Potton

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 104

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 155

Received: 10/07/2017

Respondent: D Holderness

Representation:

Look at alternative locations and spread it throughout the county!

Full text:

Look at alternative locations and spread it throughout the county!

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 166

Received: 11/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Surman

Representation:

This small market town should stay as such. The town cannot support any more residents without expansion in its current infrastructure or facilities.

Full text:

This small market town should stay as such. The town cannot support any more residents without expansion in its current infrastructure or facilities.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 201

Received: 14/07/2017

Respondent: Mr Mark Huggins

Representation:

I feel any further addition of new homes in the Potton area is failing to take into account the following impact:

Doctors Surgery is already over-subscribed and long waits for appointments
Local schools at capacity
Increased traffic and the subsequent increase in pollution on local B roads
Stress on local public transport and parking at Sandy Station
Parking in the market square (Potton)
Quality of life for people who have chosen to live in a semi-rural location

Full text:

I feel any further addition of new homes in the Potton area is failing to take into account the following impact:

Doctors Surgery is already over-subscribed and long waits for appointments
Local schools at capacity
Increased traffic and the subsequent increase in pollution on local B roads
Stress on local public transport and parking at Sandy Station
Parking in the market square (Potton)
Quality of life for people who have chosen to live in a semi-rural location

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 214

Received: 17/07/2017

Respondent: Mr Ian Anker

Representation:

I am writing to object about the plans for Potton. As a resident of Sandy, I feel that these will have an adverse impact on an area which is already struggling to cope with
the existing amount of housing and lack of supporting infrastructure (GP surgeries etc).

When compared with the tiny number of additional developments in other parts of the county - I am concerned that the powers that be have absolutely no understanding of the issues that are facing local residents NOW - let alone in the future if the proposed number of houses are built.

Full text:

I am writing to object about the plans for Potton. As a resident of Sandy, I feel that these will have an adverse impact on an area which is already struggling to cope with
the existing amount of housing and lack of supporting infrastructure (GP surgeries etc).

When compared with the tiny number of additional developments in other parts of the county - I am concerned that the powers that be have absolutely no understanding of the issues that are facing local residents NOW - let alone in the future if the proposed number of houses are built.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 338

Received: 29/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Bailey

Representation:

ALP217
The assessment does not include recent planning history: the site was part of planning application CB/17/00296/OUT and was turned down. Neighbourhood Plan aspirations have identified it as green space on the GI plan. It is inside the Greensand Country project area and bordered by two rights of way.
These are important considerations for a reassessment.

Full text:

ALP217
The assessment does not include recent planning history: the site was part of planning application CB/17/00296/OUT and was turned down. Neighbourhood Plan aspirations have identified it as green space on the GI plan. It is inside the Greensand Country project area and bordered by two rights of way.
These are important considerations for a reassessment.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 339

Received: 29/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Bailey

Representation:

ALP465
The assessment does not include recent planning history: it was submitted as Planning Application CB/17/01096/OUT and was refused. NP aspirations have identified this site as green space on the GI plan.
These updates must be considered for a reassessment.

Full text:

ALP465
The assessment does not include recent planning history: it was submitted as Planning Application CB/17/01096/OUT and was refused. NP aspirations have identified this site as green space on the GI plan.
These updates must be considered for a reassessment.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 439

Received: 03/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Paul Francis

Representation:

ALP217.
1) Likely to have an impact on the character of the area as the site falls beyond the western edge of Potton.

2) P.39 states "no aspirations are identified in parish GI plans". This is out of date, as neighbourhood plan plan has identified this areas as green space.

3) P.38 Ecological impact to wildlife of developing this area is not mentioned.

4) No mention of impact to local services, e.g an already overstretched doctors surgery.

5) No mention of traffic survey, excessive traffic volume/noise on Sandy road or existing road safety issues at Deepdale.

Full text:

ALP217.
1) Likely to have an impact on the character of the area as the site falls beyond the western edge of Potton.

2) P.39 states "no aspirations are identified in parish GI plans". This is out of date, as neighbourhood plan plan has identified this areas as green space.

3) P.38 Ecological impact to wildlife of developing this area is not mentioned.

4) No mention of impact to local services, e.g an already overstretched doctors surgery.

