Tempsford

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 136

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 153

Received: 10/07/2017

Respondent: D Holderness

Representation:

Tempsford should not have this level of development-the houses should be split evenly over the county and not impact on the countryside which this would do.

Full text:

Tempsford should not have this level of development-the houses should be split evenly over the county and not impact on the countryside which this would do.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 183

Received: 11/07/2017

Respondent: Ms Felicity Evans

Representation:

NLP450

Full text:

NLP450

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 190

Received: 12/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Melissa Lucas

Representation:

Too much of the success of this plan relies on other infrastructure developments, none of which have yet come to fruition.

Full text:

NLP450

Reading the local plan raises a number of issues for local residents and is inconsistent with the ongoing Caxton Gibbet to Black Cat proposals, and the A1 Strategy Study. If the A1 is re-routed, this plan becomes completely unworkable, as the existing road network could never cope with such an expansion in terms of new residences. Given the issues with schooling and transport for schooling in the immediate Sandy area, I am surprised to see that this plan proposes uses these schools to educate new residents to the Tempsford Airfield site. Without significant work and assurances, I cannot see this working. The comment that the Tempsford airfield is not nationally significant is short-sighted and disappointing. I would want to see much more detail on how this plan interrelates with East West Rail Consortium, Black Cat-Caxton Gibbet plans and the A1 upgrade plans. As the results of these plans are still unfinalised, it would be imprudent to commit to a plan at this point.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 199

Received: 13/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Evans

Representation:

Say No to New Tempsford but yes to additional village style developments which would complement existing rural living in this area, not kill it off.

Full text:

NLP450: I fully understand that additional housing is required to meet government targets but the amount of development proposed here is disproportional to other developments within CBC area and across the county. This area is prone to localised flooding and developing the site will only make the problem worse even if mitigating controls are considered by the developers. The flood plain on the map does not accurately reflect the extent of flooding when it occurs.
In addition, the proximity of the planned development to Tempsford village will spell the end of rural living within this area, which is the main reason why residents in the village choose to live here. I recognise that development is required, and the addition of perhaps 2 villages within that space of similar size to existing villages in the area, where existing resources can be shared, supported and enhanced, rather than killed off as a result of a town development which requires the sourcing and funding of additional resources.
We have already seen promised new town developments within Bedfordshire, new houses, new schools, public transport resources, surgeries etc that haven't worked out - such as Wixams. Please don't make New Tempsford CBC's white elephant.

Comment

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 203

Received: 14/07/2017

Respondent: Mrs Tracy Green

Representation:

This development poses significant risk to the nationally important RAF Tempsford and Gibraltar Barn. No detail is included on how you will protect Gibraltar Barn from damage.

Full text:

I am writing to contribute to the consultation of the local plan. I would like to object to the development of a new town in Tempsford for the following reasons:

1. I believe this will cause detriment to the nationally significant RAF Tempsford site and the structure known as Gibraltar Farm within this site.

My reasons for these objections are below:


1. Detriment to the RAF Tempsford site, incorporating Gibraltar Barn.

RAF Tempsford and Gibraltar Barn are nationally significant historic sites. While Gibraltar Barn is listed, the development of a new town close to it puts it in an incredible amount of danger.

The Local Plan contains no information about how the barn will be protected, nor how it will fit into such a development. Increased traffic and people close to the barn put it at a severe risk of damage from vandals, from pollution and more besides.

Gibraltar Farm, as I'm sure you will know, is the heart of the former RAF Tempsford. Men and women flew from this site to their deaths all to serve their country. To treat such a monument with such breathtaking disrespect is absolutely shameful. The actions of those who flew from Tempsford shortened the war by two years, it's said. Hitler himself was even aware of RAF Tempsford and sent men over to find and destroy it!

For some of these SOE women, Tempsford was the last place they set foot on English soil before flying off to fight for this country. They flew from Tempsford and ended their days with torture, with a bullet to the back of the neck, and being thrown like rubbish into the ovens of the concentration camps at places like Ravensbruck. Is this how we repay that sacrifice? By making this key part of British history an afterthought in a new housing estate?

