Stotfold

Showing comments and forms 1 to 16 of 16

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 489

Received: 05/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Ann Watmough

Representation:

Concerns re:
Additional infrastructure needed before any further development
No capacity at the doctors surgery or dental surgery
Issues with on-street parking due to small garages at new developments
Lack of housing for the vulnerable and first time buyers
No capacity at the school
Dangerous place to access

Full text:

I would like to put forward adverse comments with regard to future development in Stotfold.
There is much building of residential houses in Stotfold but before any more are built you need to get the following in place.
1. Infrastructure needs to be at the top of the list.
2. Now the doctors surgery is unable to cope - to see a certain doctor you have to wait approx. one month. - this is disgusting.
3. The houses that are being built do not have enough garage space - therefore there are numerous cars parked on the roads or sometimes half and half on the pavement - this is dangerous.
4. Dental surgery not taking any more patients.
5.Again these house being built are by large building companies, therefore they are not for the vulnerable or first time buyers. The building companies need to make a profit for their shareholders - they are in it for the money and the highest price they can get.
6.The school in Stotfold is full to overflowing - what will happen when a lot more children come into Stotfold ? taught at home or bused out ?
7. Stotfold is a dangerous place, especially in the morning trying to get out of Stotfold - awful and very dangerous
The above are just a few comments that need to be worked through - what is the council going to do about this ? cars parked all over the place, causing a back log for through traffic.
There is going to be nasty accident in Stotfold before too long. !!!!

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 1414

Received: 21/08/2017

Respondent: Ickleford Parish Council

Representation:

Unsustainable development which conflicts with the aims of the NPPF.

Full text:

The ministerial foreword to the NPPF states that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development, with 'Sustainable' defined as ensuring that better lives for ourselves don't mean worse lives for future generations.
The proposed developments in the draft Local Plan, taken with those already in planning will add several thousand new homes. This will inevitably lead to significant increases in car journeys, and those wishing to travel south or south-west will likely to need to drive through Ickleford. The resultant increases in traffic through are village, and the concomitant environmental impacts clearly run counter to the aims of sustainability as defined in the NPPF. There appears to be no recognition of this nor any substantive attempts to mitigate against it to alleviate the issue for those wishing to drive towards Luton and the M1 (south).
The issues which Ickleford will face will be further exacerbated by other CBC developments either within the draft Local Plan or already proposed in the towns and villages near to north Herts. There is not likely to be sufficient investment in infrastructure (e.g. public transport, increased rail network capacity) to make this sustainable, and conflicts with many aims of the NPPF.
It is on these grounds that Ickleford Parish Council objects to the CBC draft local plan relating to development in those communities adjacent to our boundary.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 2151

Received: 25/08/2017

Respondent: Central Bedfordshire Council Assets

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

See full representations

Full text:

Site NLP119 was submitted by CBC Assets to deliver c.400 new homes adjacent to the new football facility. The site assessment carried out concludes that the site should not be considered further due the scale of development proposed, the impact upon the character of the settlement, extension of the settlement envelope westwards and impact upon ecological assets.

CBC Assets has considered the comments made within the assessment and wish to submit a revised proposal for the site. It is proposed that the site area would remain as previously identified but that the site proposals be infrastructure led, supported by a smaller amount of housing. The allocation of land for infrastructure will allow the delivery of a community facility(ies) to support recent and proposed growth.

The adjacent site will deliver a new football facility and the siting of further community infrastructure adjacent to this will be complimentary, assisting in creating a community resource hub. The site is also adjacent to an existing health facility.

The quantum of proposed housing would be at a smaller scale than previously proposed, representing a more sustainable amount of additional housing in Stotfold and a reduced visual impact at the edge of the settlement.

