Site ID: 590

Showing comments and forms 1 to 1 of 1


Site Assessment Pro Formas

Representation ID: 6575

Received: 13/09/2021

Respondent: Clarendon Land and Development Ltd

Agent: Fisher German LLP

Representation Summary:

1.1 These representations are prepared on behalf of Clarendon Land & Development in respect of their land
interests at Barford Road, Willington as illustrated on Figure 1 below. The site was promoted to the
adopted Local Plan (site reference: 469). However, the adopted Plan opted to defer allocations to
subsequent Neighbourhood Plans, which would deliver the housing targets set out in the Local Plan. For
Willington, the Local Plan allocated 25-50 dwellings to be delivered through the Neighbourhood Plan. A
number of technical assessments have been undertaken to demonstrate the sites deliverability. A copy
of the layout plan submitted under withdrawn planning application 19/02628/MAO is provided at
Appendix 1. [Aerial photo of site inserted.]
1.2 Willington was designated as a Neighbourhood Plan area in November 2015. Delays to Neighbourhood Plans were highlighted as a potential issue with the Council's adopted approach and would not be supported moving forward, particularly having regard for the Housing White Paper which seems to
suggest Neighbourhood Plans should focus on issues such as design and design codes, and not the
allocation of land. Willington carried out their Regulation 16 consultation between 31st March 16th May
2021 and was submitted for Examination on 25th May 2021. Timings and details of Hearing sessions
have not yet been published.
1.3 For ease of reference these representations follow the consultation questions in order they appear in the
consultation document, where relevant.
Site Allocations and Call for Sites
2.17 The Council have assessed the site under ID reference 590. We have a number of comments on the
scoring of this site particularly in relation to the technical considerations.
Land at Barford Road, Willington
2.18 The Council's Site Assessment contains a number of criteria by which sites are scored. Wherein we have
comments these are discussed in turn below.
Within or adjoining UAB, SPA or built form of a small settlement
2.19 It is agreed that the site adjoins the settlement boundary, however the scoring for this criterion should
be a (+) rather than a (?).
In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
2.20 The scoring by the Council for this criterion is '(?) uncertain or insufficient information'
scoring should be upgraded to a (+). As demonstrated by the Ecological Impact Assessment provided at
Appendix 2, the development of the site is not anticipated to result in any significant residual negative
effects on important ecological features. The development proposals are assessed as providing
sufficient opportunities to deliver mitigation measures where required.
Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
2.21 The Ecological Impact Assessment states that 'the proposed layout will provide benefits for wildlife in the
form of additional habitats, with the opportunity to provide additional biodiversity enhancement measures
alongside the new housing' The scoring for this criterion should therefore be upgraded from a (?) to a (+).
Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
2.22 See above comments regarding ecological impact. The scoring for this criterion should be upgraded to
a (+).
Likely to impact on designated or non-designated heritage assets or their settings?
2.23 The Council have given a scoring for this criterion of (x), however, the archaeological and heritage
assessment provided at Appendix 3 concludes that the implementation of the proposed development will
not result in an adverse impact on, harm to, or loss of significance from any of the identified designated heritage
assets, either in terms of an effect on their physical fabric or through changes to their wider setting
2.24 It goes on to state that With regard to non-designated heritage assets, the site is located within the Great
Ouse valley which has a high number of recorded archaeological sites dating from the prehistoric period
onwards. Despite this, no evidence of prehistoric or Roman activity was recorded within the site. The
geophysical survey within the site recorded a potential semi-circle feature within the western parcel of the site,
though the date and origin of this is uncertain.'
2.25 It is considered that the current level of assessment, including the findings of the geophysical survey, is
adequate to inform a planning application for development within the site, and that the proposed development
accords with current legislation, the planning policies contained within the N PPF and the policies of the Local
2.26 Given the above, it is considered that the scoring for the site should be upgraded to a (+) in respect of
heritage considerations.
Connect to highway without constraint? (15e) and Highway or junction capacity issues? (15f)
2.27 Both of these criteria are taken as one. The Council have given a score of (?) for both however we disagree
with this assessment. Appendix 4 provides a copy of the previously submitted Transport Statement.
2.28 The proposed site for residential development benefits from a range of local facilities within walking
distance of the site including a school, post office and convenience store. There is also a regular bus
service connecting the site to nearby employment opportunities. A safe a suitable access can be
achieved from Barford Road and the capacity analysis demonstrates that the development of the site
will not have a material impact on highway safety.
2.29 Given the above, it is considered that the scoring for the site should be upgraded to a (+) in respect of
highway considerations.
Site Conclusion
2.30 Considering the additional commentary provided above, the site represents a strong, logical location for
further development at a scale appropriate to a Rural Service Centre.
2.31 We respectfully ask that Land at Barford Road, Willington is allocated for residential development