Policy HOU5 Abbey Field, West of Elstow

Object

Representation ID: 9106

Received: 15/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Johnny Palmer

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Not in keeping with the rural village. Overbearing commercial complex not in keeping with a rural location. Adverse impact on green space, wildlife and general ecology. Excessive noise/dust pollution.

Comment

Representation ID: 9238

Received: 09/07/2022

Respondent: Sukhi Arkan

I am writing in Referance to the proposal to build 200 homes in the Abby field West of Elstow.
This concerns me in many ways.
- the impact to the local landscape.
I moved to the area as the setting was green and a breath of fresh air. Moving from a town centre setting to somewhere for my family to grow and breath without inhaling pollution. I have 2 young children and the additional pollution is concerning me for there future health issues.
The loss of local wildlife is something to consider you would be removing/destroying home for these wild animals. Where would they go?
Would they be safely removed. I don’t see this. I see bulldozers tearing down our natural beauty.
- additional traffic
Traffic at present can be an issue of local residents when leaving the estate.
The additional homes will lead to additional vehicles causing more chaos.
The local village roads are not designed for a heavy traffic passing through. I believe this is going to cause more wear/damage on the roads leading to damage to cars.
- healthcare and education
At present the surgery that supports our community takes months to get a routine appointment. With the addition of 200 home and approx 1000 extra residents it will be impossible to get one.
Not to mention the impact to our local schools. Class numbers rising and not all our children will receive the valuable support they need to nurture there need to learn and grow.
Please please please reconsider this proposal.
A concerned resident of the Abbyfields estate. mom of 2 young children.

Object

Representation ID: 9285

Received: 27/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Claudio Scippo

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

1 - Elstow is the only historic village in the area with the abbey and connection to John Bunyan. Adding a large number of houses will ruin its character.
2 - The site is in a rural location and this large development is totally out of keeping with its surroundings.
3 - The development would bring urbanisation to the village making it just another suburb of Bedford.
3 - The additional homes will increase traffic causing even more congestion at the West End roundabout and at the traffic lights at the junction of West End and Ampthill Road.

Object

Representation ID: 9288

Received: 27/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Simon Peryer

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

There has be little consideration to the social impact of building 200 homes next to an Historic village with less
There appears scant consideration to the impact on local traffic routes. the proposed access filters onto an already congested route that is often compressed by traffic trying to get to and from the retail park. This proposal has little to offer in community as the estate would be a one way in and one way out. This will create a modern day ghetto where households will be neither Abbey fields nor Elstow.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Object

Representation ID: 9293

Received: 27/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Maria Scippo

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

1 - Elstow is the only historic village in the area with its Abbey and connection to John Bunyan. Adding a large number of houses will ruin its character.
2 - The site is in a rural location and this large development is totally out of keeping with its surroundings.
3 - The development would bring urbanisation to the village making it just another suburb of Bedford.
3 - The additional homes will increase traffic causing severe congestion at the West End roundabout and at the traffic lights at the junction of West End and Ampthill Road/ A6.

Object

Representation ID: 9372

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Ryan Tobias

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

1. There is insufficient provision within the area for good quality primary school places. Both Elstow and Lakeview are full & WixamsTree is Ofsted RI, anyway that would increase traffic at school run time due to distance.
2. Access shouldn't be onto Abbeyfields road. There's already too much traffic through the village and significant congestion on West End and the junction with the A6.
3. Building on Grade-2 Agricultural land is plain wrong at a time when Global food prices are rocketing and we plainly need to be more self sufficient as a nation and there's plenty of Brownfield sites.

Object

Representation ID: 9378

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Peter Stimpson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

I feel that replacing the valuable farm land at this location with housing is a great loss to the ability for the country to be self sufficient in producing food.
I feel that the loss of this area of countryside makes the area worst for the current residents. Loss of natural beauty, the loss of acres of local air purifying and oxygen producing vegitation, and the Loss of acres of local wildlife habitat.

Object

Representation ID: 9491

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Rachael Brierley

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

I object because it will change the landscape forever in terms of buildings and wildlife. Elstow will cease to be a village. The sites proposed are in very rural locations and habitats will be lost. Traffic and noise pollution will increase. It will block out views of historic Elstow Abbey and the plan to have a business park in the heart of the village does not fit with the character of it. It could lead to more developments and thus a total urbanisation of the area.

Comment

Representation ID: 9500

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: The Forest of Marston Vale Trust

This site lies within the designated Forest of Marston Vale and therefore this policy needs to stipulate the requirement to provide 30% tree cover within the development, as is stipulated for other allocations within the Forest area. Omitting this specific reference is unhelpfully ambiguous, and also inconsistent with the treatment in other allocation policies.