The impacts associated with development can be mitigated through appropriate assessments and identification of appropriate mitigation measures to be incorporated within the development.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 2160

Received: 25/08/2017

Respondent: Central Bedfordshire Council Assets

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

See full representation

Full text:

The published assessment for Site NLP122 does not recommend carrying the site forward to the next stage. CBC Assets, reflecting on the issues identified, suggest alternative proposals for the site which would reduce the scale of development on the site.

Stotfold is designated as a Major Service Centre in the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and is a sustainable location for development. Having considered the context of the site and the Green Infrastructure aspirations for the area, Assets propose amending the allocation of the site to deliver a high quality designed scheme on the northern and western part of the site, where it best relates to the existing built form. The remainder of the site could be brought forward to deliver Green Infrastructure provision to meet the aspirations for the area. This would also offer an opportunity to provide ecological enhancements as part of the scheme.

The revised proposals would assist in overcoming the negative impacts identified with the original proposals to comprehensively develop the site.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 3599

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs Susan Bullen

Representation:

Please find attached details of a new site at Arlesey Road, Stotfold which I have put forward on behalf of the landowner who would like the land to be considered for housing and to be included in the local plan. Landowner unaware of the 'Call for Sites'. 3 attachments- site details and 2 maps.

Full text:

Please find attached details of a new site at Arlesey Road, Stotfold which I have put forward on behalf of the landowner who would like the land to be considered for housing and to be included in the local plan. Landowner unaware of the 'Call for Sites'. 3 attachments- site details and 2 maps.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 3879

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

See full representation

Full text:

These representations are submitted on behalf of our clients, All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd, with separate comments also having been made on the Draft Local Plan itself and the Settlements Capacity Initial Study arguing in support of an allocation west of Stotfold in the Submission version of the Local Plan.

The below has been prepared in response to the comments in the Assessment Forms on sites ALP282, NLP106 and NLP160. Collectively these parcels cover the area to the west of Stotfold located between Arlesey Road, Hitchin Road and the A507. Whilst these sites were originally put forward as three separate parcels, they are now all under the control of our client as advised in our letter to the Council dated 13th April 2017.

All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd agree with the conclusion reached that Parcel NLP160 should be considered further as part of the Local Plan. A large proportion of this site is already allocated under Policy HA12 of the Site Allocations DPD with the remaining two fields to the west of the allocation area forming a logical extension to it behind the existing row of properties on Arlesey Road.

In partnership with a national housebuilder, our Client has engaged a professional team to prepare and submit a detailed planning application for the whole of this parcel as Phase 1 of Stotfold West by the end of 2017. This demonstrates further the appropriateness of its allocation, as it is deliverable and will contribute towards the high housing target early in the Plan period.

All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd object to the conclusions reached at Stage 2 of the Assessment process on parcels ALP282 and NLP106. This sets out three principal reasons why the parcels should not be considered further. Taking each in turn, our client responds as follows:

The site would extend Stotfold westwards and could potentially lead to coalescence between Arlesey and Stotfold. The whole site would also have a landscape impact in terms of reducing the buffer between Arlesey and Stotfold

The enclosed Landscape Statement prepared by James Blakes Associates (JBA) Landscape Architects robustly demonstrates that the site is completely screened by trees from views from Arlesey to the west. There is no visual connection between the two settlements. This visual barrier will be strengthened by the proposed landscape masterplan for the Arlesey East development. There is also scope also for additional tree-planting on the western section of sites ALP282 and NLP106 to further reinforce the visual separation of Stotfold and Arlesey. Although the physical gap between the settlements may narrow because of the development, the visual separation will increase in scale and permanence. In landscape terms, the site is well screened from most external viewpoints and those views over it that do exist could be screened effectively through mitigation planting.

An opportunity and constraint plan and landscape strategy is included as part of the Landscape Statement and will inform a future masterplan for the site. It demonstrates that mitigation planting can be carried out to buffer the impact on Etonbury Wood of developing the land between it and the existing settlement. This could involve the creation of a Green Corridor along the Pix Brook, with a permissive footpath and habitat enhancements such as tree-planting and meadow creation to create a more bio-diverse belt linking Etonbury Wood with Stotfold.

