Site ID: 977

Object

Representation ID: 3442

Received: 11/07/2021

Respondent: Mr William J Wade-Gery

including many areas of ancient woodlands and local flora and fauna.Not only this but it is dangerously close to a very unique SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest) and encroaches on land that holds english heritage status and has a significant history as is the site of one of the oldest families in Bedfordshire. It is one of a kind in the country and any nearby development risks destroying any archaeological links it has to the surrounding areas, which it certainly does. If you require anymore information on the SSSI and the history.

Object

Representation ID: 3526

Received: 05/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Aylen

There is a wide range of wildlife in this area, some of which is endangered, including Barn Owls, Hedgehogs, Small Tortoiseshell Butterflies, bats, kestrels, red kites, buzzards and sparrowhawks.
Roads are too narrow to accomodate increased traffic
Damage to existing buildings due to increased traffic
Countryside views lost forever
Serious impact on drainage - increased flooding
Infrastructure cannot accomodate the additional housing. Local secondary schools and medical services are already oversubscribed.
This huge project would have a devastating impact on local villagers, all of whom have deliberately chosen a rural existence.

Object

Representation ID: 3597

Received: 14/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hayley Morphew

This is purely a greenfield site - Government planning policy states that brownfield sites should be selected in preference to greenfield site. In addition, this is grade 2 agricultural land - the best and most versatile - where significant development is required, areas of poorer quality land should be chosen. Development here will not benefit Bedford town centre - instead St Neots (Cambs) will become over-utilised and overwhelmed due its proximity to this site, risking 'urban sprawl'.

Rural lifestyles and livelihoods will be destroyed. The ability to keep horses and livestock will be diminished.

Object

Representation ID: 3726

Received: 21/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Veronica Zwetsloot

I strongly object to this hugely damaging large development for the above reasons.

Object

Representation ID: 3730

Received: 21/08/2021

Respondent: Elizabeth Corkery

- Greenfield site NOT brownfield

- Wildlife: destruction of old/well-established ecosystems

- Agricultural land destruction:Grade 2, fertile/diverse=against Government policy

-Travel:more/longer car journeys to Bedford=pollution/congestion

- Entrance: only south entrance would be used=congestion/pollution

- Mental Health: destroying green views/space for locals/visitors

- Coalescence: loss of green corridor next St Neots

- Service use: will use Huntington District services

-Healthcare: inadequate GPs/difficult to create new one

-Transport: roads inadequate

-Amenities: Bushmead Rd surface poor/water pipes burst

-Pollution ++&concentrated

-Emergency: further from town/longer call outs

-Timing: longer to build large site in phases than multiple mini sites

Object

Representation ID: 3781

Received: 24/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kate Abrahams

The local plan misleadingly shows Staploe Parish as a brownfield site. It is open countryside and grade 2 agricultural land, contrary to government building policy
Poor local road infrastructure. Local roads are used as rat-run when A1 or A421 closed. Most local roads are single-track with sharp bends with high volume agricultural vehicles
No public transport in the area which can only increase reliance on private cars
Because of proximity,the proposed development will be associated with St Neots. There is poor road infrastructure to Bedford
There are other more suitable, brownfield sites

Object

Representation ID: 3807

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Andrea Witham

The site is greenfield - it is on Grade 2 agricultural land, in a quiet rural area, and would completely swamp the existing settlements. The site itself may not be at risk of flooding but parts of Honeydon do and development is likely to exacerbate this. Our roads are narrow and often single track, and cannot carry additional traffic without substantial development which would again destroy the rural character. We shop in St Neots and never visit Bedford. Cambridge would be our destination of choice once rail and road links are complete, and residents of Dennybrook would do the same.

Object

Representation ID: 3841

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Mr David Rawlins

This site is on grade 2 agricultural land and not brownfield. Selection of a greenfield site where brownfield is available is contrary to Government policy. 40% of this site was added after the deadline ended; locals were not notified of the addition until the release of the 'Vision Document' in May 21. Development will obliterate the existing village and outlying properties and destroy the rural nature of the area. It is unlikely to contribute to the economic wellbeing of Bedford town centre as residents are more like to visit St Neots or Cambridge for shopping, leisure and days out.