Object

Representation ID: 9515

Received: 27/07/2022

Respondent: Mr David Fudger

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

There is acknowledged importance of Elstow remaining a rural village - The village of Elstow is unique, it is steeped in history with its distinctive character and the addition of housing, and a business park will be totally alien to this character.

Coalescence with Bedford Town
Developing these sites would bring urbanisation to Elstow village, with this housing and employment development, being in such proximity to one another, it will mean the village becomes submerged into Bedford.

Inappropriate and overbearing in height - if any structures are placed on the proposed sites, considering the demographic of the local land, along with the A421 bypass the buildings will be incredibly imposing on nearby settlements.

Impact on local landscape - the sites are in extremely rural locations, the sites are not near densely populated areas, so to have such large-scale development is totally out of keeping. The visual impact on the local setting needs to be considered from all angles, again using specific local knowledge on this is helpful. Being mindful as well of local rights of way, or recreational past times.

Highways - There is already significant congestion experienced at the nearby site junction(s) throughout the day. Detail experiences of impact this has on your own travel patterns as well as the disruption this causes within the village setting.
Traffic volumes and village road network are not suitable for vehicles that would be accessing this site. Access onto nearby village roads might require significant remodelling of the roundabouts and junctions.
Oxford to Cambridge Arc - the government has recognised that such a scheme servicing this local area is no longer necessary, therefore the project has been scrapped.

Working habit changes - consider the changes to how the population now work from home, draw on your own experiences and knowledge of changes to the workplace environment.

Evolution of technology - over time as technology evolves so does how industries operate, having such a specific designation limits the suitability of this proposed site.

Over allocation of employment sites - the Local Plan document has many allocations proposed to be designated for employment sites, concern over the site being redesignated for an alternative use such as housing.

Unsuccessful previous delivery of site EMP6 - the site at Land at Pear Tree Farm was previously allocated for employment with the site known as Land at Medbury Farm in the previous Allocations and Designations Local Plan several years ago. The site did not move forwards in the last 15 years, so it is unreliable in terms of deliverability.

Precedent - if any of the sites are taken forwards on the east of the A6 it will open that entire local area to being developed, with a swathe of housing and employment being built over term, effectively resulting in total urbanisation of the local area.

Sustainability - The proposed development area is not close to any immediate existing services and facilities.
'Levelling up' - central government White Paper sets out that opportunity would be spread more evenly for moral, social, and economic programme growth. Locating such development in the northern part of the country would be in line with government policy.

Wildlife impact - the local area is abundantly rich with wildlife, there will be significant loss of habitat. Local knowledge of how rich in wildlife these areas are, have not been taken into consideration. This needs to be, given the uniqueness of the area as a part of the rural countryside, habitat loss from such significant development and associated ground and hedge/tree works.

Loss of Agricultural Land - The sites comprise Grade 2 agricultural land, which is Best and Most Versatile (BMV) land, and according to national policy, should be protected from significant, inappropriate unsustainable development proposals.

Distinctiveness of village must be considered - Elstow is predominantly a parish with low density development. Having an enormous business park totally urban in character would be out of keeping. Elstow has always pursued a 'dark skies' policy around the parish where the employment site is proposed. This is a distinctive character; it would not be possible to retain a rural character with overbearing, multiple story employment units being imposed on the village.

Protection of the view to Elstow Abbey - the historic building, which is recognised nationally, must be preserved in its rural setting. Any building in the area Abbey Field West of Elstow will be detrimental to the view across to the Abbey from the A6.

Noise pollution - the sites are nearby to several residential properties so during the construction phase these could be subjected to unacceptable noise and disturbance.
Where else the development could go?

There are several housing growth areas identified in the Local Plan, with significant new settlements at Little Barford and Kempston Hardwick. There is a provision for some employment allocation at these two sizeable new communities. It would be natural for employment sites to be based at these locations, for those sites to be expanded to enable those new communities to grow with job opportunities nearby and in a sustainable way. It would be naturally for these areas to take housing development as well.

The Borough Council could also allocate more employment land at existing, established business park areas which have infrastructure in place already. Do also include any other thoughts you might have on where else development could go.

