Object

Representation ID: 5808

Received: 07/09/2021

Respondent: Ms Sharon Walsh

I write in reference to site # 977, Land West of Wyboston (“Dennybrook”). I strongly object to the proposal that this land be used for the development of a new settlement of over 10,000 properties. The land South of Honeydon Road is not a suitable site and should be discounted as a sustainable location for development by Bedford Borough Council.
My comments and concerns are as follows:
General LP40 / Spatial Consideration
Dennybrook is a proposed development of over 10,000 homes that would stretch from Colmworth to the A1.This proposal is hugely excessive and would totally erase a very rural area and its historic settlements. The development would overwhelm Colmworth as a separate rural community creating a sprawling suburban environment. It would dominate the local environment with construction traffic for the next 30 years.
The need for a new housing is acknowledged, but the need for a settlement of this size is not. There is no shortage of development opportunities which could be utilized for LP40. The call for sites returned over 430 responses totaling in excess of 70,000 plots against a need of 12,500 in order to complete the plan. Therefore there is no need to consider a single settlement which is as large and destructive and the Dennybrook proposal.
The proposed site at Dennybrook would be located within close proximity to St Neots, with a possible merging into Wyboston. Hamlets (Honeydon and Begwary) and villages (Colmworth) would be engulfed and overwhelmed by the development. Given the scale of the proposed development at Dennybrook, there would be a potential coalescence to the existing settlement of St Neots which would be contrary to the Council’s adopted Local Plan which seeks to prevent coalescence of settlements. In addition, policy 37 of the Council’s adopted Local Plan makes clear that developments need to ‘Protect the landscape setting and contribute to maintaining the individual and distinct character, and separate identities of settlements by preventing coalescence…’. Development of this site would be in direct contravention to such policy.
Further, the land comprising the site is all on Grade 2 agricultural land. There is no brownfield element to this site. The NPPF makes clear that planning policies should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: ‘recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland…’. In this instance the land is classed as the best and most versatile agricultural land as should therefore be discounted as an appropriate site. Other proposals for LP40 such as Twinwoods include brownfield elements and should be prioritised.
The Council will need to be satisfied through a thorough review of the supporting documents to the site submissions that adequately address the impacts, and in terms of achieving sustainable development – in line with Paragraph 16 of the NPPF and section 39(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Individual Impact / Wellbeing
The site and surrounding area (in both Colmworth and Staploe Parishes) is entirely rural and is highly valued for its peace, quiet, open countryside views and rural setting. The people of our parishes chose to live here precisely because of the rural location and everything that brings. Any development on this site would make a permanent irreversible change to the landscape, setting and rural nature of the small hamlets and villages in and around the site and would present a significant challenge to existing residents in terms of the negative impact to mental, physical and financial wellbeing, that would be impossible to mitigate. The physical changes to the landscape that would result from this development cannot be reversed. As residents who deliberately chose to live in a rural location with limited services and infrastructure we will find ourselves engulfed in a suburban environment that we did not choose to live in. The psychological wellbeing issues which such a development will create for individual residents should not be underestimated.
Please use a separate form (this page) for each consultation document paragraph, policy or evidence base document you are commenting on.
Which paragraph number, policy number or evidence base document are you commenting on?
Please add your comments in the box below, and continue on an additional sheet if necessary.
P a g e 5 | 5
Site # 977 – “Dennybrook” (cont’d)
Ecology
From an ecological standpoint the site supports a wide range of flora and fauna. The site is a haven for birds and wildlife. The fields provide breeding sites for rare breed birds and mammals. There is a significant number of deer, badgers, foxes, red kites etc. in the area indicating that the wildlife is thriving.
The grasslands and verges within the site are known to support at least three nationally rare species. Over 100 bird species have been recorded on the site including include a range of notable farmland species corn bunting, skylark, yellow wagtail, grey partridge. Other notable species include red kite, kingfisher (associated with riparian habitat), hobby, merlin, winter thrushes redwing and fieldfare) common crossbill (from pine plantation on southern boundary) and barn owl.
Development of this site would result in the fundamental of change of habitats within the site, displacing many of those species associated with arable landscapes, and instead encouraging common garden bird species. The impact on the wildlife and biodiversity of the land would be irreversibly negatively impacted by development on this site, with an overall net loss of biodiversity.
Heritage
This proposal has the potential to cause significant harm to heritage assets and places of archaeological significance.
The council’s own HIA assessment notes that “The scheme is likely to result in harm to around 21 grade II listed buildings, although it is agreed with the HIA that this is likely to be ‘less than substantial’ in each instance and at the lower end of the scale. A high level of less than substantial harm could occur to four grade II listed buildings – all historic farmhouses either surrounded by the site or in close proximity to it… It should be stated that the scheme is likely to have a high, cumulative impact on designated heritage assets. This should be weighed against the public benefits of the scheme”.
Further the council’s assessment also notes that “..no consideration (has been) given to impacts from additional noise, traffic, light pollution or changes to the surrounding predominantly rural character which is experienced when approaching the designated assets”. The assessment notes the significant risk to heritage assets and that a further assessment should be undertaken, the outcome of which “may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated”.
From a heritage standpoint this development would result in adverse impacts to the listed buildings within and around the site, and therefore on this basis alone the site should not be given further consideration for development.
Highways
As noted in the Council’s site assessment this site is regarded as having “serious capacity constraints” in terms of highways and junction capacity. It states that “…The very large scale of the development would cause significant pressures on the surrounding highway network and further assessment will be required”. As noted previously the site lies in a very rural area with few access roads and minimal infrastructure. Several roads immediately surrounding and within the site are single track roads, and in most cases widening would not be feasible.
The proposed development at Dennybrook would be a car reliant settlement. The proposal will not benefit from a choice of sustainable modes of transport.
The highways, transport and access challenges for this site should preclude it from further consideration.
Economic Impact / Services
The site location is very close to St Neots (see earlier point re coalescence) and has comparatively poor access to Bedford. Residents of such a development are likely to favour St Neots which adds further pressure to already stretches services in St Neots, and adds further economic damage to Bedford town centre which is already in serious economic decline. There appears to be no economic benefit to Bedford town from this proposal.
Summary
The proposed settlement at Dennybrook is unsuitable because: there is a risk of coalescence with St Neots, it would engulf the hamlets and villages in and around the site, the location is high quality agricultural land, it is valued as a rural location by its residents, there are no services, the roads are very narrow, it is too far from the new E-W rail station to offer sustainable transport, there are many nature reserves and listed buildings and a large development could cause flooding in St Neots. This site is unsuitable for a multitude of reasons, from heritage, to transport, to flooding and can in no way be considered an environmentally sound or sustainable solution the Council’s housing needs.