Question 3
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
Given that things change very quickly, it is best to keep to the shortest period.
No answer given
YOU HAVE A PLAN FOR CIRCA 2030 SO USE THAT – DON’T START AGAIN.
The plan addresses a response to a predicted housing requirement. It does not question as to whether the fundamental reason is down to overpopulation and how the government/world intends to address that.
....but we can expect significant change over the next 20 years that may demand flexibility and much greater customer focus and the adoption of specific, measurable, realistic, achievable and timed objectives beyond the tracking of growth. How will the quality of development be measured? What are the current measures affecting open spaces? What is the intention regarding climate change for Bedford - when do we intend to be carbon neutral? 2030 surely, if not sooner.
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
But I do not agree with the timeframe of this consultation. It makes no sense to be thinking about where to put new houses before the route of the new railway has been identified. That will be the most important piece of new public transport within the plan period, and decisions on housing should follow decisions on the rail infrastructure, not the other way round.
So much can change in 10 years so planning up to 2040 is sufficient. Extending the plan period would increase the stress of finding enough suitable land. When Government announces their new methodology and we find that BBC does not need to build so many new homes then a longer plan period might be OK.
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given