Object

Representation ID: 7480

Received: 03/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Hambleton

PLEASE NOTE SOME OF MY ANSWERS USE ADVICE/GUIDANCE FROM PEOPLE BETTER QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON TECHNICAL INFORMATION RE PLANNING/TRANSPORT ETC. THESE ARE THEREFORE INCLUDED VERBATIM TO ENSURE THEIR ACCURACY ON SUCH TECHNICAL MATTERS. THIS DOES NOT MEAN MY RESPONSES DO NOT REPRESENT MY PERSONAL VIEWS AND MY MOTIVES ARE TO PROTECT MY HOME BUT ALSO THE ENVIRONMENT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. THE WHOLE LOCAL PLAN/CALL FOR SITES CONSULTATIONS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED ON SO MANY LEVELS THAT I FEEL I BARELY WISH TO RESPOND, HOWEVER TO NOT DO SO MIGHT MEAN FURTHER ERRORS PERSIST AND THE CONSULTATION CONCLUSIONS MAKE FURTHER PROPOSALS WITH CATASTROPHIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
The North Bedfordshire countryside and Staploe Parish in particular could be profoundly and permanently affected by the decisions made in this plan and yet we have been unable to meet with fellow residents to discuss this until very recently. The consultation process and immense quantity of technical documentation, complex response process, tight timescales and the disproportionate size of the local residents to respond and be heard compared with the other residential areas being discussed is unreasonable to make the decisions upon which a Local Plan is made democratic. Indeed, to gain professional support and advice required fundraising before any professional guidance could be afforded, whereas the Borough council has access to finds/resources to skew decisions in any way which may suit political and other agendas. I have not received any previous flyers to alert me to this process until this later consultation which has already brought the decisions down to a limited number of options (4 key development sites) of which this local area is the centre of 3. Indeed, even if I had received previous information about this plan and the local development proposals they would be in accurate due to the 25% increase in the area of the Dennybrook (site 977) site which was made public at short notice 8 months after the call for sites deadline closed and only one month before the consultation opened.
The decisions which underpin this whole consultation are in themselves flawed as they describe this rural area as part of a BROWN option………this description lead to this area being an option chosen by people who did not want further development near to them and they will have assumed was a greener choice! it is solely classed as VERY GOOD Agricultural land…….the country is short of agricultural land and so destruction of it when there are Brownfield sites not being developed is totally against all Local and National government policies.

I therefore do not agree that this consultation was sound or fair. I agree with Staploe Parish Council who responded to question 4 as follows: “Staploe Parish Council object in the strongest terms to the suggestion in the brown option that our parish is a brownfield site or under utilised land. Our whole parish is classed as open countryside for planning purposes. Our three tiny hamlets are not even classed as a small settlement in the Local Plan 2030 definition (6.21) and we are therefore defined as open countryside. We feel that describing the brown option which would see the majority of our parish covered in a large scale, high density, urban development as using brownfield or under utilised land is very misleading. We believe this could compromise the validity of the consultation as those responding would logically propose development on brownfield or under-utilised land over greenfield sites.

We believe the pros and cons list for the brown option is very inaccurate for our parish. A large development in Staploe parish would not support services etc in Bedford – we are 13 miles away and people would use services in St. Neots which are already under pressure due to large scale development on the eastern side of the town. There would be very little potential for residents here to make sustainable travel choices – we have one bus on Thursday and it would require huge investment to improve public transport. This would not reduce the need for growth in rural areas – we are a rural area and it proposes building all over our parish. Development in our parish would not improve viability of retail and leisure in Bedford Borough. People would go to St. Neots.”