Object

Representation ID: 10364

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Renhold Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

SECTION 2: MISLEADING CONSULTATION REPRESENTATION
The Parish Council would like to highlight a number of fundamental flaws to the consultation document relating to the misleading naming of Policy EMP6 Business Park as Land at Water End and St Neots Road. Borough Council Officers have maintained that sites were being classified by their geographical locations, this however has not been a helpful or real representation for the Renhold community.

The theme throughout the Local Plan with policy naming has been allocating names clearly attaching them to the nearest settlement. Neither Water End nor St Neots Road, parts of Renhold Parish, have any designated Settlement Policy Areas as they are so rural.

There is a Water End to the south of Cople, as well as a St Neots Road in Great Barford, in Little Barford and in Bolnhurst. This poor naming therefore made it very unclear as to where the proposed site allocation was to be actually located.
Secondly, it only became clear during a drop-in session with the Planning Staff at the Howard Centre on 20 Jul that sites 761 and 764 comprising EMP6 were in fact identified in the Changes to the Policies Map (supporting reference 52). As early as May the identity of the relevant sites had been sought by a community researcher from the Planning Office which failed to draw attention to the clarification available in Reference 52. Prior to 20 Jul therefore there existed uncertainty within the community as to the actual extent of the EMP6 proposal.
SEE ATTACHMENT

This image shows the location of the only 2 homes (2 & 4) in Water End, Renhold which are located 150m north of the adjacent A421 interchange roundabout. As shown the road name then changes to Green End and continues past the EMP6 site for over 300m before the next house at 62 Green End. It would have been more meaningful to the local community to describe 761 as land at Green End, Renhold.

There is no mention in the Consultation document that the implementation of EMP6 would effectively merge Green and Water Ends.

This inaccurate naming combined with the failure of the local authority to point to relevant map information showing the proposed site allocation within the consultation supporting documents is a significant issue.

Figure 12 Key Diagram, Page 83 in the consultation document sets out an overview of proposed development for housing and employment sites. However, the marking of the map again is misleading in how it represents the sites – mainly due to its coarse scale which makes it a poor complement of the LP2040 document and it fails to identify Renhold as illustrated below.
SEE ATTACHMENT

Below is an extract from the Borough Council ‘Call for Sites’ map found at: https://bluefoxtech.co.uk/demos/bedford-published-sites/#/center/-0.4205,52.1983/zoom/13.3
It shows the sites in blue put forward and below it the extract containing EMP6 together with the equivalent section of the Fig 12 Key Diagram:
SEE ATTACHMENT

When looking for the sites comprising the proposed EMP6, based on the poor descriptions used there is no certainty of which two sites are potentially involved Focusing in on the A421 junction in the two equivalent extracts below illustrates the problem. Note that Renhold is not identified on the Key Map.
SEE ATTACHMENT

Initially, and for quite some time it appeared the proposed allocation was in fact the sites marked with red arrows.

Residents who did try to study information attached to the designated sites would have been confronted by supporting statements, access appraisals and connections plans dating back to Aug 2020 which bore no resemblance to what is now being proposed and were therefore irrelevant at best and misleading at worst.

This misrepresentation of information may have resulted in many not understanding the proposals as often when individuals see no direct impact, they do not go into a more in-depth review of the consultation and refrain from providing feedback. This is relevant to those who live not only in Renhold, but also those who live in Great Barford who also have been denied clarity. The knock-on impact of this inaccurate site naming will also spread beyond the nearest settlements, with many across the borough having no idea where ‘Water End’ or ‘St Neots Road’ is – other than maybe concluding it must be near St Neots and so of no local relevance.

Making no association to Renhold within the policy site name, may be seen by some as an attempt from the local authority to disguise significant development for a very rural community.

The representation of Policy EMP6 Business Park, Land at Water End and St Neots Road in this consultation has been done inaccurately.

The late revelation of the existence of the Reference 52 Changes to Policies Maps highlighted an important shortcoming of the proposal. A section of the relevant Map 2 below clearly emphasises the separation gaps between Church, Salph and Green Ends of the original rural village and the new developments along Norse Road. There is no attempt to emphasise any comparable gap between the proposed EMP6 site and either of Green or Water Ends.
SEE ATTACHMENT