A number of other Green Infrastructure aspirations from the Etonbury Green Wheel Masterplan could also be delivered as part of a landscape led housing development.

Given the detailed conclusions of the submitted Landscape Statement, it has been demonstrated that coalescence and landscape impact are not issues that should preclude the allocation of this site.

The site would adjoin Etonbury Woods in the west, which has potential ecological impacts.

Aspect Ecology are appointed Ecological Consultants on this site and have undertaken a walkover survey of both of these parcels of land. This confirmed that there is limited habitat there with biodiversity impact and nothing that would constrain future development.

In respect of the potential impact on Etonbury Woods, given the size of the combined landholding being promoted there is ample opportunity to create a buffer zone between new housing and the woodland to mitigate for this and provide a sensitive transition.

As mentioned above, the intention here is to develop a landscape-led framework masterplan for these parcels that will incorporate both formal and informal open spaces with the opportunity for new habitat creation in order to achieve the net gain for biodiversity required by the Framework. This will also include the creation of a green, ecological corridor along the route of the Pix Brook, which is a key aim in the Etonbury Green Wheel masterplan.

Whilst it is not specified, if the concern is around visitor pressure from residents of a new development west of Stotfold this is not justified as Etonbury Wood is actively advertised locally to encourage recreational walking. The Council has also required that the development east of Arlesey on the opposite side of the A507 includes a bridge to provide safe connectivity between it and Etonbury Woods. If justified against the CIL Regulations, a contribution towards the future management of Etonbury Woods could be included in the S106 Agreement from this development providing an additional benefit.


An Ecological Assessment would typically accompany an application for residential development on a site of this size to demonstrate no undue impact and this is not considered a justifiable reason for not allocating the site.

Stotfold has also had significant development over the last 10 years which has resulted in many facilities and services, such as education reaching capacity. Any further development would need to provide schools.

Given the size of landholding involved and the potential level of development achievable of between 1,000 - 1,250 dwellings when Phase 1 is included, the scheme is of a scale that it would include various community benefits and new infrastructure where this is necessary to make the development acceptable, such as a potential new school.

The allocation of a comprehensive scheme of this nature is more likely to deliver tangible new benefits to Stotfold than piecemeal and adhoc development that has occurred more recently.

Separate representations have been submitted on the Draft Local Plan, and the Settlements Assessment Initial Study supporting the inclusion within the spatial strategy of a commitment to release land around existing settlements towards the overall housing requirement and the conclusion that Stotfold should be classified as a Major Service Centre with capacity to accommodate medium - high scale growth over the Plan.

In the review of capacity at Stotfold, the Settlements Capacity Initial Study highlights potential constraints to development to the north and east due to flood risk areas and a the existence of Local Nature Reserve and County Wildlife sites to the east all of which present constraints to the growth of Stotfold in these directions.

Aside from the land being classified as Grade 2 agricultural land and the landscape issues addressed above, no other constraints are reported to the west, further reinforcing that the combined parcels of land to the west of Stotfold should be included as an allocation in the Submission Version of the Local Plan as the most appropriate location for growth.

It would also be on the right side of the town for easy access to the A507 being located between two roundabouts meaning those travelling to and from the main road for work or other reasons would not have to go through the town. The site is also close to the railway station in Arlesey (1.5 miles to the west) with access to Arlesey Road where there is a cycle path leading to the station.

No other issues are raised on the Site Assessment Form that could not be addressed as part of a future planning application.

The site is under the control of a developer with a track record of delivering successful new housing schemes in partnership with national housebuilders, which should provide confidence that development at the site is achievable.

It is therefore respectfully requested that the site be re-considered and included as an allocation in the Submission version of the Local Plan. Were the site not included it is not considered that the Local Plan could be considered the most appropriate strategy, against reasonable alternatives and could be found to be unsound upon examination as a consequence.

