Support

Representation ID: 6346

Received: 10/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Mike Salsbury

Agent: DLP Planning Limited

ntroduction to Site and Proposals
The site was previously submitted to the Council for consideration as part of the Council’s ‘call for sites’ exercise in August 2020 and separate to this has been the subject of preapplication submissions wherein the principle of redevelopment is not in issue . The land area being promoted is shown at Appendix 1.
Situated within a highly sustainable location in the centre of Bedford, the site measures approximately 0.32 hectares and comprises previously development land (the former Peacock’s Auction House - use class sui generis with significant areas of hardstanding used in part for parking and loading). Some storage continues at the site and the land to the rear of 22 Newnham Street and a temporary use is in operation.
The building(s) on-site are of mixed ‘utilitarian’ design, which have been extended and altered unsympathetically over time.
The site fronts onto Newnham Street and is bound to the west, north and east by a series of residential properties which range in height of two-three storeys. To the south the site is bound by Newnham Street over which lies an existing residential care home and a range of two-three storey residential properties and public houses.
he site is well connected to the town centre, located just over 100metres to the west and is located within reasonable walking distance of an extensive range of services and facilities.
At the end of 2017, the Auction House mainly relocated to the edge of town on the Eastcotts Industrial Estate and this site is now predominantly vacant.
The site is suitable for development and the landowner is committed to bringing it forward, such that it is available now.
Response to Borough Council’s Site Assessment Pro-Forma (Site ID: 1493)
Site Assessment Criteria
We have reviewed the Council’s assessment of the site and wish to make a number of comments below.
Protected Species
The Council’s assessment states that they are uncertain, or insufficient information has been provided, to determine whether protect species are known or likely to exist. This could be addressed through an ecology survey and protected species surveys, if appropriate, and the recommendations and mitigation strategy could be incorporated into any development scheme.
Impact on Designated or Non-Designated Heritage Assets and their Settings
The Council’s assessment has identified that the site’s redevelopment has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets (subject to design) and this harm may range from low to high. The Council has expressed the same general comments on a great number of the site assessment proformas published for consultation. This issue could in general be addressed through careful design and the submission of technical justification - a heritage impact assessment.
Within the context of the Plan as a whole, and the substantial increase in the need for development, national policy sets out the approach to assessing proposals where some impact is identified on the significance of heritage assets, or the contribution made by their setting. Where the level of harm is identified as less than substantial, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. The Council’s criteria for site selection should reflect this balancing exercise and recognise the significant contribution towards net gains for sustainable development that can be secured through the re-use and regeneration of suitable and accessible sites within the urban area together with providing appropriate policy criteria to secure mitigation for any impact upon the historic environment.