5) No mention of traffic survey, excessive traffic volume/noise on Sandy road or existing road safety issues at Deepdale.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 450

Received: 03/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs Christine Kirkham

Representation:

ALP 217. - This development will have a huge impact on area. It is outside the settlement boundary and will have a great affect on rural landscape. This is prime agricultural land that has not ceased to be productive. The distruction to farmland birds would be catastrophic if this habitat is destroyed. I am unable to park in the market square on occasions now and ongoing further developments will make it impossible hence destroying a beautiful rural market town. I object most strongly to this development.

Full text:

ALP 217. - This development will have a huge impact on area. It is outside the settlement boundary and will have a great affect on rural landscape. This is prime agricultural land that has not ceased to be productive. The distruction to farmland birds would be catastrophic if this habitat is destroyed. I am unable to park in the market square on occasions now and ongoing further developments will make it impossible hence destroying a beautiful rural market town. I object most strongly to this development.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 496

Received: 04/08/2017

Respondent: mrs angela watts

Representation:

ALP217 I DO NOT AGREED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE SITE HAS BEEN USED FOR ANIMALS TO GRAZE AND FOR PIGS TO BE RAISED IN THE PAST, AND CURRENTLY FOR LEISURE OF PEOPLE IN LOCAL AREA TO KEEP FIT. IT HAS WILD FLOWERS AND SKYLARKS NESTING ON IT. IT WOULD SPOIL THE NATURE OF THE TOWN TO EXTEND BEYOND ITS CURRENT SITE. IT IS THE GREEN BELT THAT WILL NO LONGER BE GREEN. WE HAVE HAD ENOUGHT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE EXISTING AMENENTIES AND SERVICES TO COPE WITH.

Full text:

ALP217 I DO NOT AGREED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE SITE HAS BEEN USED FOR ANIMALS TO GRAZE AND FOR PIGS TO BE RAISED IN THE PAST, AND CURRENTLY FOR LEISURE OF PEOPLE IN LOCAL AREA TO KEEP FIT. IT HAS WILD FLOWERS AND SKYLARKS NESTING ON IT. IT WOULD SPOIL THE NATURE OF THE TOWN TO EXTEND BEYOND ITS CURRENT SITE. IT IS THE GREEN BELT THAT WILL NO LONGER BE GREEN. WE HAVE HAD ENOUGHT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE EXISTING AMENENTIES AND SERVICES TO COPE WITH.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 502

Received: 04/08/2017

Respondent: Mr William George

Representation:

The assessment for ALP465 is poorly conducted a fails to adequately assess impacts on local services, especially GP

Full text:

ALP465 states that this land is 100% urban land, which is clearly nonsense as the land is actually farmland. It is further stated that the site is within 400m of a bus stop with regular service, which given recent cuts to this service is also untrue. Impacts upon services in Potton are not addressed properly - there is a trite statement that "some expansion may be necessary" in the local schools, with no indication of how this will be funded. Furthermore, the assessment simply states that there is a surgery in Potton, without mentioning that this is already oversubscribed, resulting in people having to travel to Gamlingay -a journey made more difficult by the aforementioned cuts to bus services.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 553

Received: 07/08/2017

Respondent: Miss Rachel Rivers

Representation:

The ecological impact is high and the local infrastructure cannot cope (roads, public transport & doctors surgery).
That this is on the document when planning permission has already been declined is ridiculous!

Full text:

ALP217 has already had planning permission declined for the site so it should not be appearing again.
It is outside of the Potton boundary and will affect the views. The area is green space used by walkers & runners with rights of way around this area it and should be protected; stop trying to develop all of our green space around Potton. We identified this as green space in our neighbourhood plan.It is near to the RSPB headquarters & it will have a detrimental affect on our birds & wildlife. This is a habitat of the Skylark which is red listed on the RSPB site due to population decline.
The local roads & A1 cannot cope with additional traffic, the local bus service is woeful and there is not enough parking at Sandy station.
The doctors surgery cannot cope & the waiting times for appointments can run into weeks (I had to wait 3 weeks to get an appointment earlier this year).

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 588

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Alec Gallagher

Representation:

There is already insufficient parking capacity in Potton; there is already insufficient GP provision for patients in Potton; some local businesses are struggling to cope with demand. Potton must remain a semi-rural community.

Full text:

Ref: ALP 465

Sir, I object to the proposal for a large housing development to be built on Sutton Road, Potton.