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 4996

Received: 21/08/2017

Respondent: Ickleford Parish Council

Representation:

Combined impact of proposed sites and those already submitted.
Traffic increase
Traffic increase and environmental impacts counter to sustainability aims of NPPF
No recognition of impacts or attempts to mitigate traffic towards Luton from M1
Combined impacts with proposals in towns/villages near to north Herts.

Full text:

The ministerial foreword to the NPPF states that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development, with 'Sustainable' defined as ensuring that better lives for ourselves don't mean worse lives for future generations.
The proposed developments in the draft Local Plan, taken with those already in planning will add several thousand new homes. This will inevitably lead to significant increases in car journeys, and those wishing to travel south or south-west will likely to need to drive through Ickleford. The resultant increases in traffic through are village, and the concomitant environmental impacts clearly run counter to the aims of sustainability as defined in the NPPF. There appears to be no recognition of this nor any substantive attempts to mitigate against it to alleviate the issue for those wishing to drive towards Luton and the M1 (south).
The issues which Ickleford will face will be further exacerbated by other CBC developments either within the draft Local Plan or already proposed in the towns and villages near to north Herts. There is not likely to be sufficient investment in infrastructure (e.g. public transport, increased rail network capacity) to make this sustainable, and conflicts with many aims of the NPPF.
It is on these grounds that Ickleford Parish Council objects to the CBC draft local plan relating to development in those communities adjacent to our boundary.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 5018

Received: 25/08/2017

Respondent: Central Bedfordshire Council Assets

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

NLP122

Suggest site be reconsidered
Suggest alternative proposals for the site,
Stotfold is sustainable location for development,
propose amending the allocation to deliver a high quality designed scheme on the northern and western part of the site where it best relates to existing built form,
revised proposals would assist in overcoming negative impacts identified.

Full text:

The published assessment for Site NLP122 does not recommend carrying the site forward to the next stage. CBC Assets, reflecting on the issues identified, suggest alternative proposals for the site which would reduce the scale of development on the site.

Stotfold is designated as a Major Service Centre in the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and is a sustainable location for development. Having considered the context of the site and the Green Infrastructure aspirations for the area, Assets propose amending the allocation of the site to deliver a high quality designed scheme on the northern and western part of the site, where it best relates to the existing built form. The remainder of the site could be brought forward to deliver Green Infrastructure provision to meet the aspirations for the area. This would also offer an opportunity to provide ecological enhancements as part of the scheme.

The revised proposals would assist in overcoming the negative impacts identified with the original proposals to comprehensively develop the site.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 5019

Received: 25/08/2017

Respondent: Central Bedfordshire Council Assets

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

NLP119,

suggest site be reconsidered,
wish to submit a revised proposal, site size would remain but proposal will be infrastructure led, supported by a smaller amount of housing,
will allow for delivery of community facilities to support recent and proposes growth,

Full text:

Site NLP119 was submitted by CBC Assets to deliver c.400 new homes adjacent to the new football facility. The site assessment carried out concludes that the site should not be considered further due the scale of development proposed, the impact upon the character of the settlement, extension of the settlement envelope westwards and impact upon ecological assets.

CBC Assets has considered the comments made within the assessment and wish to submit a revised proposal for the site. It is proposed that the site area would remain as previously identified but that the site proposals be infrastructure led, supported by a smaller amount of housing. The allocation of land for infrastructure will allow the delivery of a community facility(ies) to support recent and proposed growth.

The adjacent site will deliver a new football facility and the siting of further community infrastructure adjacent to this will be complimentary, assisting in creating a community resource hub. The site is also adjacent to an existing health facility.

The quantum of proposed housing would be at a smaller scale than previously proposed, representing a more sustainable amount of additional housing in Stotfold and a reduced visual impact at the edge of the settlement.