I want you to guarantee that Gibraltar Barn will be treated with care and respect. Why not use this historic place as a museum? As a place people can come and learn about the important role Tempsford played in the war? The money it generated would more than pay for its upkeep.

I fear that if you do not take steps to protect this incredibly historically valuable building now, there will be a great outcry of protest in the future. There are many national groups, and indeed international groups, who will be extremely vocal in their condemnation of any action you take that is not in the best interests of Gibraltar Farm. Given its importance, there will be press interest and potentially interest from governmental departments. I fear that a great amount of resource will be needed to undo any ill-advised steps you make now, and that would negatively affect the people of Central Bedfordshire.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 216

Received: 17/07/2017

Respondent: Mr Ian Anker

Representation:

I am writing to object about the plans for Tempsford. 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 Tempsford. 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: 509

Received: 04/08/2017

Respondent: Joe Lawrence

Representation:

NO NO and NO. The Uk population is going up by 500,000 every year. How can you say this is sustainable? My village where I was born and bred is now having to bear the brunt of your government's mismanagement. As my wife is Colombian, we have had to pay £3000 to have our child born on the NHS and another £4000 on her Visas.How is it fair when there is an influx of EU citizens into this country getting everything for free? I am going to resist this proposal as it is not good for Tempsford

Full text:

I am a 33 year old male living on the edge of where the development will take place, and I would like to state that I am HORIFIED by the proposals. We chose to live in the countryside and this is where we want to bring up our 3 year old daughter. We do NOT want a Milton Keynes type town dumped on our doorstep. The countryside is so important for both our physical and mental wellbeing. We regularly go for runs, walks, and bike rides, and the fresh air helps with my wife's breathing problems that she inherited from living in a polluted town.
We often visit Gibraltar Farm to pay our respects to my grandfather's brothers who died protecting us in the Second World War. This is an important landmark and so is the old runway. This is not BROWNFIELD site and labeling so is utterly disrespectful.
I would like to state that I shall resist against this shameful proposed development for so many reasons.
The heart of our village will be decimated. We don't want to appear on Google Maps and have our privacy violated, but changing our humble village into a town will change everything good and innocent about where we live. The infrastructure; how can you trust a government with laying down new roads and public transport when they can't even get the A1 sorted -even after having spent millions of pounds worth on the pinch point programme. This proposal is all about money, not about our wellbeing and let me reiterate, I shall resist this hideous proposal with every fiber of my 33 year old body.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 523

Received: 05/08/2017

Respondent: Ms Lindsay Cook

Representation:

NLP452

The infrastructure is totally inadequate for servicing a development of this size. Schools, doctors and hospitals are already pushed to breaking point. The traffic flow through the village of Everton is already fast and furious and the local Speedwatch have clocked many people breaking the law.
This is an area enjoyed by dog walkers, horse riders, country sportsmen and cyclists alike an will change the whole nature of the area.
Access onto A1 is already very dangerous and many deaths have occurred on this stretch of road, Several farmers will also lose their entire livelihood should this development progress.

Full text:

NLP452

The infrastructure is totally inadequate for servicing a development of this size. Schools, doctors and hospitals are already pushed to breaking point. The traffic flow through the village of Everton is already fast and furious and the local Speedwatch have clocked many people breaking the law.
This is an area enjoyed by dog walkers, horse riders, country sportsmen and cyclists alike an will change the whole nature of the area.
Access onto A1 is already very dangerous and many deaths have occurred on this stretch of road, Several farmers will also lose their entire livelihood should this development progress.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 542

Received: 06/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Julian Badcock

Representation:

The development is simply too large to be assimilated within the existing community and the infrastructure that serves it.