Object

Representation ID: 9590

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr James Welling

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Elstow is a historic village containing over 36 grade 1 and 2 listed properties. The proposed housing development will butt directly against the sites of many of these listed properties. It is a legal responsibility of the council to maintain a distance between the listed properties and any new development and that is clearly not being done with the proposal.The properties in the village have been listed due to their historic and architectural importance. The reason for listing a building is to preserve it's historic character. Elstow's character is defined by the number of listed properties it contains. The building of a housing estate next to these ancient buildings will totally undermine the rural nature of the village and impact negatively on the lives of the existing residents who have lived in this setting for many years.
The proposal is to build 200 houses on the site. Traffic through Elstow village is already in excess of what there should be due to drivers completely ignoring the 'prohibited vehicles' signs at each end of the village and zero enforcement taking place to ensure compliance with them. The addition of these 200 new properties will greatly increase traffic through the village and surrounding roads which already suffer traffic congestion regularly due to weight of traffic.
The proposed site is on prime agricultural land at a time when it is recognised that our nation needs to produce more of it's own food. The building of these houses would fly in the face of this need. The building of these properties would also lead to the loss of natural habitat for wildlife in the area.
There are already proposals to build 5000 houses on the Wixams site East of the A6 road and a further 1000 at Shortstown. There are also another 5000 houses proposed for a site at Marston, which, although in Central Beds, is still in geographical terms going to be close to the south of our area.
In total it is proposed to to build 17,500 houses in the locality of south Bedford. The existing infrastructure already struggles to cope with the population we have with waiting times for doctors and hospital appointments being excessive now. These additional houses will, in my opinion, push it to breaking point. The same applies to our road network which is already overloaded with vehicles, yet there is no proposal to improve this network and the addition of so many houses, with the accompanying vehicles, will simply lead to traffic gridlock.
We live in one of the dryest parts of the country, where this year, we have seen a fraction of our normal rainfall. There are only so many places where we can draw water from before the impact on our rivers, waterways, reservoires, etc becomes too much. Blindly asking the local water authorinty to provide water to service this vast number of houses simply does not take into account the toll it takes on our wider environment and this is unacceptable.
The proposed 200 houses would be constructed on land next to 2 major roadways, the A6 and A421. The undoubted increase in traffic on these roads will lead to an increase in polution near them and for an increase in the pollution levels for the residents of the proposed site. This would directly impact negatively on the health of those residents.

Object

Representation ID: 9631

Received: 26/07/2022

Respondent: Miss Natalie Goldsworthy

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposed policy outlines that it ‘recognises the importance of retaining the separate identity of Elstow’, however the very proposal of additional housing and an employment allocation, shows that this is not the case and rejects the very sentiment that this proposed policy claims to want to fulfil.

The addition of more housing to Elstow will result in the urbanisation of a small village immersed in history. The historical importance of Elstow will be lost as the development site of housing and employment being in such proximity will mean the village of Elstow will no longer be a village but merely an extension of Bedford. The village of Elstow is steeped in history and has distinctive characteristics (the Abbey, Moot Hall etc) which will be engulfed through the addition of significant housing and a business park which is completely out of character for the village. I remember studying Pilgrims Progress, regarded as one of the most significant works of theological fiction in English literature, whilst undertaking English at University. It remains a staple piece of literature still being studied now and it will be immensely disappointing, if the plan is approved, that the home of the author, John Bunyan, will be completely submerged into the town of Bedford.

The sites proposed are in extremely rural and are not densely populated areas, so not only does this make the proposal out of character for the area, but the visual impact on the Abbey will be affected as well as the increase in traffic, which is already heavily congested at the traffic lights on Ampthill Road. This congestion already goes all the way back onto the Abbey fields road and will often mean that I can’t leave my estate. The addition of 200 houses is going to heavily exacerbate this and the infrastructure is simply not there to support the addition of all this housing.

This will often lead to large vehicles travelling through the centre of Elstow and the small village roads are not equipped to facilitate those types of vehicles. In addition, there seems to be no consideration of the school capacity. Since moving to the area, I have witnessed 3 near collisions with children nearly being hit by cars due to the massive congestion around school pick up and drop off, incidents have been reported to Elstow primary school and the police. Adding 200 houses to this already ongoing problem (as it has been established as a police priority to monitor the congestion and anti-social parking as part of local initiatives) will make this unmanageable.

The loss of agricultural land will be immensely significant as I understand that the site comprises of Grade 2 agriculture land, which is considered BMV and accordingly to national policy should be protected from significant, inappropriate, and unsustainable development proposals, such as this one. In addition, there is an abundance of wildlife in these areas which will be disrupted and completely lost.

There is also no guarantee that this proposal will remain as only 200 houses, once planning permission is granted, there are several opportunities for the developer to vary planning conditions, whether that be adding more houses, or moving the placement of those houses, which will be completely out of keeping with the Elstow village area.