This development is just one of several which have been proposed for Potton and which if actioned will impact adversely on the town and its current residents. The effects of the new development already built on Biggleswade Road, together with the huge Kings Reach development a few miles away in Biggleswade are already apparent. Parking spaces in Potton town square have been noticeably more difficult to come by in recent months and more and more vehicles are routinely parked on the pavement on Biggleswade Road; congestion in Kings Road remains a problem; the barbers shop in the town square now almost always has a long queue whereas when I moved to Potton twelve years ago it was possible to walk in and get served almost immediately; and the wait for a doctor's appointment at the Greensands Surgery is already two weeks long.

I moved to Potton twelve years ago to escape the urban sprawl of London, now to find that Central Beds Council is intent on wrecking my adopted home. On the spot on Biggleswade Common, where twelve years ago I stood and watched skylarks hovering, there now stands a housing estate. The skylarks, along with that part of the Common, have vanished. I do not want this civic vandalism inflicted on my adopted home town.

There is no housing crisis in the UK - what there is is a population crisis. That is the fault of central government and it is for them to solve by addressing the causes, not the effects, and certainly not getting local government to do their dirty work for them. I suggest CBC needs to stand up for its citizens.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 594

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Ms Susan Benge

Representation:

Potton has undergone quite a bit of development recently, the schools, the doctors are unable to cope as it is. The roads are now blocked with parked cars partly in the road and on the pavements. There is no need for any further development here. We choose to live in a small rural town, if we wanted to live somewhere bigger, we would do so. Leave it alone.

Full text:

Potton has undergone quite a bit of development recently, the schools, the doctors are unable to cope as it is. The roads are now blocked with parked cars partly in the road and on the pavements. There is no need for any further development here. We choose to live in a small rural town, if we wanted to live somewhere bigger, we would do so. Leave it alone.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 595

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Ms Susan Benge

Representation:

Sandy has undergone a lot of growth. It and the surrounding villages are taking far too much of the planned increase in development. People choose to live in a rural area and you are taking this away. Impact on quality of life in the whole area, green areas and wildlife. Share the growth out. Sandy station is an important part of the community. The extra car journeys, and travel costs for people who currently walk to the station would be awful. You are destroying the very reason people want to live around here.

Full text:

Sandy has undergone a lot of growth. It and the surrounding villages are taking far too much of the planned increase in development. People choose to live in a rural area and you are taking this away. Impact on quality of life in the whole area, green areas and wildlife. Share the growth out. Sandy station is an important part of the community. The extra car journeys, and travel costs for people who currently walk to the station would be awful. You are destroying the very reason people want to live around here.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 602

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs Tracy Smith

Representation:

We dont need anymore houses in potton

Full text:

If planning is given i would like to know how doctor's schools are going to cope already 3 to 4 weeks waiting for an appointment at the docters blood tests up to 5 weeks..also potton is a nightmare to get round in a car roads are more like a car park. We soon wont have any green space left to enjoy and also the only people who can afford the housing that is built are from the london area nothing for us locals iv lived in potton all my life and to be honest i never thought i would hate it like i do now i dont think the people who build these houses would want there green space taken over by loads of housing developments.......

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 611

Received: 23/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs C George

Representation:

ALP217 land north of sandy road Potton.

Full text:

ALP217 land north of sandy road Potton.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 617

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Bottone

Representation:

Against proposed CBC housing plans for Potton and surrounding towns which are expected to take 10x the amount of houses that Ampthill and surrounding towns are.

Full text:

I find it disgusting that a) CBC WILL NOT see sense with the 62 houses to Mill Lane plan. It is going to cause massive damage to the nearby Woodland & encourage antisocial behavior in the area which will result in more cost to CBC. On top of this, the road infrastructure WILL NOT support the additional houses.

b)The fact that Potton and surrounding settlements are being dumped with an astonishing plan which destroys our local environment with yet MORE housing whilst other towns i.e Ampthill are hardly/ at all affected at all. This is unfair and HUGELY disproportionate. I am against the plan for thousands of more houses within the area and suggest that you rethink the plan with more emphasis on equality and fairness. Potton and Biggleswade have taken a battering in recent times, it is NOT acceptable to add more houses than what the infrastructure can handle.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 655

Received: 09/08/2017

Respondent: Potton Town Council

Representation:

Please read full text for results on PTC questionnaire in regard to housing in Potton.

ALP465/ALP199 - should be excluded on ecological, GI and landscape issues. Please read full text on specific site assessment question details.