Full text:

The site is very close to Everton and adjacent to our own parish boundary. The development would have a serious impact on local infrastructure, facilities and traffic and would have a detrimental effect on the rural community which is not equipped to handle such a large scale development. The position of the site at the extreme edge of Bedfordshire would mean increased pressure on services such as schools and GP surgeries over the county boundary in our own district of Huntingdonshire. It would also put more pressure on the A1 and proposed A428 express way.

The site is described as "brownfield", but this is highly misleading as the airfield was returned to agriculture not long after the war. The original airfield was designed to look like farmland, to escape enemy attention, as it was a secret site, from which secret agents took off to be dropped into occupied Europe during the last war. Now only portions of the runway and the odd barn remain. The rest is farmland.

Waresley-cum-Tetworth Parish Council will be objecting to this proposal, but the consultation is open to the general public and it is very important to state your views. The more public opposition there is to this insane scheme, the less likely they are to go ahead with it.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 555

Received: 07/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs W Greenacre

Representation:

NLP450 and NLP452
Proposed development larger than anywhere else
Development should be spread around Central Bedfordshire
Enormous strain on infrastructure
Insufficient jobs to be created
Homes for people from London, Peterborough and Cambridge not local people
Developments on or near flood plain
Disregard for Tempsford Airfield
Everton will look down on a massive housing development

Full text:

See attached letter

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 586

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Wayne Cortnage

Representation:

Corrupt project which will only benifit Council and Lady Errol.
The amount of proposed housing in this one area is totally impractical and unjustified.

Full text:

This amount of proposed houses is just impractical and will majorly impact the area .
There is absolutely no need for me to go into detail as you know as well as I do that the proposed development is to large for it not to severely impact the surrounding areas.
We all know the proposed airfield is deliberately being made to look unattractive by the current owner, purely so any proposal is a improvement.
We also know Lady Errol is due to make a lot of money and we are all aware how corrupt this proposal is.
Hence her links with the Council.
Please be assured that everyone is working very hard to expose this and the further this goes the easier of exposing this will be.
I moved to Tempsford in January and saved and saved to make this happen.(18k stamp duty).
I moved from Shefford because of the over population of housing.
I have no alternative to now move again if these proposals go a head.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 597

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Ms Susan Benge

Representation:

This is a travesty. The local infrastructure could in no way support an additional 4000 homes. This would completely change the rural character of the area, destroy Everton as a village. The whole landscape would be damaged as well as a site of historical significance.

Full text:

This is a travesty. The local infrastructure could in no way support an additional 4000 homes. This would completely change the rural character of the area, destroy Everton as a village. The whole landscape would be damaged as well as a site of historical significance.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 606

Received: 08/08/2017

Respondent: Janet Bush

Representation:

the development of this land for housing should not be considered. There are far too many unknowns regarding the A1 upgrade, east-west rail plans, A428 upgrade route decision. The planned town size is massive (up to 10,000 homes) and dwarfs surrounding villages and infrastructure capabilities.

Full text:

NLP450
The consultation appraisal states that any development in this area is an "infrastructure led" opportunity but the infrastructure does not yet exist.

This development would make A1 traffic problems worse. Existing problems include traffic flow, local commuter parking problems, and health & educational services resources, rats runs through local villages.

Development should not be considered until after the capacity of the A1 throughout the non-motorway stretch from Baldock to Alconbury is improved. The only real solution is by re-routing parts of the A1. Until the plans for this are designed and approved, there should be NO plans for housing in this area.

There is no definite timescale for the provision of the east-west railway, nor has there been any local consultation on a possible route, how much land would be required, and where, so it is quite impossible to design a new settlement around an unknown location for the railway.

Assumption that the East-West railway will go ahead and through this development - both appear to rely in the provision of each other to make them viable. It's a chicken and egg proposal and makes no sense at all.

Have Network Rail been consulted and are they agreeable to the disruption caused by the construction of a bridged crossing or underpass, or the timescale involved in such work, which must be completed before construction traffic can enter the area.

