Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

The residents of Ashwell continue to object to this proposed development as we feel that all our representations (including 135 relevant and specific letters of objection, and Parish Council representations), have been and continue to be ignored. The goal posts are continually changing, and there appears to be an agenda to force this proposal through regardless of the opinions of the vast majority of the people, and common sense interpretation of planning policies. Could this be democracy in action, 2016 version?

There has been no consultation to build on this land, having been previously rejected on 3 separate occasions, neither has it appeared in any Village Plan or study. A housing development here is inappropriate as it is outside the existing agreed village boundary; is elevated and will seriously affect the visual aspect of the village, in particular Arbury Banks ancient monument, the adjacent Conservation Area, the North Baldock Chalk Uplands Character Area, and the approaches from Bygrave. The intention to amend the settlement boundary to accommodate it, makes complete nonsense of any previous policies, agreements and consultations.

Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site is far too narrow and will be hazardous as the entrance onto Clay bush road will be on a left hand bend, on a sharp downhill slope with a poor visual sight line and adjacent school premises. Additionally the proposed building of 2800 houses north of Baldock (Site SP14) will significantly increase vehicular movements on Claybush Road, as it will throughout the village.

Although not a planning issue, village services, roads and infrastructure are already severely stretched, and there are no plans, willor money to improve them.

Ashwell is already well ahead of its requirement for new homes, and there is no identified local rural housing need or a need for the local community or for agricultural workers etc. It will take a further 1.74 hectares of agricultural land out of production, which the country long term cannot afford. There is no sensible reason to use this green belt land.

Taking the English countryside for granted and assuming that it will always be there, is one of its greatest threats. Successive administrations have done almost nothing to preserve our countryside. If we seriously value our rural villages and local countryside, this proposal must be rejected yet again, as nothing has changed, only the political pressure to change.

The residents of Ashwell continue to object to this proposed development as we feel that all our representations (including 135 relevant and specific letters of objection, and Parish Council representations), have been and continue to be ignored. The goal posts are continually changing, and there appears to be an agenda to force this proposal through regardless of the opinions of the vast majority of the people, and common sense interpretation of planning policies. Could this be democracy in action, 2016 version?

There has been no consultation to build on this land, having been previously rejected on 3 separate occasions, neither has it appeared in any Village Plan or study. A housing development here is inappropriate as it is outside the existing agreed village boundary; is elevated and will seriously affect the visual aspect of the village, in particular Arbury Banks ancient monument, the adjacent Conservation Area, the North Baldock Chalk Uplands Character Area, and the approaches from Bygrave. The intention to amend the settlement boundary to accommodate it, makes complete nonsense of any previous policies, agreements and consultations.

Vehicle and pedestrian access to the site is far too narrow and will be hazardous as the entrance onto Clay bush road will be on a left hand bend, on a sharp downhill slope with a poor visual sight line and adjacent school premises. Additionally the proposed building of 2800 houses north of Baldock (Site SP14) will significantly increase vehicular movements on Claybush Road, as it will throughout the village.

Although not a planning issue, village services, roads and infrastructure are already severely stretched, and there are no plans, willor money to improve them.

Ashwell is already well ahead of its requirement for new homes, and there is no identified local rural housing need or a need for the local community or for agricultural workers etc. It will take a further 1.74 hectares of agricultural land out of production, which the country long term cannot afford. There is no sensible reason to use this green belt land.

Taking the English countryside for granted and assuming that it will always be there, is one of its greatest threats. Successive administrations have done almost nothing to preserve our countryside. If we seriously value our rural villages and local countryside, this proposal must be rejected yet again, as nothing has changed, only the political pressure to change.