Full text:

Potton Town Council comment on CBC Draft Local Plan
Introduction
Potton Town Council (PTC) is in the process of preparing a Neighbourhood Plan (NP) under the guidance of a Neighbourhood Plan Steering Committee. The Draft NP is now in the final stages of preparation having completed the consultation Questionnaire to confirm the Draft Policies.
The Questionnaire was produced in hard copy and around 2200 individual copies were distributed to households in Potton. Additionally, an online version was made available for completion. We received 727 responses to the Questionnaire, a return rate of around 33%. This is a substantial response rate and these comments on the CBC Draft Local Plan reflect the views of the population of the Parish of Potton as illustrated in the Questionnaire results.
Development 2017 - 2035
The overriding concern of the majority of respondents regarding housing developments in Potton was the size, scale and rate of developments. Respondents were asked how many additional houses they felt would be an acceptable number in Potton up to 2035. While there is a general acceptance that growth is inevitable, 74% of respondents felt that no more than 250 additional houses would be acceptable. Only 4% were of the view that more than 500 houses would be acceptable. These results confirm the Neighbourhood Plan Vision of 'Medium Scale Growth' throughout the period of the plan. Medium scale is defined as 'up to 500 houses'.
As a result of this, Potton Neighbourhood Plan policy H01 states that housing developments will not be supported which will result in the total number of dwellings exceeding 2735. This policy is supported by the questionnaire results.
Since 2235 households is the baseline for future development within the lifetime of the Neighbourhood Plan (and Local Plan), the following planning approvals must be included is the accepted medium scale development in Potton up to the year 2035:
*151 households on Biggleswade Road (part of old Local Plan)
*Planning approval for 90 households south of Sutton Mill Road (part of old Local Plan
*Planning approval for 90 households on Sandy Road (South)
*Planning approval for 62 households on Mill Lane
Therefore, this means that a maximum of 107 additional households will be supported within the lifetime of the Local Plan.
The questionnaire results also clearly showed a strong concern about the rate of development as well as the scale of development. 85% of respondents supported the policy that the maximum number of 500 houses should be delivered evenly throughout the period of the Neighbourhood Plan and therefore also the Local Plan. There is currently planning permission granted for the development of 393 households in Potton, which represents 78.6% of the medium scale development supported for the Local Plan. Since this is likely to be accomplished within the next 5 years, the Neighbourhood Plan will only support the development of the additional 107 households within the final 5 years of the Local Plan i.e. between 2027 and 2035. This support would also only be given provided the necessary infrastructure had been upgraded.
Call for Sites
It is noted from the Draft Local Plan that Site Assessments have been carried out on the many sites identified around the town by the 'Call for Sites' issued by CBC. Four sites have been put forward for further consideration in the Local Plan, all of which are outside the current settlement envelope. Although no proposals have yet been submitted, based on the site areas, these four sites represent the potential for a further 189 houses. In order to respect the views of the respondents to the Questionnaire, we have already stated that a maximum of an additional 107 households can be considered through the Call for sites process. We would like to comment on and object to two of these sites with details as follows.
Site ALP465.
*This site is adjacent to and is very similar in shape to site ALP199. Site ALP199 has been excluded from the Local Plan process for a range of excellent reasons involving Ecological, Green Infrastructure and Landscape mitigation reasons which we believe apply equally to site ALP465 which should also be excluded from further consideration.
*We would support Policy H3 in the CBC Draft Local Plan regarding support for older people. Sites ALP199 and ALP465 are both on steeply sloping land which is unsuitable for older people with mobility issues. Access to the town centre and other facilities would require a circuitous route of approximately 1500 metres (done on OS 1:2500 map) including steep slopes which would need to be negotiated.
*This land is currently an open green space which readily absorbs precipitation. If it were to be developed, rainfall would be channelled downhill into the existing Sheepwalk Close development with associated flooding issues. Additionally, any run-off would contain contaminants from roads/gardens which would affect the water quality in the brook.
*Stage 1A Assessment, sections 4 and 5. We believe that these sections should be answered 'Yes'. The site is on Greensands Ridge Nature Improvement Area is it?.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 18. It is inaccurate to state that there has been no public consultation. There has been community consultation on this site which was proposed in planning application CB/17/01096/OUT. This consultation resulted in 50 objections and over 1200 signatures on a petition opposing the proposed development of the site. The planning application was rejected by CBC.