There does not appear to have been any investigation of the impact of the new development upon the social infrastructure of Sandy, Everton and Tempsford in respect of medical, educational and recreational facilities, nor the physical interaction with these settlements.

No consideration appears to have been given to the protection of the unique characters of the settlements dangerously close to coalescence with a new town, nor the preservation of their unique landscaped settings.

There is no publicly available evidence that water, gas, electricity and telecommunications infrastructure has the capacity to serve a massive increase in population in this area, especially taking into account of proposed development immediately to the north in the St Neots area.

Very little consideration appears to have been given to the unique and nationally important historical significance of Tempsford Airfield.

While the area would address the requirement to meet housing figures, what consideration has been given to local requirements related to new household formation. Development in this location will, for example, be of little benefit to newly formed households in Luton or Dunstable, as too remote from

Drainage and potential for flooding - the flood plain from the river has been referenced within the assessment but not the run off from Tempsford Hill which has caused flooding issues in the past.

Additional impact of air pollution in this area (already considerable due to levels of traffic using the A1), additional building and commuter travel to potential rail station will increase traffic in proposed densely populated area.

Impact on local farmers, job losses, reduction in fresh food production due to loss of agricultural land.

Impact on rural businesses (pubs, shops) if town built within close proximity to local villages.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 663

Received: 09/08/2017

Respondent: Mrs Juliet Pennington

Representation:

Existing components of ecological network (16.33) include fields in the proposed Tempsford site which provide breeding areas for hares. The edges of these fields are home to rare wildflowers such as grass vetchling and bee orchid. The woodland edge provides cover for the endangered turtle dove and this is one of the few areas in the UK where they breed. Barn owls also hunt in these fields. If this area were built on all these species would be lost.

Full text:

Existing components of ecological network (16.33) include fields in the proposed Tempsford site which provide breeding areas for hares. The edges of these fields are home to rare wildflowers such as grass vetchling and bee orchid. The woodland edge provides cover for the endangered turtle dove and this is one of the few areas in the UK where they breed. Barn owls also hunt in these fields. If this area were built on all these species would be lost.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 692

Received: 10/08/2017

Respondent: Liz Bull

Representation:

I wish to object to this massive proposed development.
The effect on the wildlife with be hugely detrimental.
The surrounding flood plane will be affected by this.
There is no infrastructure to cope with this.

Full text:

I wish to object to this massive proposed development.
The effect on the wildlife with be hugely detrimental.
The surrounding flood plane will be affected by this.
There is no infrastructure to cope with this.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 694

Received: 09/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Andrew Pym

Representation:

see letter attached

Full text:

see letter attached

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 735

Received: 31/07/2017

Respondent: Mr M Greenacre

Representation:

see attached letter

Full text:

see attached letter

Attachments:

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 736

Received: 11/08/2017

Respondent: Waresley-cum-Tetworth Parish Council

Representation:

Tempsford Growth Location - negatively affecting rural communities, not enough infrastructure to support, CBC get the housing quota whilst Cambs deals with the increased pressure, is not a brownfield site, impact on the Greensand Ridge, Heritage issues on site, Protection of ROW, want to be informed in the future.

Full text:

I write on behalf of my parish council to express our very strong objection to your proposal for a new market town of 7000-10000 homes on Tempsford Airfield.
As our parish of Waresley-cum-Tetworth shares a border with the parish of Tempsford, the effect on us of such a proposal would be particularly acute. The fact that the site is at the extreme eastern edge of Tempsford, puts it even closer to us. Indeed some of the neighbouring listed building sites, which you mention in your plan document eg Tetworth Hall, the Coach House and Cottage and Valley Farm House are actually in our parish and not (as implied) in your district.
We object to the proposal on the following grounds
* A town of this size on our doorstep, would have a devastating effect on our rural community and would change its nature irrevocably. Schools, GP surgeries, roads etc would be put under intolerable stress.
* The site's position to the East of the railway line means that it is cut off from the village of Tempsford and from the county of Bedfordshire. Inhabitants of the new community would therefore tend to head east into Everton and towards Cambridgeshire for local services.
These services are not equipped to deal with such an influx.
* Central Bedfordshire thus achieves its housing quota, while we, in a different county, have to cope with the consequences.
* Cut off by the railway, there would be few routes out of the community towards the A1 and this would lead to traffic congestion on these routes.
* 7-10000 extra cars on the A1 at rush hour (once they had got there) would bring it to a standstill. The A14 from Huntingdon to Cambridge should provide a cautionary example.
* The whole scheme is thus dependent on a railway station at Tempsford - an eventuality which is at best conjectural.
* The site is only 5 miles from St Neots and 4 miles from Sandy, both market towns. Just how many market towns is this area supposed to support?
There are strong environmental and historical reasons to oppose the scheme.
* The site is rural in nature and as such should be preserved, not built over. To describe it as "brownfield" as you do, is misleading , as it was returned to agriculture in the 1950s and most of the site is farmland.
* The site lies close to the Greensand Ridge, which overlooks it. This is a Nature Improvement Area (NIA), which should be protected and in fact the Greensand Ridge Trust has recently been granted £1.66 million to protect this environment. A market town here would be in direct contradiction to the principles of enhancing the rural environment.
* Tempsford airfield is an historic site, a secret airfield from which agents took off to be dropped into Europe in the Second World War. Their memorials are preserved in Gibraltar Farm Barn. The history of this site is important and the character of the site should not be destroyed.
* A Roman Road (Hasell Hedge) runs along the edge of the site and continues north to form the parish boundary with Waresley-cum-Tetworth. This ancient way should be preserved.
* Hasell Hedge is a public bridleway and part of it is included in the Greensand Ridge Walk. Several public rights of way join up with it at the Tempsford site, coming from Everton, from Woodbury and from Tetworth. These rights of way must be preserved and their rural nature should not be compromised.
In summary, this proposal is entirely unsustainable. If implemented it would have a catastrophic effect on our own village and on the other communities in our local environment. The nature of important historic sites, both ancient and modern, would be fundamentally changed.
We were surprised and disappointed that we were not consulted when your local plan was launched and in fact, we only found out about it by accident. In view of the fact that our parish is adjacent to the scheme, we trust that you will keep us informed in future.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 801

Received: 12/08/2017

Respondent: mr Jonathan Evans

Representation:

The pure scale of this development means the loss of individuality among three existing communities (Tempsford, Sandy and Everton) who will merge as this development progresses. Some small scale development in keeping with the rural nature maybe but not on this scale.

Full text:

NLP452 - I object for the following reasons:

This is a rural community with close links to the Greensand Ridge landscape which will be forever altered if the planned development on this scale goes ahead. The infrastructure upon which it will rely is still under discussion and hasn't even reached consultation stage so the proposals around development on this scale are premature and ill conceived.
Tempsford Airfield has a historic significance which continues to be recognised today by the military and is clearly evidenced by the dipping of aircraft wings whenever military aircraft pass this way (a common occurrence given the proximity of Shuttleworth, Duxford and RAF sites). Development on this site would be an insult to those who bravely gave their lives during WWII.
The potential for flooding assessment references an environmental agency map which was last reviewed in 2004 - it is outdated and doesn't take into account the additional risk of flooding that would occur following development of this land nor the additional run off of water from Tempsford Hill which causes localised flooding on a regular basis.
The area makrked for development is made up of prime agricultural land and green spaces that are natural habitat for many species of wildlife including muntjac deer, spotted flycatchers and, we believe, nightingales. An in depth ecological study must be undertaken to ensure that the natural habitats of these animals remain undisturbed by any development.
While I would be accepting of a development in keeping with the rural nature of this area (i.e. addition of more small villages) the additional 4,000 - 10,000 new homes (depending on who's report you read) is just totally uncalled for and goes way beyond the remit required of Central Beds for new houses. It's not a case of not in our backyard, more just not so much, especially when towns that could integrate additional capacity already exist within Central Beds along the Oxford Cambridge corridor.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 825

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

In your Local Plan overview, you state that local communities want you to "keep the character of Central Bedfordshire" and "limit the impact on the countryside". It is difficult to imagine a proposal that will change the character of an area more, and have more of an impact on the local countryside, than the plans you propose for the Everton and Tempsford area. The character of this part of Central Bedfordshire will be hugely, irreversibly and detrimentally changed, against the wishes of local residents.

Full text:

In your Local Plan overview, you state that local communities want you to "keep the character of Central Bedfordshire" and "limit the impact on the countryside". It is difficult to imagine a proposal that will change the character of an area more, and have more of an impact on the local countryside, than the plans you propose for the Everton and Tempsford area. The character of this part of Central Bedfordshire will be hugely, irreversibly and detrimentally changed, against the wishes of local residents.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 826

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

The 'Appendix B Area Assessment' of the Local Plan for Tempsford notes that 'development at this scale would be likely to have a detrimental impact on the rural character and appearance' and that 'Development is further constrained by the abundance of Priority Habitats and best and most versatile agricultural land in the west of the settlement, as well as sensitive heritage settings.'. These both seem to be at odds with the objective to limit the impact of the development on the countryside and to use brownfield sites. This development should not proceed.

Full text:

The 'Appendix B Area Assessment' of the Local Plan for Tempsford notes that 'development at this scale would be likely to have a detrimental impact on the rural character and appearance' and that 'Development is further constrained by the abundance of Priority Habitats and best and most versatile agricultural land in the west of the settlement, as well as sensitive heritage settings.'. These both seem to be at odds with the objective to limit the impact of the development on the countryside and to use brownfield sites. This development should not proceed.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 827

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

A development of up to 7-10,000 houses East of Tempsford is effectively planting a new town with twice the capacity of Sandy into a single rural location. That will have a massive detrimental effect on the surrounding countryside, communities and the rural setting and way of life. It will completely dwarf all of the existing settlements. It can only lead to increased traffic on surrounding roads (irrespective of potential infrastructure improvements), increased levels of pollution and noise. It is simply not fair to impose such a high and concentrated burden on the residents of neighouring villages.

Full text:

A development of up to 7-10,000 houses East of Tempsford is effectively planting a new town with twice the capacity of Sandy into a single rural location. That will have a massive detrimental effect on the surrounding countryside, communities and the rural setting and way of life. It will completely dwarf all of the existing settlements. It can only lead to increased traffic on surrounding roads (irrespective of potential infrastructure improvements), increased levels of pollution and noise. It is simply not fair to impose such a high and concentrated burden on the residents of neighouring villages.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 829

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

It is grossly unfair on the local area to put half to one-third of your total number of houses to be developed into this single location. Whilst we all appreciate the need to accommodate growth and provide more housing, this should be spread more equally across the whole of Central Beds and not focussed on such a large area of currently rural farmland.

Full text:

It is grossly unfair on the local area to put half to one-third of your total number of houses to be developed into this single location. Whilst we all appreciate the need to accommodate growth and provide more housing, this should be spread more equally across the whole of Central Beds and not focussed on such a large area of currently rural farmland.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 830

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

The proposed Tempsford development area is not close to existing major centres of employment as shown in fig 13.4 of your local plan. Surely it makes more sense to build new homes closer to employment locations.

Full text:

The proposed Tempsford development area is not close to existing major centres of employment as shown in fig 13.4 of your local plan. Surely it makes more sense to build new homes closer to employment locations.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 831

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

The development of new infrastructure such as road and rail is not yet clear. The plans should not proceed without greater certainty over road and rail developments as the impact on already congested roads/junctions, and rail services, will be unsustainable.

Full text:

The development of new infrastructure such as road and rail is not yet clear. The plans should not proceed without greater certainty over road and rail developments as the impact on already congested roads/junctions, and rail services, will be unsustainable.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 832

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

The development will negatively impact the Greensand Ridge NIA. It will change the setting and outlook from this segment of the NIA from a rural landscape to an urban one, appearing as one urban development from the North of the development down to Sandy.

Full text:

The development will negatively impact the Greensand Ridge NIA. It will change the setting and outlook from this segment of the NIA from a rural landscape to an urban one, appearing as one urban development from the North of the development down to Sandy.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 833

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

This new development, while likely being separated from Sandy to the South by a small amount of trees or open space, is bound over time to become an extension to Sandy and result in two joined-together towns similar to Ampthill & Flitwick. The result will be a conurbation combining Sandy, Everton & Tempsford that will effectively spoil an even larger area of the countryside. This will have a huge negative effect on surrounding countryside and communities.

Full text:

This new development, while likely being separated from Sandy to the South by a small amount of trees or open space, is bound over time to become an extension to Sandy and result in two joined-together towns similar to Ampthill & Flitwick. The result will be a conurbation combining Sandy, Everton & Tempsford that will effectively spoil an even larger area of the countryside. This will have a huge negative effect on surrounding countryside and communities.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 834

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr Robin Lewis

Representation:

Site is not in alignment with NPPF for large developments.

Full text:

Site Assessment Technical Document July 2017: This document states in paragraph 4.3.33, that your approach "is supported by paragraph 52 of the NPPF which states that 'the supply of new homes can sometimes be best achieved through planning for larger scale development...' ". However, paragraph 52 of the NPPF also goes on to say "Working with the support of their communities, local planning authorities should consider whether such opportunities provide the best way of achieving sustainable development." Your proposed Tempsford development DOES NOT have the support of the local communities; the local communities DO NOT consider that these proposals are the best way; you HAVE NOT worked with the local community. Paragraph 52 only says new homes CAN SOMETIMES be best achieved by large development. It is wrong to conclude that this proposal IS supported by the NPPF as you suggest.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 874

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr John Pugh

Representation:

NLP452
I feel that I must comment on this ridiculous notion of building a new town on this site.
While I accept that there is a need for housing, to contemplate a development of this size is bordering on lunacy.
Consider the inadequate infrastructure that exists now. A development of this size will totally destroy the surrounding area.
I moved to Everton to escape the hell hole known as Luton. To look out on a huge vista of wall to wall housing instead of pleasant countryside will be a sad comment on modern existence.
I fear the worst.

Full text:

NLP452
I feel that I must comment on this ridiculous notion of building a new town on this site.
While I accept that there is a need for housing, to contemplate a development of this size is bordering on lunacy.
Consider the inadequate infrastructure that exists now. A development of this size will totally destroy the surrounding area.
I moved to Everton to escape the hell hole known as Luton. To look out on a huge vista of wall to wall housing instead of pleasant countryside will be a sad comment on modern existence.
I fear the worst.

Object

Site Assessment Forms (Housing)

Representation ID: 875

Received: 14/08/2017

Respondent: Mr John Pugh

Representation:

NLP450
I feel that I must comment on this ridiculous notion of building a new town on this site.
While I accept that there is a need for housing, to contemplate a development of this size is bordering on lunacy.
Consider the inadequate infrastructure that exists now. A development of this size will totally destroy the surrounding area.
I moved to Everton to escape the hell hole known as Luton. To look out on a huge vista of wall to wall housing instead of pleasant countryside will be a sad comment on modern existence.
I fear the worst.

Full text:

NLP450
I feel that I must comment on this ridiculous notion of building a new town on this site.
While I accept that there is a need for housing, to contemplate a development of this size is bordering on lunacy.
Consider the inadequate infrastructure that exists now. A development of this size will totally destroy the surrounding area.
I moved to Everton to escape the hell hole known as Luton. To look out on a huge vista of wall to wall housing instead of pleasant countryside will be a sad comment on modern existence.
I fear the worst.