Object

Representation ID: 3843

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Mr David Mitchell

Colmworth Parish Council has produced the following analysis of the proposed Dennybrook development and I agree with their conclusion that we should object to it. I have added my concern about the increasing risk of flooding caused by extreme weather events and proximity to the River Great Ouse.
The Dennybrook development would overwhelm Colmworth as a separate community, creating a sprawling suburban environment and bringing significant traffic congestion to our narrow and twisting roads. It would dominate the local environment with heavy construction traffic for the next 30 years and more.
• Dennybrook is a proposed development of over 10,000 homes that would stretch from Colmworth to the A1 at Eaton Socon. The development would be approximately the size of Biggleswade, 2/3rds the size of St Neots. The homes would bring around 20,000 extra cars, plus the respective volume of white vans etc, totally overwhelming the local road network. This proposal is hugely excessive and would totally erase a very rural area and its historic settlements.
• The land comprising this 2,400 acre site is largely Grade A agricultural land, growing essential crops. There is no brownfield element to the site, a priority under the Government's National Planning Policy Framework. Other (rejected by BBC) proposals for LP40 such as Twinwoods include brownfield elements and should be prioritised.
• The site lies in a very rural area with few access roads and minimal infrastructure. Apart from the far east end of the site near St Neots, the only road access points are unclassified roads incapable of handling the traffic volume. Several roads immediately surrounding and within the site are single-track roads, yet none are scheduled for widening.
• The scale of the project would create significant disruption from construction traffic extending beyond 2055, that is an unacceptable burden on neighbouring communities.
• The site has comparatively poor access to Bedford itself, many residents will favour St Neots which adds further economic damage to Bedford town centre which is in serious decline.
There is no shortage of high-quality development opportunities for inclusion in LP40. The call-for-sites by BBC returned over 430 responses totalling in excess of 70,000 plots against a need of approximately 12,500 plots for completion of the plan. There is no need to consider something as large and destructive as the Dennybrook proposal.
• It is difficult to understand how the site would contribute greatly to BBC's housing need when potential residents would more likely be attracted from the St Neots area, particularly those reliant on methods of transport other than the car. Thus the site will likely fail to support Bedford housing needs in proportion to the scale of the development.
• The location of the site means that, for employment purposes in particular, many residents will be commuting above-average distances and will be almost wholly reliant on private cars. The distances for most would not encourage walking or cycling and while there is a new railway station planned for the area, possibly around Tempsford or Little Barford, this will not be close enough to avoid using the car for access.
• BBC noted in their assessment of this site in 2019 "The site is located in a relatively convenient location for vehicle journeys on the strategic road network, which may be a deterrent to non-motorised travel." In no way can this site be considered to be an environmentally sound or sustainable solution to BBC's housing needs.
• I am concerned that the proposed site is close to the River Great Ouse and global warming is already causing extreme rainfall events on a more frequent basis. Proposed housing density is high, the ground is clay and the area to absorb rainfall will be substantially reduced by buildings, which will lead to more surface water flooding within the proposed site.
• Recent developments at Wixhams, Shortstown and Bedford Riverside have been depressingly poor, architecturally, and I fear that left to market forces, builders will seek only to maximise returns with little regard for diverse, interesting and innovative design. Does Bedford Borough Council Planning Dept have the resources and talent to ensure that we don't repeat past mistakes?

Object

Representation ID: 3853

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Jacqueline Ayto

DENNYBROOK
OBJECTIONS:

1) The plan to have over 10,000 new homes built in Dennybrook would bring chaos to the village of Colmworth & surrounding areas. I have lived in Colmworth all my life (58 yrs) so know the area so very well. The local 2040 plan would stretch from Colmworth to the A1 at Eaton Socon. The size of the site would be 2/3rds the size of St. Neots. It would…
bring chaos to Colmworth’s roads, & surrounding roads, bringing in another 20,000
cars, plus other volume of vans, lorries etc. There is no infrastructure to support this
Amount of housing & traffic. It would totally overwhelm our local road network.
It would also erase a very rural area and many historic settlements.
2) The proposed site, consisting of 2,400 acres lies in a very rural area with few access
Roads and very minimal infrastructure. The proposed site only has the far east end near St. Neots as an access point. All other roads are unclassified & incapable of handling the traffic volume that Dennybrook would generate. There are many single tracked roads
surrounding the site, but nine have been viewed as being widened.
3) The proposed site of Dennybrook comprising of 2,400 acres is high quality
Agricultural land, growing essential crops. Priority under the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework says that here should be a brownfield element to the site.
Dennybrook has no brownfield element ear marked. Although other proposals for LP40
have been rejected by Beds Borough Council, such as Twinwoods, they do include
brownfield elements and should be or have been considered.

