SIR: The proposed plan to build 6,000 houses on a pristine‎ green field area is unacceptable (Chronicle, July 30).

A number of suitable locations that would not destroy irreplaceable Downlands and accommodating far few homes would be more viable.

Six thousand homes (potentially minimum 12,000 residents) would require doctors' surgeries, shops, schools, drainage, water supply, gas, electricity and rubbish collection. Excessive traffic, accompanying pollution and at least one vehicle per household would make a farce of the zero carbon policy. This is without the infrastructure; access roads and through traffic.

Perhaps the supporters of the scheme, including the remote land owners and developers, will return with a plan for 2,000 houses, claiming victory over the initial plan.

I suggest councillors who are promoting this destructive plan invest time in seeking more suitable brownfield locations that would not impact upon local areas.

Winchester and area is probably the most sought after location to live in England, influenced by the proximity of the city to countryside, rivers and hills.

Indeed, how many times is it necessary to say 'no' to massive, environmental destructive new town.

Retaining an irreplaceable, large expanse meadows is essential for future generations.

Simon Lever,

Juniper Close,

Badger Farm

Letter editor's note: Whilst the landowners are promoting the Micheldever Station area for a new town, the latest story in the Chronicle reported the fact that city council planners are looking at a new town (site unspecified) as one of the four options for a revision to the Local Plan.