Site ID: 874

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2


Site Assessment Pro Formas

Representation ID: 3733

Received: 21/08/2021

Respondent: Elizabeth Corkery

Representation Summary:

Location - already surrounded by urban area

Wildlife - fewer protected species compared to Denybrooke

Agricultural land - poor quality than Denybrooke

Transport - closer to bedford town centre, promotes growth and fewer car journeys

Amenities - closer to amenities already in place

Size - smaller site so less impact to local pollution compared to large scale Denybrooke

Timing - quicker to complete phases and overall project compared to Denybrooke


Site Assessment Pro Formas

Representation ID: 6563

Received: 13/09/2021

Respondent: Challenger Multi Academy Trust

Agent: Fisher German LLP

Representation Summary:

1.1 These representations are prepared on behalf of The Challenger Multi Academy Trust in respect of their land interest at Land South West of Williamson Road / East of Hill Rise, Kempston. The site area is illustrated at Figure 1 below. [Aerial photo of site inserted.]
1.2 The site has been previously promoted through the previous stages of Bedford Borough Council’s Local Plan review.
1.3 The site measures some 1.4 hectares and at an assumed density of 40 dwellings per hectare (dph) is capable of delivering circa 56 dwellings. The site currently comprises of playing fields / sports pitches under the ownership of the Academy. The site is a brownfield site within the Bedford Urban Area and is therefore in a highly sustainable location which comprises a windfall site. There is not currently an emerging Neighbourhood Plan for Kempston Town Council.
1.4 The land shown in yellow above is not subject to this representation, however the Trust is working on a joint approach with Wells & Co to ensure the overall site area can come forward in a comprehensive manner. The land owned by Wells & Co will facilitate access into the site.
1.5 The site currently comprises of a Games Court. The redevelopment of the Games Court for residential development would generate a capital receipt which in turn would be used to fund much needed improvements at the school.
1.6 The site is located within the existing built-up area of Kempston and its development would comprise the re-development of a brownfield site in the urban area. The capital generated by the development would represent a social benefit being reinvested in improvements at the school.
1.7 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 874. We have a number of comments on the scoring of this site particularly in relation to the technical considerations. Land South West of Williamson Road and East of Hill Rise, Kempston
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 is within the urban area. This is therefore considered a particularly sustainable location for growth which will comprise the redevelopment of a brownfield site. The negative scoring (-) for point 8b is therefore irrelevant given that 8b concerns whether a site is within a settlement policy area or built form of a small settlement; the site is within the urban area. We disagree with the scoring for point 8b given its irrelevance to this site. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist? Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
2.20 Whilst we have not carried out an ecological assessment to date, given the amount current use of the site as a playing field it is unlikely that the site will hold significant ecological value. A scheme could be capable of providing a biodiversity net gain, subject to scheme details. Point 2b should therefore be a (+) rather than a (?) on the site assessment.
Likely to impact on designated or non-designated heritage assets or their settings?
2.21 It is considered that a scheme is capable of coming forward which is sensitive to any heritage assets identified as potentially causing harm. However, the site is some distance away from the nearest listed buildings (which are located on High Street and Woburn Road), therefore a scheme will likely be able to come forward with minimal heritage impacts. We disagree with the scoring of (x) for criteria 4b and believe this should be scored with a (+) given the significant distance of the site from the nearest heritage assets. Highway or junction capacity issues
2.22 The highways comments in response to the site assessment is as follows:
“E boundary, Williamson Road. High frequency bus (1) stopping next to site. Segregated cycle trail next to site. Access by way of joint proposal with land to the east adjoining Williamson Rd. Access for pedestrians could be improved by widening the footway adjacent to Williamson Road.”
2.23 We are content, in principle, to provide the necessary identified widening of the footway adjacent to Williamson Road, subject to detail and discussion of this with Wells & Co regarding the adjacent parcel of land.
Site Conclusion
2.24 Considering the additional commentary provided above, the site represents a strong, logical location for further development within the urban area boundary. The capital generated by the development would result in an added social benefit as it would be reinvested in improvements at the school.
2.25 We respectfully ask that Land South West of Williamson Road and East of Hill Rise, Kempston is allocated for residential development.