*We support Stage 2 Assessment section 23 with the view that the site would have a negative impact on the character of the settlement and would result in the loss of aesthetic value for the area.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 24. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the site is a former Land Settlement Area and is designated as Grade 1 Agricultural Land according to the Eastern Region Agricultural Land Classification map published by Natural England.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 27. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the bus stop referred to does not have at least an hourly service at any time of the day.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 32. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the Water and Waste Water infrastructure is currently under stress as identified in the Water Cycle Study (April 2017). Improvements to the infrastructure will only be in place towards the end of the Local Plan Period and the Stage 2 Water Cycle Study has not yet been prepared.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 36. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since it has already been concluded in section 23 that development of this site would have a negative impact on the landscape.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 37. We believe that the Heritage assessment should be R (Red) since this site is a former Land Settlement Area.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 39. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since development of this site would contravene Aspiration 20 of the Potton Green Infrastructure Plan regarding expansion of Pegnut Wood in a northerly direction.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 41. As already advised under section 18, this site does have a planning history with an application CB/17/01096/OUT which was rejected by CBC.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 45. As previously stated, 85% of the respondents to the questionnaire supported an even rate of growth over the plan period and therefore this site could not be developed for 11-15 years.
Site ALP217.
*Stage 1A Assessment, sections 4 and 5. We believe that these sections should be answered 'Yes'. The site is on Greensands Ridge Nature Improvement Area. Additionally, the site is a Significant Wildlife Area according to the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) in terms of species per km2.
*Stage 1B Assessment section 6. We would suggest that this site is NOT a logical extension to the settlement but should be considered an outlying development. The site is separated from the existing development by a hornbeam hedgerow which should be retained as an existing settlement edge. Either removal or obscuring this hedge would have a negative effect as it would urbanise the approach to Potton and obscure the view of the established boundary hedge which defines the Western edge of Potton.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 18. It is inaccurate to state that there has been no public consultation. There has been community consultation on this site which formed part of a proposed site in planning application CB/17/00296/OUT.
*The site is not supported by the questionnaire results with 82% of respondents objecting to development of this site.
*Stage 2 Assessment, section 23. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the site does not complement the existing settlement because of the separation caused by the significant hedgerow.
*Stage 2 Assessment, section 24. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the land is designated as Grade 2 Agricultural Land according to the Eastern Region Agricultural Land Classification map published by Natural England.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 27. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the bus stop referred to does not have at least an hourly service at any time of the day.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 29. Access to the site would only be possible off the already busy Sandy Road and we believe that any development of this site would increase traffic flow on this road and add to the dangerous nature of the road.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 32. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since the Water and Waste Water infrastructure is currently under stress as identified in the Water Cycle Study (April 2017). Improvements to the infrastructure will only be in place towards the end of the Local Plan Period and the Stage 2 Water Cycle Study has not yet been prepared.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 36. We believe that this should be designated R (Red) since development of the site would have a significant harmful impact on the landscape. The site is on Greensands Ridge Nature Improvement Area and additionally, the site is a Significant Wildlife Area according to the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) in terms of species per km2.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 38. There was a recent development proposal reference CB/17/00296/OUT which went for public consultation. There were a large number of objections to the proposal regarding the Ecological assets of this site.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 41. As previously stated, this site formed part of a proposed site in planning application CB/17/00296/OUT. The application was withdrawn. We understand that this was when it became apparent that the application would be refused by CBC.
*Stage 2 Assessment section 45. As previously stated, 85% of the respondents to the questionnaire supported an even rate of growth over the plan period and therefore this site could not be developed for 11-15 years.
Within the constraints already highlighted early in this response to your draft Local Plan, the Neighbourhood Plan would support development on sites NLP170 and NLP347.
Housing
We are fully supportive of the proposed Housing policies in the Draft Local Plan.
We would particularly support the Draft Local Plan policy H4 regarding affordable housing. The questionnaire confirmed the findings of the Bedfordshire Rural Communities Charity (BRCC) Housing Needs Survey for Potton which identifies a shortage of affordable housing in the parish. All developments proposed in Potton will need to have a minimum of 30% affordable housing. (Site Assessment indicates 35%)
In addition to this, there is an identified need in the BRCC Housing Needs Survey which is supported both anecdotally (do you mean during the consultation period) and by the questionnaire results, for a Rural Exception Site of up to 30 dwellings. Therefore, we also support the CBC Draft Local Plan Policy H5 regarding Rural Exception Sites. The Neighbourhood Plan will support the inclusion of Rural Exception Sites within any future developments or sites that are to be included in the Local Plan process. Thus, NLP170 and NLP347, should include this provision for the inclusion of a Rural Exception Site.


