Through reading the many reports provides on this website I have to question the quality and accuracy of the information provided to support the consultation. There are a number of errors identified in the attachments which are being used to support decisions.

Examples from 2022 Lepus Sustainability Appraisal Report for GNLP5014
3.6.17 - Names of local Primary School is incorrect
3.6.11 - Name of medical Practice is incorrect.
3.6.14 – Site is more than 600m to practicing religious ground, not less than as stated.
3.6.17 - Distance of primary school to site is incorrect.

This information is in the public domain and begins to question the quality and accuracy of the rest of the report for other assessments of sites. The consultants providing this report should be questioned in terms of their ability. This inaccurate data is being used to make significant decisions for the GNLP and should be revisited for fact checking.

Additionally the Site Assessment Information document for GNLP5014 states Green for Utilities Capacity and Infrastructure – I do not understand how this is green given the remote location and lack of mains sewage and gas.