Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

This is my letter to confirm my reasons for objecting to the proposal to build extra houses in Barkway on land identified as BK3 .
This is not a cut and paste job from any letter created by others but I imagine you will receive such documents but they are equally valid as objections
My understanding is that NHDC have been given a mandatory target to build a certain number of dwellings between 2011 and 2031 and my calculation is that this amounts to just less than 30% of the housing stock as at 2011. As Barkway has only a small number of houses, my calculations are that, to equal the average that NHDC need to build each year, this average amounts to 5 houses per year.
Houses already built/approved plus BK1 and BK2 have fulfilled our fair share until 2024. There are also several small sites currently under discussion. This shows that Barkway is, as it always has, contributing its fair share. It can absorb and get benefit from gradual sustained increase in its population and the draft Neighbourhood Plan which was created two years ago confirms that the residents back the continued expansion at this level.
It is unfortunate to say the least that the NP has not been able to be progressed because the NHDC Local Plan is not yet approved. BPC have been told that they cannot take their NP any further until NHDC agree that it can go forward and that has not yet happened.
There are therefore ways in which NHDC are abusing their power and ignoring their electorate. The absolute reverse of National Government's push for localism.
1. The size of development is grossly disproportionate
2. The residents have already by survey supported a plan which does support expansion at or even above the average needed across NHDC but objects to excessive expansion
3. The properly organised survey and NP have been frustrated by NHDC which at this moment removes any statutory obligation on NHDC to fulfil the wishes of the residents
4. The actions of NHDC are that they take the soft options.
I appreciate that just words like the above are simply that; words.
HOWEVER, It is necessary to fight this proposal based on an item by item analysis showing how the current proposal flies in the face of NPPF criteria. On this I take my lead from BPC and wholeheartedly support their analysis. The problem is always to reduce emotion and argue on whether proposals meet National Guidelines and not local prejudices.

I therefore also list below the legal arguments.
Sustainable transport
A local plan should have sustainable transport plans which include measures to reduce the use of private cars by replacing them with public transport or low carbon alternatives. There are no plans to improve local public transport links, this will increase the use of private cars to access local amenities in Barley, Buntingford and Royston. It will not discourage use of private transport to access schools and will affect public bridleways and footpaths, and does not recognise the needs for access to existing amenities by those of impaired movement. As no jobs are being created, persons will be required to rely on private transport to commute to work outside the village.
Contravention: NPPF30 NPPF34, NPPF35, NOOF 38 and NPPF95 as well as NDHC Policy SP 6 - sustainable transport. And their sustainability objective 2c as well as NHDC policy 29.

Local Amenities
Barkway has limited amenities, comprising a pub, a school, hairdressers, petrol station and car service stations. The current local school is able to accommodate 50, 5 to 9 year olds. Currently it has 28 pupils. The additional houses on BK 1&2 plus other infill homes will help keep the school viable.
Under NPPF policies Local plans should take into account local Amenities and access to them. The BK3 proposal does not promote sustainable communities that enhance or maintain our rural community, and does not ensure a sufficient supply of school places above primary level.
Contraventions NPPF 38, 55 and 72.

Impacts on character and appearance of surrounding areas and conserving and enhancing the natural environment
The road, known as the 'joint', leading into Barkway and ridgeline running along the top of the Field known as BK3 are part of the East Anglian Heights, known locally as the Chiltern Ridge. NHDC have stated the need to protect this, and have constantly strived to protect the historic linear character of the village. BK3 will detract from this in a massive way
This contravenes their own statements and NPPF 11 and NPPF 11.

Core Planning Principles
NHDC have thus far rejected the Barkway and Nuthampstead emerging Neighbourhood plan.
A contravention to NPPF para 17.

Economic Growth
BK3 will not create employment, or support economic growth. It may even have a negative impact on Newsells Stud Farm which currently employs some 30 people.
Contravention to NPPF para 28.

NHDC Policy 7 Selected Villages beyond the Green Belt
NHDC will normally permit development proposals if the site lies within the main area of the village; and the proposal would maintain or enhance the character or visual quality of the village.
NHDC are seeking to extend the permitted development boundary of the village to include BK3 without prior consultation