4) The scale of Dennybrook would create significant disruption from construction traffic Extending beyond 2055. This I consider to be an unacceptable burden on Colmworth & Surrounding neighbouring communities.
5) The proposed site of Dennybrook has very poor access to Bedford, many residents will favour St. Neots, which will bring further economic damage to an already declining Bedford town centre.
6) It is hard to see how the site would address Bedford Borough’s housing needs, when potential residents will either come from St. Neots or the surrounding Cambridge arc. The site would likely fail to attract people from Bedford & it’s needs for housing in proportion to the size of the development.
There are other high quality developments opportunities for inclusion in LP40. A call-for-sites by Beds Borough council totalled a response in excess of 70,000 plots against a need of 12,500 plots for completion of the plan. There is no need to consider a large & destructive proposal like Dennybrook.
7) The location of Dennybrook would encourage car use as residents would be commuting above average distances. This cannot be environmentally sound in the current climate of using cars less, & we are being encouraged to walk or cycle.

Object

Representation ID: 3855

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: David Michell

Colmworth Parish Council has produced the following analysis of the proposed Dennybrook development and I agree with their conclusion that we should object to it. I have added my concern about the increasing risk of flooding caused by extreme weather events and proximity to the River Great Ouse.
The Dennybrook development would overwhelm Colmworth as a separate community, creating a sprawling suburban environment and bringing significant traffic congestion to our narrow and twisting roads. It would dominate the local environment with heavy construction traffic for the next 30 years and more.
• Dennybrook is a proposed development of over 10,000 homes that would stretch from Colmworth to the A1 at Eaton Socon. The development would be approximately the size of Biggleswade, 2/3rds the size of St Neots. The homes would bring around 20,000 extra cars, plus the respective volume of white vans etc, totally overwhelming the local road network. This proposal is hugely excessive and would totally erase a very rural area and its historic settlements.
• The land comprising this 2,400 acre site is largely Grade A agricultural land, growing essential crops. There is no brownfield element to the site, a priority under the Government's National Planning Policy Framework. Other (rejected by BBC) proposals for LP40 such as Twinwoods include brownfield elements and should be prioritised.
• The site lies in a very rural area with few access roads and minimal infrastructure. Apart from the far east end of the site near St Neots, the only road access points are unclassified roads incapable of handling the traffic volume. Several roads immediately surrounding and within the site are single-track roads, yet none are scheduled for widening.
• The scale of the project would create significant disruption from construction traffic extending beyond 2055, that is an unacceptable burden on neighbouring communities.
• The site has comparatively poor access to Bedford itself, many residents will favour St Neots which adds further economic damage to Bedford town centre which is in serious decline.
There is no shortage of high-quality development opportunities for inclusion in LP40. The call-for-sites by BBC returned over 430 responses totalling in excess of 70,000 plots against a need of approximately 12,500 plots for completion of the plan. There is no need to consider something as large and destructive as the Dennybrook proposal.
• It is difficult to understand how the site would contribute greatly to BBC's housing need when potential residents would more likely be attracted from the St Neots area, particularly those reliant on methods of transport other than the car. Thus the site will likely fail to support Bedford housing needs in proportion to the scale of the development.
• The location of the site means that, for employment purposes in particular, many residents will be commuting above-average distances and will be almost wholly reliant on private cars. The distances for most would not encourage walking or cycling and while there is a new railway station planned for the area, possibly around Tempsford or Little Barford, this will not be close enough to avoid using the car for access.
• BBC noted in their assessment of this site in 2019 "The site is located in a relatively convenient location for vehicle journeys on the strategic road network, which may be a deterrent to non-motorised travel." In no way can this site be considered to be an environmentally sound or sustainable solution to BBC's housing needs.
• I am concerned that the proposed site is close to the River Great Ouse and global warming is already causing extreme rainfall events on a more frequent basis. Proposed housing density is high, the ground is clay and the area to absorb rainfall will be substantially reduced by buildings, which will lead to more surface water flooding within the proposed site.
• Recent developments at Wixhams, Shortstown and Bedford Riverside have been depressingly poor, architecturally, and I fear that left to market forces, builders will seek only to maximise returns with little regard for diverse, interesting and innovative design. Does Bedford Borough Council Planning Dept have the resources and talent to ensure that we don't repeat past mistakes?