Object

Representation ID: 9635

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Anita Welling

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Elstow is a historic village containing over 36 grade 1 and 2 listed properties. The proposed housing development will butt directly against the sites of many of these listed properties. It is a legal responsibility of the council to maintain a distance between the listed properties and any new development and that is clearly not being done with the proposal.The properties in the village have been listed due to their historic and architectural importance. The reason for listing a building is to preserve it's historic character. Elstow's character is defined by the number of listed properties it contains. The building of a housing estate next to these ancient buildings will totally undermine the rural nature of the village and impact negatively on the lives of the existing residents who have lived in this setting for many years.
The proposal is to build 200 houses on the site. Traffic through Elstow village is already in excess of what there should be due to drivers completely ignoring the 'prohibited vehicles' signs at each end of the village and zero enforcement taking place to ensure compliance with them. The addition of these 200 new properties will greatly increase traffic through the village and surrounding roads which already suffer traffic congestion regularly due to weight of traffic.
The proposed site is on prime agricultural land at a time when it is recognised that our nation needs to produce more of it's own food. The building of these houses would fly in the face of this need. The building of these properties would also lead to the loss of natural habitat for wildlife in the area.
There are already proposals to build 5000 houses on the Wixams site East of the A6 road and a further 1000 at Shortstown. There are also another 5000 houses proposed for a site at Marston, which, although in Central Beds, is still in geographical terms going to be close to the south of our area.
In total it is proposed to to build 17,500 houses in the locality of south Bedford. The existing infrastructure already struggles to cope with the population we have with waiting times for doctors and hospital appointments being excessive now. These additional houses will, in my opinion, push it to breaking point. The same applies to our road network which is already overloaded with vehicles, yet there is no proposal to improve this network and the addition of so many houses, with the accompanying vehicles, will simply lead to traffic gridlock.
We live in one of the dryest parts of the country, where this year, we have seen a fraction of our normal rainfall. There are only so many places where we can draw water from before the impact on our rivers, waterways, reservoires, etc becomes too much. Blindly asking the local water authorinty to provide water to service this vast number of houses simply does not take into account the toll it takes on our wider environment and this is unacceptable.
The proposed 200 houses would be constructed on land next to 2 major roadways, the A6 and A421. The undoubted increase in traffic on these roads will lead to an increase in polution near them and for an increase in the pollution levels for the residents of the proposed site. This would directly impact negatively on the health of those residents.

Object

Representation ID: 9671

Received: 26/07/2022

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within HOU5, the site lies to the south-west of a very high concentration of heritage assets in Elstow - one of the key jewels in Bedford’s heritage crown.
Elstow is a distinct medieval settlement on the southern side of Bedford, separate from the main built up area and with its own distinct identity and character. This separation is important to its significance.
The setting of the Elstow Abbey in particular (comprising the Manor House Scheduled Monument, Grade I listed Hillersdon House, Grade I listed Church of St Mary and St Helena, and Grade I listed Church Tower) within the meadows, and views of the Abbey from the approach into Bedford along the A6 are important.
We welcome the preparation of an HIA for the site which considers both built heritage and archaeology but consider that it downplays the contribution made by the wider setting of Elstow Abbey to its heritage significance.
Although the significance of the heritage assets comprising Elstow Abbey are drawn primarily from their immediate setting and architectural, archaeological, historic interests, nonetheless their importance is enhanced by their landscape context and wider rural setting.
Elstow Abbey sits in a typical location for a monastery/nunnery. Monasteries and other religious institutions were reliant upon their wider agricultural estate to support them and were often sited away from large conurbations to provide an area of peace and reflection away from the outside world. The wider rural setting is important to the experience of the Abbey as a place of worship, and local landmark, as well as illustrating its historic association with agriculture. It therefore makes an important contribution to its significance.
While we acknowledge that the land immediately to the south and west of the Abbey is to be retained as green open space, nonetheless any built development within HOU5 would divorce the Abbey from its wider rural context, altering its historic illustrative value as a rural monastic site, and thereby resulting in a loss of significance. We do not consider that there is any potential for further mitigation since any measures which retain the open character would render the developable area too small for a viable allocation. We therefore recommend that the site is deleted.
If you are minded to proceed with this allocation, then further landscape work specifically considering the wider setting of Elstow Abbey will need to be produced in advance of the EiP, setting out with appropriate justification where development could be sited. This further work should then inform revisions to policy wording to establish key design parameters for the site. We would be grateful to have a conversation with you to agree the scope of this further work with you.
While we note that there is reference to a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) in the Vision Strategy (Savills, August 2020), we have been unable to access it. Without having had the opportunity to review this technical work, we have been unable to determine whether it satisfies the concerns and next steps that we have outlined above.
Without this further evidence, the allocation is not justified and therefore is not sound.

Comment

Representation ID: 9713

Received: 26/07/2022

Respondent: Historic England

We have considerable concerns about the suitability of this site for residential development, and therefore recommend that the site is deleted.
However, if you are minded to proceed with this allocation, then further landscape work specifically considering the wider setting of Elstow Abbey and the rural approach into Bedford, will need to be produced in advance of the EiP, setting out with appropriate justification where development could be sited. This further work should then inform revisions to policy wording to establish key design parameters for the site. We would be grateful to have a conversation with you to agree the scope of this further work.

