete, enhance and safeguard connections in the existing strategic Green Infrastructure network.
- It is considered that this option is not based on sustainable development principles compared to the other options around Northampton. It would represent an elongation rather than a compaction of the emerging urban form.
- This option would be unlikely to foster the regeneration of Northampton.
Northampton Option 5 (South of M1 and South-West)
A.1.2 Please refer to the Northampton - Options assessed for future growth
Justification for rejecting options
- The option is located beyond the strong physical barrier of the M1 motorway, which would conflict with the desire to provide good linkages between existing and new communities.
- By allowing development beyond the M1 corridor this would severely impact upon the character of the town of Northampton which is clearly contained within this corridor.
- This option would in effect, be akin to a new settlement requiring a wide range of its own facilities as it would be challenging for a new community to make maximum use of services and facilities within Northampton.
Why this option does not meet the vision and objectives if the Emergent Joint Core Strategy
- It is considered that this option is not based on sustainable development principles compared to the other options around Northampton.
- This option would be unlikely to foster the regeneration of Northampton to enable it to fulfil a greater role within West Northamptonshire and the Region.
- With the M1 being a definite physical barrier, this option is unlikely to enable and support the delivery of co-ordinated transport improvements, with an emphasis on non-car modes, improving connections with and around Northampton and links to the wider network.
Question 53
- Add Comments
- View Comments (0)
Do you support the rejection of 'Northampton Option 2 (Northampton East)' and 'Northampton Option 5 (South of the M1 and South-west)'?
Map A.1 Northampton - Options assessed for future growth
(Popup full image)