Employment and Economy
We are fully supportive of the proposed Employment and Economy policies.
The Neighbourhood Plan survey showed that 66% of residents were supportive of the identification of land for a business centre in Potton. This is further supported by the fact that 144 respondents either run a business or work from home in Potton. In the Local Plan (2011) an employment area was identified in MA5 and we would wish to see this as a priority in the future development of Potton. Furthermore, site NLP042 was proposed for industrial use in the 2011 Call for Sites and the Neighbourhood Plan would also support this in order to relocate an existing haulage business which is currently in the centre of the town.
Transport
We are fully supportive of the proposed Transport policies.
The Neighbourhood Plan survey identified an issue with bus services within Potton. As mentioned earlier in this response, bus services do not meet the Site Assessment criteria of a minimum of an hourly service in peak times. The main issue is the connectivity of buses to trains running from Biggleswade or Sandy. 90% of respondents were dissatisfied with bus services in Potton and the majority of complaints were related to links with trains. The Neighbourhood Plan will therefore support the introduction of a bus - train link service at peak times. This will become even more important with the 22% increase in households over the lifetime of the Local Plan - and probable increase of 17% over the next 5 years.
The Neighbourhood Plan steering group is concerned about the possible closure of Sandy station if the new East - West link railway results in a replacement station being built in the new Tempsford Town. This would result in Potton residents having to drive through the small hamlet of Everton. This would inevitably result in an increased usage of Biggleswade station.
Environmental Enhancement
We are fully supportive of the proposed Environmental Enhancement policies.
Policy EE1 - As part of the Neighbourhood Plan a revised Green Infrastructure Plan has been developed by BRCC. Creation of footpaths and cycle ways were particularly supported, with 61% of respondents requesting that all new developments provide traffic-free walkways and cycle ways with access to town facilities. A Potton Green Wheel is also being planned in association with BRCC and we would look to section 106 monies to finance this as well as any planning applications facilitating routes where required. The Neighbourhood Plan is also supportive of developing cycle links to Biggleswade, Gamlingay and Wrestlingworth in addition to the existing link to Sandy which is being developed.
Overall, we welcome the policies within the draft Local Plan and will expect close adherence when planning applications and site layouts are considered. The Potton Neighbourhood Plan is close to completion and will detail the wishes of the residents for the development of Potton 2017 - 2035 and also supporting the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 661