Object

Representation ID: 9739

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Andrew Simmons

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

I am writing to express my concern with the proposal of Policy HOU5 Abbeyfield, West of Elstow.


Although the village of Elstow is bypassed it still remains on a daily basis a rat run between Bedford and Luton, as people cut through to avoid the roundabouts and traffic lights. Each day there are queues to come out of the village towards Bedford and in the event of an accident on the bypass or surrounding area the village and surrounding roads are instantly gridlocked. The proposal of potentially 200 houses, with on average 2 cars per household, means an extra 400 cars a day. This is a significant increase in traffic and more importantly pollution .

This proposed area is away from any other housing so creates a seperate part of the village with no link to the rest, making it stand out on it's own. Elstow only has 1 primary school which i believe is full, both primaries in Wixams are also full, so to is Wilstead.

The area concerned over the years, since the Abbeyfield Road was built, has become high in wildlife with badgers, newts, deer etc and currently I believe there are Red Kites nesting in the trees at the end of Church End.
These birds were saved from national extinction and were successfully reintroduced to England. Red Kites are listed under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

Over the years Elstow has grown signicantly with housing and businesses but cannot continue to sustain future growth so I urge you to reconsider this policy in the plans.

Comment

Representation ID: 9752

Received: 27/07/2022

Respondent: Rosemarie Langley

I live in High Street Elstow. I have lived in the village for 54 years.
I have been examining the plans for industrial and housing increases for the village. As you know the village has already been greatly enlarged in recent years, with the Wigram Close and the old school site and the Abbey Fields development.

Please take care of the following issues :
- Make sure there is a large percentage – 50% - of Social / Council housing in the new housing plans with solar panels built in.
- Also that the necessary school places will be built along with houses, with solar panels on the schools
- Keep a clear corridor for the Marston Vale Forest land as well as the Brook in the land through the village, for walkers and for wildlife,
- Make sure that the village roads are properly surfaced and adequate for heavy vehicles
- Keeping in mind that many people walk and cycle, and provide safe byways to enjoy the village with its obvious history of over 1000 years.
Thank you very much.
All best wishes for a happy and successful development.

Object

Representation ID: 9800

Received: 24/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Timothy Harris

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposal for housing in the South of Elstow HOU5 is harmful to the local area where my family has lived for 4 generations.
200 houses is a massive development when infrastructure is already lacking.
This would have a deleterious effect on the rural nature of Elstow as a village separated from Bedford for a thousand years.
The view of Elstow Abbey and the medieval fish ponds has appeared in numerous historical paintings and sketches as a perfect example of English rural idyll Old Church, River meadows, Hillesden Mansion ruins etc.Some of these are included in national collections including the UK Government Art Collection. This development would destroy those views from the West of Elstow forever.
It would be irresponsible for Bedford to treat one of its rural jewels and actual places that international tourists visit for with the contempt displayed in this proposal.
Apart from this major reason there are other considerations such as the pressure on transport with long queues at the Wedt End roundabout throughout the day. This would not improve.
This is a greenfield site with much wildlife which I know from regular wal,s having lived in the village myself for 29 years. There will be massive disruption to this wildlife if the proposal goes ahead.
The loss of agricultural land is unacceptable.
The levelling up agenda should see housing targets reduced for already overcrowded places like Bedfordshire and the South Midlands. There is no place for this type of speculative development away from towns, next to trunk roads and plonked alongside a historic rural village.
This would push development towards the Wixams and mean an unwanted joining up which neither community want.
This proposal needs to be removed from the local plan 2040 as inappropriate for the rural parish of Elstow.

Comment

Representation ID: 9847

Received: 28/07/2022

Respondent: Ms Nicola Chapman

I am writing to express my concern with the proposal of Policy HOU5 Abbeyfield, West of Elstow.

Although the village of Elstow is bypassed it still remains on a daily basis a rat run between Bedford and Luton, as people cut through to avoid the roundabouts and traffic lights. Each day there are queues to come out of the village towards Bedford and in the event of an accident on the bypass or surrounding area the village and surrounding roads are instantly gridlocked. The proposal of potentially 200 houses, with on average 2 cars per household, means an extra 400 cars a day. This is a significant increase in traffic and more importantly pollution .

