Support

Bedford Borough Local Plan 2040 Plan for Submission

Representation ID: 9490

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Peter Knight

Representation Summary:

Originally I objected to the issues and options consultation. Described
my parish as a brownfield, urban site with under utilised land when it is a greenfield site in
open countryside with highly productive grade 2 agricultural land.
Objected to the “Draft Plan: Strategy options and draft policies”. Referred to Dennybrook as a
development of 2,500 homes - not clear that it would eventually be 11,500. Transport
modelling mistakes. The Borough Council have discounted this settlement so I support the
outcome. Object to sites being considered after the deadline.
The Duty to Cooperate with St Neots will be important.

Full text:

I was concerned that the issues and options consultation was not
compliant and therefore the plan would not be justified because it relied on this consultation. It
described my parish as a brownfield, urban site with under utilised land when actually it is a
greenfield site in open countryside with highly productive grade 2 agricultural land. However,
the Borough Council appear to have listened to my concerns and so I am happy with the
outcome and believe the plan to be compliant and sound. Little Barford is a more suitable
location than our parish as it is closer to the new rail station and on grade 3 agricultural land.
Similarly I was concerned that the “Draft Plan: Strategy options and draft policies”
consultation in July 2021 was not compliant because it referred to Dennybrook (the largest of
the proposed new settlements) as a development of only 2,500 homes when in fact the
development would eventually be 11,500 homes – this was not made clear in the consultation.
However, the Borough Council appear to have discounted this settlement so we believe the
outcome is compliant and sound.
The transport modelling for the settlement at Wyboston (Dennybrook) was flawed in that there
were errors in the number of transport movements stated. However, as this settlement has
not been proposed in this final plan we believe the outcome is compliant and sound.
Finally, I was concerned that the “Draft Plan: Strategy options and draft policies”
consultation in July 2021 included a call for sites and sites such as an expansion of
Dennybrook and a new site (Eaton Bank) were considered even though they were submitted
well after the submission deadline (and in the case of Eaton Bank it was submitted on the last
day of the consultation). This gave little if any opportunity for residents to comment on them.
However, since these sites have not been included in the final plan, I believe the outcome is
compliant and sound. The Duty to Cooperate statement demonstrates that meetings have been held with Central
Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire Councils and with many relevant agencies but little detail
has been given about how they will manage the level of development planned for the area
around St Neots. This is going to be important for St. Neots with the proposed new settlement
at Little Barford. St Neots are also developing to the east at Loves Farm and Wintringham
Park. It will also be very close to new developments proposed in Central Bedfordshire at
Tempsford so we would like to see more in the plan about how Little Barford will integrate with
these sites and how it will affect St Neots town’s services, town centre and the surrounding
road network.