Received: 09/08/2017

Respondent: mr Christopher Miles

Representation:

ALP465
I object to any future development of this site as this is a higher grade agricultural site than stated. Traffic would increase through the town as that is the easiest way to go to get to the railway station. It would put a great strain on the doctors surgery and parking in the town.

Full text:

ALP465
I object to any future development of this site as this is a higher grade agricultural site than stated. Traffic would increase through the town as that is the easiest way to go to get to the railway station. It would put a great strain on the doctors surgery and parking in the town.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 987

Received: 23/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs C George

Representation:

ALP217 Planning refused CB/17/00296/out not mentioned!
Will have an effect falls outside settlement which is concealed with historic boundary hedge. Destroys Greensand plateau. 100% grade 2 farmland, loss of wildlife. Successful breeding for Skylark. Biodiversity cannot mitigate loss of farmland and birds. Infrastructure/open space comments out of date. Neighbourhood plan identifies as green space on GI plan. Two well used right of ways border area. Threatening our food production as only 21% of England farmland is grade 1 or 2.

Full text:

Dear Sirs
Objection to ALP217 housing development of 75 houses.
This site was part of the planning application for 186 houses; 100 Sandy Road (North) and was turned down earlier this year; CB/17/00296/OUT. This is not mentioned in the Planning History P.41
In P.23 it states that the site is "unlikely to have an impact on the character of the area" and that "it will compliment the existing settlement pattern" i.e. Nursery Close. This development falls outside the settlement area and would conceal the boundary hedge marking the edge of Potton. Additionally, in P.36 Landscape Character states there is "concern that characteristic greensand plateau would be lost... this attractive rural landscape is characteristic of the greensand ridge affording valued panoramic views."
P.24 The land proposed for development in 100% grade 2 Farmland and has been farmed for many years including this year. It is estimated that only 21% of Farmland in England is graded 1 or2, ie the best and most versatile farmland and should have significant protection from development.
P.38 Ecological Assets; Does not mention loss of wildlife and in particular farmland birds which successfully breed in and around the field, specifically the Skylark, a red listed bird which is suffering a massive decline as its farmland habitat is destroyed. So called biodiversity net gains from housing developments cannot mitigate for the loss of farmland birds.
P.39 Open Space/leisure and Green Infrastructure Assets; Incorrect and out of date "no aspirations are identified in parish GI plans." The Neighbourhood plan has now identified this as green space on the GI plan. There will be "potential conflicts with open space" since the site is bordered by two 'rights of way'. It is also within the newly formed 'Greensand Country Project Area' aiming to promote the greensand countryside. CBC is a member of the 'Greensand Country Landscape Partnership'!
In brief:
It is incredulous that CBC can even consider building on grade 2 farmland. Land which has been farmed for food going back through history. Plus the additional threat if causes to both wildlife and the rights of way regularly used by Potton residents to access the surrounding countryside. It will also destroy the outlook over the fields to Deepdale and the Greensand ridge.
The lack of GP's and Dentist plus the town centre road layout which is already impossible to drive through due to its age and accessibility are a worrying concern to all Potton residents. We already have hundreds of new homes planned or being built. This one will 'break the camel's back' in the effect it will have on our community as a whole. Please do not approve.
Carol George (Mrs)

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1115

Received: 16/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Ross Hanway

Representation:

In summary, not suitable for following reasons
1) Land should be given protected status as similar plots in Bedfordshire due to its historic significance
2) Will greatly overstretch existing services in area to breaking point.
3) Only transport options are by car which will have a huge negative impact on the area and increase the chances or major accidents.
4) Recent applications have been rejected for several reasons, nothing in this proposed document overcomes the original rejections so how can it be accepted now?

Full text:

ALP465 Sutton Road Proposd Development

I wish to lodge my objections for this proposed site for numerous reasons as detailed below.

1) This land should be protected as similar lands have already been in Bedfordshire. the land was originally given to the community after World War 2 and used as allotments for growing of foods. It has remained undeveloped since then and currently used as horse paddocks. Similar land in Bedfrordshire has been given protected status due to its historic nature and this should be the case here as well. The land is between the houses on Bury Hill and Pegnut Wood and any development is going to harm the natural beauty of the area and harm the environment. Similar developments have been rejected for exactly that reason and it seems strange that even though previous applications have been refused, it is now being put forward again for planning.

2) This development if approved will have a huge negative impact on the Town itself. Already the Doctors, Dentists and School are at capacity with the dentists not accepting any new registrations. Any new development will stretch these services even further putting the new residents without health or education and slowing those services that are already in place for existing residents.

3) The proposed development is on the wrong side of Potton. Anybody who uses public transport, i.e. The train station will have to drive through Potton to get there. This will have an increase on traffic through the town, especially down Bury Hill which is already a very busy road. This will naturally increase the chances of accidents in the area especially at the junction at Sutton Road/Bury Hill which already has numerous accidents due to heavy traffic in the are. There are no bus services in the area and no footpath access to the proposed development. This again increases the risk of anyone wanting access and could potentially lead to dangerous accidents in the area.

4) There are several other sites more suitable for development in Potton where my points 1 and 3 above would not apply and it seems that this is just being forced through for some bodies agenda rather than an actual assessment of the area and what should be developed. As stated above, this has recently been assessed by an independent planning assessor and the plans were rejected for two reasons as it was not suitable for development. Why if recently rejected would the site be put forward again, when nothing in this proposal counters the arguements by the planning assessor?

I can understand the need for new housing and I am not against development itself, the issues here are that this proposed land is not suitable at all for further development and should be protected due to its beauty and historical heritage. I would gladly discuss this further with anyone if they wish to contact me.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1224

Received: 11/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Thomas Barrett

Representation:

Sutton Road ALP465

Object to site
Planning permission refused earlier this year
Draft Local Plan documents out of date
Infrastructure unable to take another development
Site within Greensand Nature Improvement Area
Sandy Upper School not nearby 3 miles away
GP Surgery does not have enough space or doctors

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1584

Received: 22/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Ernie Bradley

Representation:

see attachment

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1587

Received: 22/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs R F Bradley

Representation:

Object
Rural character of Potton lost
Increase of 62% of dwellings
Building on Flood Plain
Loss of tranquillity in ancient rural area
Spoil character of Sutton
Uncomfortable for residents increase in noise and traffic
Air pollution
Deepdale and Carthagena Road crossroads very dangerous
Deleterious effect on tourism
Lack of schools and doctors in area
Fauna and flora will lose habitat
Loss of agricultural land
Roads cannot cope
Facilities and infrastructure needs to be put in place before development.
Massive joining up of existing settlements

