Transport Technical Paper [EXAM 114]

You may be aware that Ridgmont has been objecting to Central Bedfordshire’s Local Plan, and Policy SE2, a huge allocation of warehousing, along the A507 towards the Ridgmont bypass turnoff. As a local resident I would also like to oppose these plans due to the following:-
• The 2005 Mid Bedfordshire Local Plan designated the land east of the railway as an “Area of Great Landscape Value”.
• CBC’s 2016 Landscape Character Assessment states the need to ‘safeguard open land at the foot of the ridge to provide for the setting of the ridge & the associated villages’.
• CBC’s 2017 Employment Site Assessment states that it is ‘important to retain development west of the railway and not allow spread into open countryside’.
• Historic England stated in January 2019 that the allocation would ‘affect the setting and significance of a number of designated heritage assets in the surrounding area’.
• The Local Plan Inspectors said in September 2019 that the allocation is ‘not justified due to the harm that would be caused to the landscape character of the area’.
LANDSCAPE IMPACT
• In 2005, the land was designated an “Area of Great Landscape Value” in the 2005 Mid Bedfordshire Local Plan.
• In 2007, Bedfordshire County Council’s Landscape Sensitivity Study concluded that ‘this area itself is very sensitive as the setting to the [Greensand] Ridge’.
• CBC’s 2016 Landscape Character Assessment recognises the need to ‘safeguard open land at the foot of the [Greensand] Ridge to provide the setting for the ridge and the associated villages’ and ‘restrict expansion of development associated with J13’.
• CBC’s 2017 Employment Site Assessment states that it is ‘important to retain development west of the railway line and not allow spread into open countryside’. The Assessment went on to score the site ‘red / amber’ for landscape character.
• The Inspectors charged with examining the Local Plan highlight in their September 2019 letter that ‘Policy SE2 is not justified due to the harm that would be caused to the landscape character of the area.’
• The Inspectors also stated ‘Given the size of buildings proposed, the visual impact of the allocation would not be mitigated by additional landscaping.’
HERITAGE IMPACT
The proposed allocation site at Marston Gate is in close proximity to a large number of heritage assets:
• Ringwork at The Round House, Brogborough a Scheduled Monument, All Saints Church, Segenhoe Church, Segenhoe Manor & Maltings Spinney, Ridgmont – 3 Grade II* Listed Structures & an Ancient Scheduled Monument
• There are four designated Conservation Areas within close proximity of the allocation site, at Ridgmont, Husborne Crawley, Husborne Crawley Church End and Aspley Guise.
• Historic England has concluded that the Marston Gate allocation would erode the rural character of the surrounding countryside that forms the vital setting to all these Conservation Areas, detracting from, the appreciation of this setting and ultimately harming the significance of the Conservation Areas.
• Historic England have stated that the Marston Gate allocation would ‘harm the significance’ of these assets on account of ‘visual impact as well as intensification of noise and artificial light’.
• Because of the harmful impact on the setting and historic significance of these designated heritage assets Historic England considers the ‘development would not achieve the NPPF’s overarching aim of promoting sustainable development’.
• Historic England also affirms that even if the scale of the development is reduced, they remain ‘unconvinced this would remove the impact on the conservation areas and in particular on Brogborough ringwork therefore find the proposed allocation is not justified nor consistent with national policy under paragraph 35 of the NPPF’.
• The council has since reached a Statement of Common Ground with Historic England in January 2020; and this document confirms that Historic England still, ‘maintains its objection in principle to the allocation of Marston Gate’.
OTHER REASONS TO REMOVE THE PROPOSED WAREHOUSE
M1 Junction 13 is defined as a ‘hotspot’.
Currently, Highways England and Central Bedfordshire have yet to produce modelling or potential solutions to address this hotspot.
Congestion A507 The Marston Gate allocation site would be accessed from the A507, a key east- west route across the district. The council already expects the A507 to experience ‘high levels of congestion’, however, no modelling or potential solutions have been devised as of yet to address them.
This is also an allocation, which the council does not need to make. In other words no need is expressed in planning policy for this allocation. It is therefore not required economically or for reasons or economic growth. The Councils Functional Economic Marketing Assessment (FEMA) and Local Employment Land Review (ELR) reports show there is currently an over supply of employment land and alternative brownfield sites are available.
CONCLUSION:
REMOVE POLICY SE2 - KEEP DEVELOPMENT WEST OF THE BLETCHLEY-BEDFORD RAILWAY LINE, PROTECT THE GREENSAND RIDGE AND PROTECT DESIGNATED HERITAGE ASSET