The impacts associated with development can be mitigated through appropriate assessments and identification of appropriate mitigation measures to be incorporated within the development.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 5083

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd

Agent: Woods Hardwick Planning Ltd

Representation:

Object to medium-low capacity for Stotfold
Recent growth should not preclude further growth
Stotfold should be Major Service Centre.
Support view that there are opportunities for development in west and south, which could support additional services, but disagree that the scale of development needed to deliver these would detrimentally impact on landscape setting and settlement character.
Landscape Statement attached demonstrates that the site is screened from most external viewpoints and views over it could be screened effectively.
No visual connection to Arlesey
Mitigation possible for Etonbury Wood
GI aspirations could be delivered

Full text:

All Land Investments (Stotfold 1) Ltd objects to the conclusion reached in the Settlements Capacity Initial Study in respect of Stotfold that it only has medium - low capacity to accommodate growth during the Plan period.

This appears to be at least in part driven by virtue of Stotfold having grown considerably through new development in the past 10 years, however, this should not in itself be a reason to preclude further growth taking place there. Indeed, despite nearby Arlesey already having substantial commitments it has not stopped the Council identifying a potential strategic growth option there.

Furthermore, as outlined in the separate representation on the Draft Local Plan itself, our clients are of the view that Stotfold should be re-classified as a Major Service Centre given the existing facilities and services it offers are comparable to other Major Service Centres in Central Bedfordshire. The opportunity should be taken to build on its recent growth and reinforce the sustainability of Stotfold through further development that includes community benefits.

The Settlements Capacity Initial Study also indicates the presence of constraints to the north and east of the Stotfold, but acknowledges that there are opportunities for development in the west and south, which would be well connected to the existing urban area, in close proximity to rail connections, that could support the provision of additional services and facilities in the town, a view supported by All Land Investments (Stotfold) Ltd.

However, it goes on to suggest that the scale of development needed to deliver these is likely to detrimentally affect landscape setting, and the character of the settlement. This point is refuted by our Clients, who are promoting land to the west of Stotfold (Parcels referenced ALP282, NLP106 and NLP160). Enclosed is a Landscape Statement prepared by James Blake Associates which robustly demonstrates that in landscape terms, the site is well screened from most external viewpoints and those views over it that do exist could be screened effectively through mitigation planting.

In respect of coalescence it confirms that the site is completely screened by trees from views from Arlesey to the west. There is no visual connection between the two settlements. This visual barrier will be strengthened by the proposed landscape masterplan for the Arlesey East development. There is scope also for additional tree-planting on the western section of the site to further reinforce the visual separation of Stotfold and Arlesey. Although the physical gap between the settlements may narrow because of the development, the visual separation will increase in scale and permanence.

Mitigation planting can be carried out to buffer the impact on Etonbury Wood of developing the land between it and the existing settlement. This can involve the creation of a Green Corridor along the Pix Brook, with a permissive footpath and habitat enhancements such as tree-planting and meadow creation to create a more bio-diverse belt linking Etonbury Wood with Stotfold.

A number of other Green Infrastructure aspirations from the Etonbury Green Wheel Masterplan could also be delivered as part of a landscape led housing development.

In light of the above, our client would argue that Stotfold has in fact got capacity for Medium to High levels of growth, especially with the right investment in new infrastructure provision. This offers opportunities to encourage sustainable development with good connections to major road and rail links and could deliver a range of housing for the local community with the potential for major infrastructure improvements.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 5743

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Bloor Homes South Midlands

Representation:

The site is promoted for residential development, located to the south of Arlesey Road, at the western
edge of the settlement of Stotfold, adjacent to existing housing fronting the Arlesey Road. The site is
capable of accommodating approximately 100 dwellings, to include significant amounts of open space
along with an attenuation pond feature and LEAP at the southern area of the site, overlooking the Pix
Brook.
The site would provide an attractive edge of settlement development along with sensitive open space
creating a natural environment and encouraging a diverse range of habitat.
see attachment