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1717

Received: 23/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs C George

Representation:

We (our community) fully recognise the need for more housing but the scale of development
being proposed by CBC is completely unjustified and unsustainable and fails to take into
account the impacts of the neighbouring Authorities' Local Plans. The cumulative impact of
this level of new housing will be hugely damaging to our environment, water and transport
infrastructure, and ultimately the quality of life of Central Bedfordshire's residents.
We call on Central Bedfordshire to look again at the housing numbers it proposes in its
draft Local Plan, and for others to join with CPRE Bedfordshire in challenging the scale of
development proposed.

Full text:

We (our community) fully recognise the need for more housing but the scale of development
being proposed by CBC is completely unjustified and unsustainable and fails to take into
account the impacts of the neighbouring Authorities' Local Plans. The cumulative impact of
this level of new housing will be hugely damaging to our environment, water and transport
infrastructure, and ultimately the quality of life of Central Bedfordshire's residents.
We call on Central Bedfordshire to look again at the housing numbers it proposes in its
draft Local Plan, and for others to join with CPRE Bedfordshire in challenging the scale of
development proposed.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1845

Received: 24/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Daniel Norman

Representation:

ALP217 This site is outside the existing settlement and is too far from the centre of the Town and its facilities, ie GP and Dentist, Shops etc.The use of cars for travel will follow. The access onto the very busy Sandy Road together with that access from the opposite site NLP330 will prove dangerous.

Full text:

ALP217 This site is outside the existing settlement and is too far from the centre of the Town and its facilities, ie GP and Dentist, Shops etc.The use of cars for travel will follow. The access onto the very busy Sandy Road together with that access from the opposite site NLP330 will prove dangerous.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1851

Received: 24/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Daniel Norman

Representation:

ALP465 I understandand this site is being considered with ALP199. Access onto the Sutton Road is partly blind from the south and will be dangerous. The site is sloping which when built upon will cause rainwater to drift down towards Sheepwalk properties to the west.

Full text:

ALP465 I understandand this site is being considered with ALP199. Access onto the Sutton Road is partly blind from the south and will be dangerous. The site is sloping which when built upon will cause rainwater to drift down towards Sheepwalk properties to the west.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1856

Received: 24/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Daniel Norman

Representation:

NLP347 & ALP045 Both sites appear to require access to be created onto Everton Road which will impact yet more onto an already busy road at school times together with parents' parking spots. The junction of Everton Road and Mill Lane is already going to be more congested if the NLP290 site gets approved finally.

Full text:

NLP347 & ALP045 Both sites appear to require access to be created onto Everton Road which will impact yet more onto an already busy road at school times together with parents' parking spots. The junction of Everton Road and Mill Lane is already going to be more congested if the NLP290 site gets approved finally.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1875

Received: 24/08/2017

Respondent: Sue Rowell

Representation:

Objection to this sites inclusion in sites to take forward based on factual inaccuracies and contrary to NPPF principles and CBC's own core strategies.

Full text:

ALP465 -There are a number of inaccuracies in the site assessment and its conclusion. The site DOES have a planning history and was REFUSED in June 2017 on grounds relating to the sites location; poor access to public transport leading to an increased level of car journeys(ie the nearest bus stop does not provide services suitable for commuters) and excessive distance to the towns facilities and therefore its unsustainability. It was deemed incongruous and out of character with the existing grain of development on Bury Hill and adjoining dwellings. As the site falls in the Greensand Ridge NIA it is inappropriate for development. Even if plans are resubmitted these grounds for refusal remain the same and cannot be overcome by conditions. On that basis alone this site should not be taken forward. The site is NOT 100% urban land as indicated in the sites assessment and remains open countryside and good quality agricultural land, previously used to grow hay. This site will be included in Potton's neighbourhood plan as aspirational Green infrastructure space to extend Pegnut wood for open access and preserve an important linking wildlife corridor for protected species such as Badgers. There is also no justification in taking this site forward on the basis of growth in housing required in Potton as the town has already seen substantial growth in the last 18 months, with several other sites already given planning permission.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1883

Received: 24/08/2017

Respondent: Dave Rowell

Representation:

Alp465

The document incorrectly states that there is no planning application, there has been and it was turned down.

Full text:

Alp465

The document incorrectly states that there is no planning application, there has been and it was turned down.