I strongly object to the inclusion of Mill Hill in this plan.
In my view any one of the following points should result in the inclusion of Mill Hill being seriously re considered with the cumulative effect of these points leading to rejection of the inclusion.
1 Your own Sustainability Assessment has previously evaluated the Mill Hill site as the most environmentally damaging site of all of those being considered. How can this site be re instated in the plan?
2 There is mention of the site being geographically significant for sand and gravel supply. Is this an important criteria ? I cannot see how it is.
3 This site would be a very poor choice for nature.
We should all have concerned over the impact of noise and dust on Attenborough Nature Reserve SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) which runs along the edge of the site (less than 100 m away) as well as the impact on the water quality of Holme Pit SSSI. The proposed site also contains 5 LWSs (Local Wildlife Sites), one of which would be destroyed, and two partially destroyed by the development.
The site is rich in bird life and other species. 24 red and 22 amber listed bird species use the area for feeding and breeding
Grass snakes, harvest mice, otters, toads, and bats are also currently present on site. These along with other possibly endangered and protected species should not be so easily discounted.
This is not a low impact site.
The site is currently Green belt and is regarded as the "lungs of Clifton"
Are we really ready to give up on this valuable resource (for possibly 25 years) when other less damaging sites are available.

From a safely viewpoint I am concerned over,
The safety of conveyors and other vehicles crossing foot and bridle paths.
Heavy and Slow vehicle access on to The Mill Hill roundabout. There has been mention of lights being installed to improve safety. Surely after spending £250 million on the A453 improvements we are not going to slow the traffic for this sole purpose.