There is no detailed information in the Local Development Framework Allocations Submission Document as to which specific area the "green buffer" that is said to be "parkland which is publicly accessible and integrated into the development with the remaining land to the west retained in agricultural use" refers to. This prevents proper assessment of what area will be publicly accessible land and what will be retained as agricultural use. Given the size of the remaining land to the West of the proposed development site, this should be clearly specified as currently all of it is private agricultural land. The wording is therefore ambiguous and potential impact unclear, particularly if land is to be changed from private agricultural use to publicly available parkland. There is no rationale given as to why any of the land to the West of the proposed development should be changed from private agricultural use to publicly available parkland. In conjunction with my objection to MM20 I object to the re-write regarding containing allotments within the proposed larger site relative to the initial submission.