This proposed area is away from any other housing so creates a seperate part of the village with no link to the rest, making it stand out on it's own. Elstow only has 1 primary school which i believe is full, both primaries in Wixams are also full, so to is Wilstead. Currently one resident I have spoken to has to travel to Haynes as she was unable to secure a place for her daughter anywhere nearer.
Further housing without an increase of local schooling means yet again extra traffic and pollution at a time we are supposed to be attempting to try to reduce emissions.Doctors and Dentists are also full in the area and residents struggle to get an appointment for either.

The area concerned over the years, since the Abbeyfield Road was built, has become high in wildlife with badgers, newts, deer etc and currently I believe there are Red Kites nesting in the trees at the end of Church End.
These birds were saved from national extinction and were successfully reintroduced to England. Red Kites are listed under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

Over the years Elstow has grown signicantly with housing and businesses but cannot continue to sustain future growth so I urge you to reconsider this policy in the plans.

Comment

Representation ID: 9913

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Anthony Hare

My concern is the unfair focus to build housing south of Bedford and failing to look north of Bedford. We already suffer hugely increased traffic problems which will only increase with more traffic due to increased housing especially in an area such as Elstow having already seen housing triple+ in the past 30+ years, and that is to a village that has greater historic and heritage values than possibly any village in southern England. The housing referred below could easily subsume Elstow into a greater Bedford to simply become a residential ward estate like Putnoe or Goldington or Brickhill or Harper or Cauldwell.

HOU 5 - West Elstow - Abbey Field
A touch confused with regard to housing on Abbeyfield West when the housing details referred to by Natalie Billington's local plan briefing makes no such reference. I have had a long personal discussion with Charles Whitbread, the landowner, about that said housing and he has said that plans are yet to be drawn up, but, and importantly, he has agreed, in fact promised, that I will be personally involved with the plans before any submission to BBC planning. He is aware that I have personally spent some 24 years stopping the Whitbread family developing that land and other land(s) in Elstow.

Comment

Representation ID: 9917

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Susan Anderson

The density of housing would take away the rural feel of the village and would take Elstow into the urbanisation of Bedford with no or little distinction would be made where Elstow was in relation to the expansion of Bedford. Views of the Abbey from the south would be lost and also another block of land that is present open space be gone forever.

Comment

Representation ID: 9964

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr David Anderson

The development will destroy the village and it will become part of the urban sprawl of Bedford.
Elstow is unique with its connection with John Bunyan and I hope that the planners don't make another mistake that will be regretted in future years like the loss of Bunyans Cottage as the rural feel of the village will be lost forever.

Object

Representation ID: 10001

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Dr Margaret Turner

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The Plan is not sound in that it fails to take into consideration Bedford Borough 2010 Character Appraisal and Management Plan.
The northern part of the proposed control of development area falls within the Elstow Conservation Area, as outlined in the BBC 2010 Character Appraisal & Management Plan (CAMP) and considered at this time to be “of special interest”.
In Policy BE9 of the CAMP, The Council undertook to “protect the character and Appearance of the conservation areas through the careful control of development “. HOU5 of The Local Plan 2040 fails to demonstrate this.
In Policy BE11 Bedford Council undertook “to ensure all new developments within, adjoining or likely to affect the setting of conservation areas, preserves or enhances its character or appearance. This has not been explicit or even sufficiently allowed for under the 2040 Local Plan, in terms of scale, form, likely density, levels of traffic generation, the visual impact or other environmental controls.
Under BE 15 BBC undertakes to “protect important views in conservation areas and refuse development on any open space which contributes to the inherent character of the area”. The open space and view across to the Abbey church should fall under this definition.
Policy BE23 protects archaeological sites and so it should be necessary to further survey and record the important archaeology
The case for the proposed development to bring about benefits in terms of economic regeneration and/or environmental enhancement has not been made.
In relation to the Duty to co-operate, the plan falls short in relation to that part of the duty which requires co-operation with statutory bodies to address climate change, including the
management of flood risk and the provision of open space and most particularly the protection of known sites of archaeological and historic interest and the open views of these important sites.

Object

Representation ID: 10025

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Timothy Court

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposed policy outlines that it “ recognises the importance of retaining the separate entity of Elstow” however the proposal of the additional housing and employment allocation shows that this is not the case and rejects the very sentiment that this proposal claims to want to fufil.
This new development proposed for Elstow means that it will be merged with Bedford. Elstow is an historic village with the Church, the Abbey and Moot Hall all being key features. The new housing and employment developments will swamp what is a unique, rural village and thereby change forever the character of the village. The proposals are not in keeping with the nature of this village.
The additional houses will inevitably mean more cars and therefore greater congestion. The roads in and around Elstow will not be able to cope with this. The alternative sites of Kempston Hardwick and Little Barford have better road networks to manage this problem.
There is no guarantee that this housing proposal will remain at 200 houses. Once planning permission is granted there are several opportunities for the developer to vary planning conditions, whether that be be adding more houses or moving the placement of them.

Object

Representation ID: 10029

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Stephanie Court

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposed policy outlines that it “ recognises the importance of retaining the separate entity of Elstow” however the proposal of the additional housing and employment allocation shows that this is not the case and rejects the very sentiment that this proposal claims to want to fufil.
This new development proposed for Elstow means that it will be merged with Bedford. Elstow is an historic village with the Church, the Abbey and Moot Hall all being key features. The new housing and employment developments will swamp what is a unique, rural village and thereby change forever the character of the village. The proposals are not in keeping with the nature of this village.
The additional houses will inevitably mean more cars and therefore greater congestion. The roads in and around Elstow will not be able to cope with this. The alternative sites of Kempston Hardwick and Little Barford have better road networks to manage this problem.
There is no guarantee that this housing proposal will remain at 200 houses. Once planning permission is granted there are several opportunities for the developer to vary planning conditions, whether that be be adding more houses or moving the placement of them.

Object

Representation ID: 10039

Received: 28/07/2022

Respondent: The Southill Estate

Agent: Carter Jonas LLP

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Southill Estate owns the land at Abbey Field West of Elstow, and supports the draft allocation for residential development and agrees with the policy requirements for the promoted development. The decision to allocate the land has been informed by the assessment of the site against selection criteria and constraints in the Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment and Site Assessments, and in the assessment of the site against sustainability objectives in the Sustainability Appraisal Report. The site is consistent with the spatial strategy and distribution strategy contained in PSBLP. The site is also consistent with national policy contained in the NPPF, in terms of the preferred location for strategic development and accessibility by sustainable modes of transport.
A Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared for the site to assess the impacts on heritage assets and set out mitigation and enhancement measures to address those impacts; the Assessment was submitted with the Southill Estate’s representations at Draft Local Plan stage in Summer 2021. An updated Bedford Innovation Campus Indicative Masterplan Document is submitted with these representations.

A more detailed commentary on these matters is provided below.

Policy HOU 5 identifies a number of key principles for the promoted development, which are included to ensure a high quality scheme and that the opportunities associated with the location of the site are delivered, and to ensure that significant constraints are addressed. For example, there are policy requirements relating to heritage assets, open space, green infrastructure, noise pollution, housing mix, access arrangements, pedestrian and cycle connections, education contributions, archaeology, flood risk, ecology, climate change, and water infrastructure. These policy requirements have been informed by the findings of the site assessment process.

The policy requirements in Policy HOU 5 are consistent with national policy contained in the NPPF. For example, there are sections of the NPPF that address housing (Section 5), communities (Section 8), sustainable transport (Section 9), design (Section 12), climate change and flooding (Section 14), natural environment (Section 15), and historic environment (Section 16).

The site was assessed in the Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment and Site Assessments (Site Ref. 638). The site assessment identified potential constraints associated with nature conservation, heritage assets, and noise. The assessment identifies uncertain impacts for protected species, biodiversity net gain, agricultural land, and flood risk. The assessment includes detailed commentary on highway, transport and access matters. Policy HOU 5 include policy requirements for nature conservation (criteria vii), heritage (criteria i(a), and noise (criteria i(d). The policy requires an assessment of ecology, flood risk and drainage, and transport to support a planning application. In addition, there is a policy requirement for a masterplan and design code to be submitted with a planning application. Policy DM7 of PSBLP provides the general policy for biodiversity net gain that applies to all major developments, including the promoted development at HOU 5.

The site was assessed against sustainability objectives in the Sustainability Appraisal Report and Appendices – see SA Appendix pg. 174 to 175. The Southill Estate’s representations to the Sustainability Appraisal comment in more detail on the findings of the assessment, and request changes to the scores for some sustainability objectives. In summary, negative effects are identified for biodiversity and habitats, historic environment, previously developed land, and community services and facilities. Policy HOU 5 includes policy requirements to address impacts on biodiversity and the historic environment and ensure that mitigation measures are provided as part of the promoted development. The promoted development would provide pedestrian and cycle connections to enable residents to access the services and facilities available in the surrounding area. The identified development needs for PSBLP will require both previously developed land and greenfield sites. The medium and longer term impacts on biodiversity and habitats, historic environment, and services and facilities should be changed to neutral or positive because of the policy requirements in Policy HOU 5 for effective mitigation measures to be implemented as part of the promoted development.

A Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared for the site to address impacts on heritage assets. In summary, it is concluded in the Assessment that the draft site allocation would change the wider rural setting of Elstow Conservation Area, the Parish Church of St Mary and St Helena, Church Tower, and the Elstow Manor House Scheduled Monument including Hillersden Mansion. This change would result in no more than a minor adverse impact to their wider rural setting and would have no impact on the immediate setting of the assets. The impact on the wider rural setting of these designated heritage assets would amount to less than substantial harm to the significance of these assets. The conclusion of the Assessment demonstrates that in terms of impacts on heritage assets it would be appropriate to allocate the site in PSBLP. In any event, there is a policy requirement to assess heritage impacts at planning application stage once more detailed information is provided on the design and layout of the promoted development.

An updated Bedford Innovation Campus Indicative Masterplan Document has been prepared for the promoted development. This confirms that the site’s developers and landowners will continue to work proactively with Bedford Borough Council to bring forward the residential development of the site. This includes a commitment to meet the emerging policy requirements set out by policy HOU5.

It is noted that Policy HOU 5 does not specify the number of dwellings that could be accommodated within the draft allocation, which is an approach that is consistent with other strategic allocations. This site is included in the housing trajectory for 200 dwellings – see Appendix 1 in Stepped Trajectory Topic Paper April 2022. It is considered that the promoted development could accommodate more dwellings (approximately 400 dwellings) by increasing the density while still meeting all of the policy requirements. This is not a requested change to Policy HOU 5, but an adjustment is required to the housing trajectory for PSBLP.

In conclusion, the Southill Estate supports the draft allocation for residential development and agrees with the policy requirements for the promoted development. No changes are required to Policy HOU 5, but site capacity referred to in the housing trajectory should be increased to approximately 400 dwellings.

Comment

Representation ID: 10107

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Sukhi Kaur

• Existing wildlife in this area will be destroyed

• The beautiful landscape where we walk down most days will be destroyed including trees. Will not benefit our health as will prevent us walking down this beautiful area.

• Elstow village will be massively effected, which is a historic rural parish and really needs to be preserved.

• No consideration for traffic flow/generation, living on Melrose drive the traffic is disaster during school hours already whereby I cannot get into my own property, people parking on double lines, on my drive way, this development will just add to the problem, which has still not been addressed despite numerous complaints to the council since 2017!

• Highway Safety - this will cause more traffic coming in and out the estate, we already have issues with speeding through the estate and been requesting for average speed cameras throughout the estate

Object

Representation ID: 10122

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Ann Peace

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Additional housing on the Abbeyfields Road will cause chaos. An additional minimum of 200 houses could result in an additional 400 cars using that road. Traffic lights or roundabout access would be needed resulting in queuing around the bad bend under the Hight Street which already has seen major accidents. West End is already congested most the day with traffic queuing back along Progress Way at rush hour. Cars from Abbeyfields already struggle to get out at the roundabout.

There are no provisions for additional school or doctors

The current facilities are not able to cope with existing demand. Which will mean more people will need to use cars to access facilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 10168

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mrs Elsie Hare

My concern is the unfair focus to build housing south of Bedford and failing to look north of Bedford. We already suffer hugely increased traffic problems which will only increase with more traffic due to increased housing especially in an area such as Elstow having already seen housing triple+ in the past 30+ years, and that is to a village that has greater historic and heritage values than possibly any village in southern England. The housing referred below could easily subsume Elstow into a greater Bedford to simply become a residential ward estate like Putnoe or Goldington or Brickhill or Harper or Cauldwell.

HOU 5 - West Elstow - Abbey Field
A touch confused with regard to housing on Abbeyfield West when the housing details referred to by Natalie Billington's local plan briefing makes no such reference. I have had a long personal discussion with Charles Whitbread, the landowner, about that said housing and he has said that plans are yet to be drawn up, but, and importantly, he has agreed, in fact promised, that I will be personally involved with the plans before any submission to BBC planning. He is aware that I have personally spent some 24 years stopping the Whitbread family developing that land and other land(s) in Elstow.

Object

Representation ID: 10285

Received: 29/07/2022

Respondent: Mr Sheldon Reynecke

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposed policy outlines that it “ recognises the importance of retaining the separate entity of Elstow” however the proposal of the additional housing and employment allocation shows that this is not the case and rejects the very sentiment that this proposal claims to want to fufil.
This new development proposed for Elstow means that it will be merged with Bedford. Elstow is an historic village with the Church, the Abbey and Moot Hall all being key features. The new housing and employment developments will swamp what is a unique, rural village and thereby change forever the character of the village. The proposals are not in keeping with the nature of this village.
The additional houses will inevitably mean more cars and therefore greater congestion. The roads in and around Elstow will not be able to cope with this. The alternative sites of Kempston Hardwick and Little Barford have better road networks to manage this problem.
There is no guarantee that this housing proposal will remain at 200 houses. Once planning permission is granted there are several opportunities for the developer to vary planning conditions, whether that be be adding more houses or moving the placement of them.