Object

Representation ID: 3895

Received: 28/08/2021

Respondent: Sir Graham Fry

This site is unsuitable for development because it is greenfield and rural in nature. There are serious issues concerning transport, the natural environment, the loss of good agricultural land, heritage assets and flooding. Above all, creating a new town here would destroy a peaceful corner of the English countryside and be a perfect example of unsustainable development.

Object

Representation ID: 4015

Received: 29/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Turner

Too Large
High quality agricultural land will be lost
Dennybrook identifies it as scoring lower than Spatial Option 3a.
Huge increase in traffic through the hamlets
Increase Flood Risk
Permanent irreversible change to the landscape
Too close to St Neots with a potential coalescencee
proposed development at Dennybrook would be a car reliant settlement.
Dennybrook site does not align with a strategic transport corridor growth strategy,
including rail.
Roadside nature reserves which contain the rare plants and fields with valued breeding sites will be lost
The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets.

Object

Representation ID: 4099

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs MARGARET TURNER

High impact on rural parish's with narrow roads, Grade 2 agricultural land and highly valued for its peace, quiet, open countryside views and rural setting by its residents. Development provides far more houses than required for the 2040 plan, Coalescence with St Neots, Car reliant settlement, High impact on landscape, Impact on road side nature reserves, Loss of village identity, High impact of traffic on Bushmead Road

Object

Representation ID: 4189

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr paul giles

please refer to all my points above with regards to dennybrook garden village

Object

Representation ID: 4202

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Fletcher Giles

please refer to all my points above with regards to the dennybrook garden village.

Object

Representation ID: 4232

Received: 30/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Joshua Zwetsloot

Please refer to all my points above with regards to the Dennybrook Garden Village.

Object

Representation ID: 4277

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Helen Leach

Please refer to all my points above with regards to the Dennybrook Garden Village.

Object

Representation ID: 4445

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Caroline Corkery

- Greenfield site NOT brownfield

- Wildlife: destruction of old/well-established ecosystems

- Agricultural land destruction:Grade 2, fertile/diverse=against Government policy

-Travel:more/longer car journeys to Bedford=pollution/congestion

- Entrance: only south entrance would be used=congestion/pollution

- Mental Health: destroying green views/space for locals/visitors

- Coalescence: loss of green corridor next St Neots

- Service use: will use Huntington District services

-Healthcare: inadequate GPs/difficult to create new one

-Transport: roads inadequate

-Amenities: Bushmead Rd surface poor/water pipes burst

-Pollution ++&concentrated

-Emergency: further from town/longer call outs

-Timing: longer to build large site in phases than multiple mini sites

Object

Representation ID: 4495

Received: 31/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lucy Crawford

Dennybrook:
- rural location,
- narrow roads
- grade 2 (high quality) agricultural land
- contrary to Staploe NDP survey
- unnecessary (Option 2b with Little Barford is suitable instead)
- risks coalescence with St Neots
- engulfs Honeydon
- too far from new station for sustaniable access
- would increase car journeys
- widening roads would lead to urbanisation
- based on flawed transport modelling - underestimates trips
- risks harm to nature reserves, and listed buildings.