Full text:

Re: Central Bedfordshire Local Plan 2015-2035, Draft Plan July 2017
Land to the south of Arlesey Road, Stotfold (NLP154)
Regarding the above consultation, thank you for inviting comments, and allowing us the opportunity to
respond on the Draft Local Plan. Specifically our comments are in relation to land to the south of
Arlesey Road, Stotfold.
Growth Strategy
We are broadly supportive of the Local Plan growth strategy, whereby it directs increased
development to sustainable locations such as Stotfold. In particular the Spatial Strategy Approach
which seeks to deliver between 20,000 and 30,000 new homes through moderate extensions to
existing towns and villages, along with entirely new towns and villages. However, we encourage the
Council to be cautious in terms of delivery rates from the proposed large sites and query the
deliverability of key infrastructure, such as the A1 improvements and East West Rail.
Stotfold is identified as a Minor Service Centre in the draft Local Plan, under the Settlement
Hierarchy, defined as "larger settlements with a good level of services, possibly including a school,
doctor's surgery, a basic retails offer and frequent public transport links". Stotfold is located within
Growth Area B, as set out in the Shaping Central Bedfordshire Consultation, undertaken in autumn
2016, whereby the Spatial Strategy contains options for all levels of growth, including potential for
major growth, providing it can be planned sustainably.
Area B requires the highest level of infrastructure investment if it is to take forward significant growth,
such as the A1 and East Coast Mainline / East/West Rail. This infrastructure must be secured first,
prior to strategic sites coming forward, and the proposed new settlement at Tempsford. It is therefore
doubtful that such growth can be relied upon to deliver housing in the more immediate future. Area B
does however direct some limited extensions to other settlements, and particularly sustainable
locations such as Stotfold should certainly be considered for some small-medium residential
extensions. Policy SP1: Growth Strategy of the draft Local Plan needs to make provision for this.
We are concerned by the Council's proposal (paragraph 8.3.2 of the draft Local Plan) that when
supply is low, to include a policy which negates the requirement to apply the 'presumption in favour of
sustainable development'. Of course, the presumption is 'at the heart of' the NPPF, and should be
seen as a 'golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking'.
We would be interested to know how this proposed policy aims to 'boost housing supply', i.e. would
the Council draw on reserve sites? And if so, one would require these to be contained in the Plan so
as not to be seen to 'bypass' it. Clearly if supply is low, then the Council should, at this early stage of
the plan making process, ensure that there is a continual over-supply to avoid such a scenario, and to
avoid further delay should the Plan be found unsound.
It is disappointing to note that the draft Local Plan does not provide an indication in terms of the
number of dwellings to be allocated at each settlement. This would be a helpful minimum
requirement guide for the formation of Neighbourhood Plans, and would indicate how much each
settlement is capable of accommodating.
Site Specifics
A site location plan is provided at the end of this letter.
The site is promoted for residential development, located to the south of Arlesey Road, at the western
edge of the settlement of Stotfold, adjacent to existing housing fronting the Arlesey Road. The site is
capable of accommodating approximately 100 dwellings, to include significant amounts of open space
along with an attenuation pond feature and LEAP at the southern area of the site, overlooking the Pix
Brook.
The site would provide an attractive edge of settlement development along with sensitive open space
creating a natural environment and encouraging a diverse range of habitat. Strong lines of
connectivity are possible, which will link into the centre of Stotfold along the Arlesey Road.
The proposed development would be well screened on the eastern approach into Stotfold along the
Arlesey Road, with the proposed development wrapping around the existing pub. Tree and hedgerow
planting along the western boundary is already in place.
Under the Council's Site Assessment Technical Document, Appendix D: Preliminary Site Assessment
Results, the site is referenced as NLP154, land to the south of Arlesey Road, Stotfold, measuring
4.22ha in total. The site was submitted as suitable for residential development to the Council's Call
for Sites exercise during spring 2016.
The outcome to NLP154 is as follows; "Site to be excluded from Local Plan process" justified as
follows; "Site fails at Stage 2 based on an overall consideration using planning balance. The site
does not follow the existing residential line of development and would extend the settlement in an
illogical way. Comments from consultees highlight issues surrounding negative impacts on existing
green corridors and the sites importance as a rural buffer. Also the site is not within a flood zone but
may hold flooding issues from the adjacent brook."
We strongly disagree with the Council's statement that development at this location would 'extend the
settlement in an illogical way' particularly given that permission was granted in April 2017
(CB/16/05525/FULL) for a new two storey building to the east of the existing Etonbury Academy at
Stotfold Road, the site being located directly adjacent to land south of Arlesey Road.
We also disagree with the Council's inconsistent approach; given that land to the east of the site at
NLP160 (land at Arlesey Road, Stotfold) is 'to be considered further as part of the Local Plan'. No
mention is made under this assessment to extending the settlement in an illogical way, even though
NLP160 extends as far to the south as our adjoining site NLP154, with the Pix Brook as its southern
boundary. No mention under NLP60 is made regarding flooding issues.
Should NLP160 be approved in the future for residential development, then it is sensible to also
consider NLP154 which would provide joined up frontage development along Arlesey / Stotfold Road.
Other than the more major projects which look at new villages in Aspley Guise, Marston Vale, RAF
Henlow Camp, east Arlesey, East Biggleswade and a new town at Tempsford, we expect remaining
allocations required to meet such a level of growth to be presented in the next publication of the Local
Plan. It is understood that this will look at sites on the edges of settlements, based on the Call for
Sites assessments exercise previously undertaken. It is also understood that sites such as land at
Stotfold will be considered and allocated through any future Neighbourhood Plan.
We therefore suggest that, land to the south of Arlesey Road (NLP154) should be allocated as
suitable for residential development in the emerging Local Plan and any future Neighbourhood Plan,
should this be progressed. Allocating smaller sites for development as opposed to over reliance on
larger, strategic land dependent on significant infrastructure enhancements would mean that housing
targets are more deliverable and achievable.

