Sutton

We object to the site assessment of NPL340.
This site was dismissed as it was calculated that over 50% of the site was situated within flood zones 2/3. However, we specifically stated that only approx. 2.7 ha of land would be suitable for residential development of the 5.2 hectares of land submitted, the remaining land was to be offered as green infrastructure to assist with the objective of the Biggleswade 'Green Wheel'. This is of particular importance to this site and a significant benefit to the local area and this should be taken into account when assessing the site in more detail. This has been including within the site area to show the benefits of the scheme. If this public benefit were to be removed the ratio of land within zone 1 to the gross site area would be significantly increased allowing the site to proceed through to stage 2 of the assessment process.
We question the Council's calculation of the area but more fundamentally we suggest that the inclusion of open space and green infrastructure improvements should not be a reason for the scheme to fail the site assessment process and we urge the Council to review this.

Given that the draft Local Plan seeks to promote development to the east of Biggleswade and provide green infrastructure improvements to the area (as set out in paragraph 7.6.9) we question this approach to discount suitable sites within the exact location that can deliver this aim of the draft Local Plan.

NLP433 This proposal would not keep the character of Sutton which is a conservation area.Some of the area is in a flood plain.Infrastructure is unable to cope with current expansion of Biggleswade with the A1 and railway at full capacity at peak times.

See attachment

NLP433 The proposed submission and area south of Sutton / east of Biggleswade should be protected as rural farmland, wildlife habitat and rural landscape. It is not suitable for further large scale development due to it's environmental and agricultural assets. The area contains important natural and historic assets, as well as areas of flood zone.

We must prioritise and protect our environment, prime quality farmland and water catchment areas.

The A1 corridor, must have no further development expansion until the relevant infrastructure is fully delivered (including significant capacity expansion of the East Coast mainline railway into London and the A1/A1(M) road through Central Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire). This must include the provision of significant extra north-south road and rail capacity, especially into London, such that the transport links can sustain the proposed growth.

Any growth to the east of Biggleswade must be limited and constrained so as to sensitively expand Biggleswade whilst fully protecting the rural nature of Sutton and Dunton, as well as preserve as much high quality farmland, water catchment areas and environmental assets as possible. The expansion of Biggleswade (including any new settlements, villages, etc.) must not be allowed within 1 mile (1.6km) of the villages of Sutton or Dunton to protect the rural nature of these villages and prevent coalescence. This is especially the case for Sutton which has an important conservation area, many historic/listed buildings and scheduled monuments.

The rural nature and character of our villages must be protected, as must the well-being of the existing residents of our rural villages. Policies on coalescence need to be clear and significantly strengthened to protect the rural nature of Central Bedfordshire. The Local Plan must include a policy to prevent the encroachment of towns and new settlements onto rural areas and villages. This must include a significant 'protected rural envelope' of around 1 mile (1.6km) around existing rural villages where large scale development is prohibited.

Development in this area will lead to additional motorised transport use, rather than reduce dependency upon motorised transport, especially cars, and should therefore not be allowed.

Note: The pack horse bridge is a scheduled monument and is not shown as such on the map, neither is the Sutton conservation area.

NLP325 The village of Sutton is unable to support the development of an additional 20-25 dwellings, in addition to the already planned dwellings to be built on the old farm buildings on either side of Sutton High Street.

Sutton has no services/facilities in the village, other than a pub and has poor transport links to service centres.

Additional traffic in the village will lead to damage to the ford and pack horse bridge (scheduled monument).

The existing planned development of the two farm sites off of the High Street will meet the future needs of Sutton village.

NLP433 The area to the south of Sutton is not suitable for development, as it contains important natural assets, historic assets and high quality agricultural land. The infrastructure, including wider north-south transport infrastructure, must have suitable capacity enhancements established before further growth is considered. Some limited expansion of Biggleswade may be suitable in the longer term (15+ years),
this should be adjoining the existing Biggleswade settlement and avoid
taking prime agricultural land and natural assets. Sutton and Dunton must
be protected by a 'protected rural envelope' of one mile around the
existing villages where significant development is prohibited.

NLP340 This site is significantly within a flood area and is unsuitable for development. This site is on or close to Biggleswade Common and hence should be prioritised for wildlife/nature and limited to grazing and agricultural uses.

See attachment

OBJECT

This plan could totally engulf and spoil the community and fabric of the village of SUTTON. The proposed development is not equally distributed around the county and is out of scale. Too little is proposed in the south and too much to the east. The current transport, educational and medical structures are already stretched. This land is of far too good a quality to be taken out of food production. Also understand this area is an emergency aircraft landing site. Where's that going to go? Please let's preserve the English countryside for future generations to enjoy.

NLP433 The proposed plan covers a large area to the south of Sutton High Street. This development would overshadow the small hamlet of Sutton. The village has many listed buildings, a Grade I church and Grade II ancient monument, the Packhorse Bridge. It is in a Conservation Area. Extra traffic would greatly impact on this "scenic route" and the village character. The Council states that it will not grant permission that would greatly impact on the visual or physical coalescence of nearby settlements. If this development went ahead, it would go against CBC's own policy.

see attachment

see attachment

Thousands of new buildings bordering a village of only 299 people will have an enormous impact on the tranquillity of the area including, uninterrupted views, light and noise pollution, air pollution and increased traffic. This will significantly impact on the health and well-being of residents, whose choice on the character of the area in which they live is being taken away.

I object to the proposed 4 villages south of Sutton on prime agricultural land.
The huge amount of agricultural land to be lost to massive housing estates of 700-800 each is unacceptable. Those that live in Sutton and outlying villages do so because they choose to live in the countryside not urban sprawl spreading from Biggleswade. Villages do not have their own doctor's surgeries, post offices, banks, train stations and supermarkets. Biggleswade is swamped with traffic now and a further 2500 - 3000 homes have or are in the process of being constructed at the present time but that is where most residents of Sutton need to go to access banks, trains, supermarkets etc. all adding to congestion.

Sutton is an ancient charming hamlet with a large conservation area and medieval packhorse bridge. Already increased traffic levels are unacceptable and continue to increase. It cannot be sustained.

The farmland is criss crossed with rights of way and a major bridlepath, these should be preserved at all cost for future generations' enjoyment of the countryside.

The development proposed in this area is excessive and unwarranted and most certainly unwanted.

The residents of this area put up with poorly maintained roads if they cannot be upgraded now to take into account the increased population of this area what guarantee is there that they will be vastly improved in the future.
The roads should be safe for residents now but they are not. The Potton - Dunton road has a very high accident rate but nothing is done to improve it as it is an unclassified rural road when in fact is a major cross country link to many thousands of people.

CBC says it wishes to conserve the countryside - this is simply destruction of hundreds of acres and possibly ruination of the lives of those in Sutton. It should not be allowed.

The site assessments for Sutton have not been completed properly, for instance they have not properly considered the cumulative impact of the additional dwellings which have already been given permission.

The parish maps used as part of this consultation for Sutton have not identified the pack horse bridge as a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

The ford and Packhorse Bridge form one of the most picturesque scenes in Central Bedfordshire. The Packhorse Bridge dates back to the 13th or 14th century. It is the only bridge of its kind in Bedfordshire and is an asset which is very popular amongst historians, artists and those who want to enjoy the rural nature of the area. This wonderful and peaceful environment, the bridge and nearby ford will be damaged by additional traffic.

The village of Sutton is fortunate in being located close to the RSPB Reserve at Sandy. It is also surrounded by rich farmland, with many hedgerows and small areas of woodland. This is a wonderful environment for leisure purposes, but also supports diverse wildlife. The gardens of houses in the village are visited by many species of birds and the wide range of butterflies, moths and other insects that we see is delightful. We also see various species of rodents and bats in our gardens here. The footpaths and bridleway support many species of wild flowers. It would be hard to imagine that this would continue if the proposed development of Biggleswade towards High Street Sutton and Church Road was to go ahead. Although this is a modest area, the natural environment is worth preserving, and has actually been improving in recent years with the changes in agricultural practices that have meant the species are able to thrive.

The village of Sutton is a tranquil community at present with a quiet road running through it (except during school hours!) and pleasant surrounding countryside. This peaceful environment would be lost if the proposed development of Biggleswade in the direction of Sutton Church Road and High Street goes ahead. There would be an increase of traffic through the village and to the school and the tranquility of the village would be destroyed by the close proximity of new houses.

The village of Sutton is fortunate in being located close to the RSPB Reserve at Sandy. It is also surrounded by rich farmland, with many hedgerows and small areas of woodland. This is a wonderful environment for leisure purposes, but also supports diverse wildlife. The gardens of houses in the village are visited by many species of birds and the wide range of butterflies, moths and other insects that we see is delightful. We also see various species of rodents and bats in our gardens here. The footpaths and bridleway support many species of wild flowers. It would be hard to imagine that this would continue if the proposed development of Biggleswade towards High Street Sutton and Church Road was to go ahead. Although this is a modest area, the natural environment is worth preserving, and has actually been improving in recent years with the changes in agricultural practices that have meant the species are able to thrive.

The village of Sutton is a tranquil community at present with a quiet road running through it (except during school hours!) and pleasant surrounding countryside. This peaceful environment would be lost if the proposed development of Biggleswade in the direction of Sutton Church Road and High Street goes ahead. There would be an increase of traffic through the village and to the school and the tranquillity of the village would be destroyed by the close proximity of new houses.

I object to this.

I object to this.

Words, that's all this plan is regarding the impact on trees, woodlands & hedgerows. When the Biggleswade retail park was built many mature trees were felled to the absolute detriment of the immediate area & for what? A pavement & verge. The verge could've been sacrificed to keep mature living trees. Why should I believe it'll be any different if new development starts. If any tree or hedgerow stands in the way of development it'll likely be bulldozed without hesitation. New saplings are valuable but no substitute for mature, statuesque trees which are vital to our ecology.

When I moved to Sutton with my family it was done so with expense to enjoy the rural setting, views over fields, hedgerows & open spaces. Whilst the addition of parks & so called green spaces may satisfy the consciences of developers & councillors, it deprives homeowners in currently rural locations of the thing they have worked hard to achieve. No amount of 'sympathetic' development will compensate for what development will really bring - destruction of rural views, peace, tranquillity and the natural habitats which thrive within these.

ALP444. This site is privately owned and not available for development.

I strongly object to the plan for Sutton. It is overambitious and will have a devastating impact on the current village. Sutton is a small village with no shops, a pub and a junior school. It is a quiet village with a riding school and livery yard in the heart of the village with bridleways and footpaths leading out from the village. The suggested development will increase the level of traffic in a sleepy, quiet village making the roads in the village congested. This will also increase pollution in the village.

As a customer of the riding school in the High Street and having a horse in livery at Manor Farm, I am particularly concerned at the threat to the safety of my horse and those at Manor Farm due to the proposed development. In essence, the riding school will be bordered by a housing development and creating a very real risk to the bio security of the horses and also the risk of injury to the livestock. Over the course of the past twelve months the number of attacks on horses in fields have increased with horses in Luton and Milton Keynes being deliberately targeted and injured. The development will also create a greater risk for the horseriders who have to ride along the road to access bridleways. The development will therefore have an adverse effect on the riding school business which has been located in Sutton for quarter of a century. This seems perverse at a time when we are trying to encourage more children into sport.

The isolated sleepy village is why house prices are high in Sutton and why people have deliberately sought out the village as their home. Developing the village so that it is essentially a suburb of Biggleswade will cause house prices in Sutton to drop. It will also bring more crime to the village - Sutton has a low level of crime at present compared to Biggleswade but the plan as it stands will change that for the worse.

I strongly object to the proposed 4 villages east of Biggleswade. They will affect the historic hamlet of Sutton by increased traffic, light pollution, noise, severely reduced open countryside and lost rights of way and bridlepaths.

The agricultural land is prime Grade 1, 2 and 3. It was not intended to be developed and should never be lost to large estates that will swallow up hundreds of acres for ever.

Sutton has a conservation area and therefore road signs are restricted especially at the heritage site of the packhorse bridge. Through traffic is already increasing as a result of the housing developments nearby and the wildlife at the historic packhorse bridge and ford is being compromised.

The residents of Sutton reside there because it is a delightful small community in the countryside and should remain so. It is mentioned in the Doomsday Book and is special.

Most residents of Sutton use Biggleswade for leisure, shopping, banking etc but there is little scope for additional visitors now as it is a small market town which has 3000 new homes built or in course of erection and is overwhelmed now. There is no scope in the town centre for improved 'infrastructure' in relation to access to the train station or parking that is clearly evident.

The very busy Biggleswade Road and Sutton/Dunton road have high accident rates and are dangerous and poor and need upgrading now not in 15 years time.

Do not destroy the unique character of Sutton by this devastating Local Plan.

Development should not extend up to Sutton as this would impact the rural landscape and wildlife surrounding the village.

I wish to object to the Local draft plan. I have to use this site as there is no "green pencil" next to the draft plan.
I object on the following grounds.
1 The proposed developement from Biggleswade extending to Dunton and Sutton would effectively merge these communities. Sutton is a conservation area and the village dates back to the early 11th century. The merging would have a significant adverse effect on the conservation aspect of an ancient village.
2 There has already been extensive development in this part of Bedfordshire notably Biggleswade and Stotfold.Together with proposed extensive development in Arlesey it represents an unfair loading of development in this part of the county. Other areas should take their fair share of housing.
3. The infrastructure ofhealthcare,sewage,education,already stretched, will not be able to cope
4 This is a local plan.There is no local demand for this amount of housing

Development should be fairly distributed across Central Bedfordshire (not just on basis where land becomes available).Current facilities mean Sutton is unable to support the planned development.Sutton cannot cope with the inevitable additional traffic.A few years Central Beds councillors visited a proposed development site close to the ancient Packhorse Bridge - Some commented "We did not know this existed - A jewel in the Crown of Central Bedfordshire". The bridge and Ford would inevitably be damaged by the additional development and traffic. Adverse impact on wildlife (otters have been known to cross the ford).