Object

Representation ID: 4676

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Melvyn Chase

I have severe Parkinson’s and cannot type easily. Please duplicate all of Lucy Crawford’s responses for my views. Her email address is Lucy_crawford@hotmail.com and she lives at 33, Staploe PE19 5JA

Object

Representation ID: 4702

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Liza Mackenzie

Overall, the land west of Wyboston (Dennybrook) does not offer a truly sustainable form of development, and thereby contrary to policies contained within the NPPF and of the Council’s adopted Local Plan. Accordingly, the proposed new settlement should be discounted when considering sites for allocation going forward to the pre-submission draft Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 4706

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Darren Edwards

Agent: Fuller Long Planning Consultants

We do not consider the proposed settlement is consistence with the guidance given in the NPPF for the following reasons:

The site is greenfield
The land has a Grade 2 Agricultural Classification (higher than other sites)
Harm to the character of the countryside
Loss of identity of Honeydon and Begwary.
Insufficient open space between the settlement and St Neots.
Little or no benefit to sustaining Bedford Town Centre.
Flood Risk
Ecology

Notwithstanding these serious concerns should the site be included within the emerging local plan the land at 8 Chapel Close should also be allocated for development.

Object

Representation ID: 4728

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Tom Tagg

This car dependent development will destroy high quality agricultural land, individual village identities and open landscape views. Coalescence will occur with St. Neots, Honeydon, Colmworth, Colesden, Chawston and Wyboston. It is not sustainable - brownfield sites should be chosen first. The developer has failed to properly assess the special, unique and protected biodiversity, lack of suitable roads/infrastructure and does not propose dwellings that will be carbon neutral. He has not demonstrated Environmental Net Gain. The proposals fail to meet many of the objectives in BBC's 2040 Vision.

Object

Representation ID: 4798

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Fletcher Giles

Cobholden is unsuitable because: there is a risk of coalescence with St Neots, it would engulf Duloe, the location is high quality agricultural land, it is valued as a rural location by its residents, there are no services, the roads are very narrow, it is too far from the new E-W rail station to offer sustainable transport, there are listed buildings and a large development could cause flooding in St Neots. The transport modelling is flawed and underestimates the number of trips.

Object

Representation ID: 4815

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr paul giles

Cobholden is unsuitable because: there is a risk of coalescence with St Neots, it would engulf Duloe, the location is high quality agricultural land, it is valued as a rural location by its residents, there are no services, the roads are very narrow, it is too far from the new E-W rail station to offer sustainable transport, there are listed buildings and a large development could cause flooding in St Neots. The transport modelling is flawed and underestimates the number of trips.

Object

Representation ID: 4817

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mr paul giles

Dennybrook is unsuitable because: there is a risk of coalescence with St Neots, it would engulf Honeydon, the location is high quality agricultural land, it is valued as a rural location by its residents, there are no services, the roads are very narrow, it is too far from the new E-W rail station to offer sustainable transport, there are many nature reserves and listed buildings and a large development could cause flooding in St Neots. The transport modelling is flawed and underestimates the number of trips.

Object

Representation ID: 4830

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Pavely

I strongly object to such an enormous development of hundreds of houses on prime agricultural farm land where numerous villages, homes, listed properties and livelihoods will be consumed and lost forever. The site at Barford would be more accessible for the new rail line.

Object

Representation ID: 4833

Received: 01/09/2021

Respondent: Miss Helen Leach

Dennybrook is unsuitable because: there is a risk of coalescence with St Neots, it would engulf Honeydon, the location is high quality agricultural land, it is valued as a rural location by its residents, there are no services, the roads are very narrow, it is too far from the new E-W rail station to offer sustainable transport, there are many nature reserves and listed buildings and a large development could cause flooding in St Neots. The transport modelling is flawed and underestimates the number of trips.

Object

Representation ID: 4838

Received: 02/09/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hayley Morphew

This is not an urban, brownfield site. It is rural, open countryside consisting of grade 2 agricultural land. Government policy states that brownfield sites should be selected in preference to greenfield sites due to the intrinsic nature and character of the countryside which must be preserved. There are other sites more suitable (Twinwoods for example is a brownfield site consisting of grade 3 agricultural land). Any development here will not benefit Bedford, instead St Neots (Cambs) will be overwhelmed due to the insufficient segregation and risk of urban sprawl. Flooding of St Neots is a key risk.