Attachments:

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 6063

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Greene King

Agent: David Russell

Representation:

Although we are in general accord with those Draft Plan polices that relate to our clients' land, we have very serious concerns about the Site Assessment
Technical Document, both in the approach taken and the resulting conclusions and
recommendations about individual sites.
see attachment

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 6140

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: North Hertfordshire District Council

Representation:

The Settlements Capacity: Initial Study (July 2017) states that there is already considerable pressure on existing services, facilities and infrastructure due to the level of development already planned and underway in Stotfold. The Site Assessment Technical Document Appendix D: Preliminary Site Assessment Results (July 2017) identifies that three sites comprising 20.86 hectares are to be considered in Stotfold as part of the Local Plan. see attachment

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 6369

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Mr John Saunders

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Representation:

Whilst the need to meet housing need provides a context, the Local Plan provides an opportunity to secure redevelopment of a poor quality, failing industrial site on the edge of Stotfold and provide much need new housing. The site is in a sustainable location and the site is considered to be a viable and deliverable proposition to be allocated for new housing in the emerging Development Plan for Central Bedfordshire. see attachment

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments:

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 6701

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Saunders Garage

Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Representation:

Site NLP160 (5.16 ha) is noted as to be considered further as part of the Local Plan. Integral to Site NLP160 is the present allocation HA12 contained in the adopted Site Allocations DPD (2.84ha). This comprises the premises of Saunders Recovery and its principal use as a vehicle recovery and secure storage yard has been long established.
See attachment

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 6956

Received: 29/08/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments Limited

Representation:

Appendix 7 - Land Between Astwick Road and Taylor's Road, Stotfold
Appendix 8 - Land West of Astwick Road, Stotfold
see attachment

Full text:

see attachment

Attachments: