Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

We are writing to object to the NHDC Proposed Submission Local Plan ('the Local Plan') as it relates to the following proposed sites:

IC1 (Duncots Close, Ickleford)
IC2 (Burford Grange, Ickleford)
IC3 (Bedford Road, Ickleford)
LS1 (North Ickleford).

Our objections are as follows:

1.For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND because it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
2.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT LEGAL as there was not 'early or meaningful engagement with the local neighbourhood' contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework. In fact there was no engagement and the first time the neighbourhood knew these sites were being considered for development was when the draft Local Plan was published a few weeks ago.
3.For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as the NHDC modelling used to estimate traffic flows does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, in particular resulting from the closure of nearby RAF Henlow and the redevelopment of that large site to provide around 700 new homes. It can be expected that many of the residents of that recently announced development will travel along the A600 to Hitchin to access businesses in Hitchin, Stevenage or Luton (or beyond) or to commute by rail into London from Hitchin. Even without that development, the proposed additional homes at IC3 and LS1 will place an unreasonable burden on the traffic flow as the A600 approaches Ickleford at the mini-roundabout junction with Turnpike Lane. There appears to be no viable mitigation for this traffic flow such as a by-pass.
4.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as NHDC has not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and/or the proposed redevelopment of RAF Henlow which has only recently been announced.

We are writing to object to the NHDC Proposed Submission Local Plan ('the Local Plan') as it relates to the following proposed sites:

IC1 (Duncots Close, Ickleford)
IC2 (Burford Grange, Ickleford)
IC3 (Bedford Road, Ickleford)
LS1 (North Ickleford).

Our objections are as follows:

1.For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND because it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
2.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT LEGAL as there was not 'early or meaningful engagement with the local neighbourhood' contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework. In fact there was no engagement and the first time the neighbourhood knew these sites were being considered for development was when the draft Local Plan was published a few weeks ago.
3.For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as the NHDC modelling used to estimate traffic flows does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, in particular resulting from the closure of nearby RAF Henlow and the redevelopment of that large site to provide around 700 new homes. It can be expected that many of the residents of that recently announced development will travel along the A600 to Hitchin to access businesses in Hitchin, Stevenage or Luton (or beyond) or to commute by rail into London from Hitchin. Even without that development, the proposed additional homes at IC3 and LS1 will place an unreasonable burden on the traffic flow as the A600 approaches Ickleford at the mini-roundabout junction with Turnpike Lane. There appears to be no viable mitigation for this traffic flow such as a by-pass.
4.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as NHDC has not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and/or the proposed redevelopment of RAF Henlow which has only recently been announced.

We are writing to object to the NHDC Proposed Submission Local Plan ('the Local Plan') as it relates to the following proposed sites:

IC1 (Duncots Close, Ickleford)
IC2 (Burford Grange, Ickleford)
IC3 (Bedford Road, Ickleford)
LS1 (North Ickleford).

Our objections are as follows:

1.For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND because it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
2.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT LEGAL as there was not 'early or meaningful engagement with the local neighbourhood' contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework. In fact there was no engagement and the first time the neighbourhood knew these sites were being considered for development was when the draft Local Plan was published a few weeks ago.
3.For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as the NHDC modelling used to estimate traffic flows does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, in particular resulting from the closure of nearby RAF Henlow and the redevelopment of that large site to provide around 700 new homes. It can be expected that many of the residents of that recently announced development will travel along the A600 to Hitchin to access businesses in Hitchin, Stevenage or Luton (or beyond) or to commute by rail into London from Hitchin. Even without that development, the proposed additional homes at IC3 and LS1 will place an unreasonable burden on the traffic flow as the A600 approaches Ickleford at the mini-roundabout junction with Turnpike Lane. There appears to be no viable mitigation for this traffic flow such as a by-pass.
4.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as NHDC has not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and/or the proposed redevelopment of RAF Henlow which has only recently been announced.

We are writing to object to the NHDC Proposed Submission Local Plan ('the Local Plan') as it relates to the following proposed sites:

IC1 (Duncots Close, Ickleford)
IC2 (Burford Grange, Ickleford)
IC3 (Bedford Road, Ickleford)
LS1 (North Ickleford).

Our objections are as follows:

1.For sites IC1, IC2 and IC3, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND because it conflicts with the National Planning Policy Framework and the NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt land.
2.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT LEGAL as there was not 'early or meaningful engagement with the local neighbourhood' contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework. In fact there was no engagement and the first time the neighbourhood knew these sites were being considered for development was when the draft Local Plan was published a few weeks ago.
3.For sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as the NHDC modelling used to estimate traffic flows does not account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, in particular resulting from the closure of nearby RAF Henlow and the redevelopment of that large site to provide around 700 new homes. It can be expected that many of the residents of that recently announced development will travel along the A600 to Hitchin to access businesses in Hitchin, Stevenage or Luton (or beyond) or to commute by rail into London from Hitchin. Even without that development, the proposed additional homes at IC3 and LS1 will place an unreasonable burden on the traffic flow as the A600 approaches Ickleford at the mini-roundabout junction with Turnpike Lane. There appears to be no viable mitigation for this traffic flow such as a by-pass.
4.For sites IC3 and LS1, the Local Plan is NOT SOUND as NHDC has not accounted for any impact associated with the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and/or the proposed redevelopment of RAF Henlow which has only recently been announced.