Hatton Station. My initial reaction is that Hatton Station is too small an area to allow for more development; however should such development become necessary, I would suggest that Site B, the land to the east of Oakdene Crescent would be the more suitable.

Site A, the land in the triangle, is in a "wet" area, with barely adequate sewage facilities. The amount of infra-structure work needed to improve this site would be considerable.
Also, existing housing in that area consists entirely of bungalows, with the exception of the one house next to the motorway; this would mean that any development there would be resisted strongly by residents unless it also consisted of single storey dwellings. Additionally, the proximity the motorway would not make it particularly attractive for potential purchasers. On the other hand, it could provide a community amenity area, possibly a children's play area.

Site B. by contrast, has already got good amenities, and some recent development has already taken place there. Although I still stand by my first statement, should development become necessary Site B should be the preferred option.