Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I write as a concerned resident of Ickleford in response to the above proposals.

As a general response I would like it documented that I lodge objections based on the following, which although may not be sound objections on planning grounds are my opinions as a local resident after the public meeting held in the village hall on 6th October and information imparted by our District Councillor:

Threat to school = disruption and destruction of the heart and sheer nature of the village - impacting on key 'triangle' feature of such local importance and centre of the community! And ....

1. Threat to erosion of boundaries from neighbouring Towns 2. Threat to local infrastructure = already crippled local routes between Central Beds, Hitchin and beyond. But we don't need to worry apparently, because Central Beds are far behind in the process apparently and of course the 700 new homes proposed for Henlow, plus the proposals for Lower Stondon and Arlesey won't have impact will they; NOT!!!
3. Misuse of current Green Belt designations 4. Proposed expansion in areas already noted as prone to flooding/flood risk = unsuitable.
5. The one single main sewer already over capacity = two noted areas adjacent to proposed site already experience regular drainage/surface flooding issues yet Anglian Water failing to respond and address accordingly.
6. Proposed development equates to a 40% increase on current dwellings/village size = unfair and disproportionate expansion when compared to that being proposed for some other local villages/areas.
7. Lack of consultation following failure to adhere to due process = loss of public engagement and responses; loss of opportunity and rightful voice that questions and undermines process; although may not represent grounds for legal challenge can a public enquiry into conduct of officers and elected members be requested?

More specifically I am in full support of the response submitted by Ickleford Parish Council on the four sites proposed.

IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes

Based on conflict between the local plan and NHDC/National policy, my objections and concerns are:

1. Building on Green Belt. The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, and IC3 due to conflicts with; National Planning Policy Framework and, NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt

2. Sewerage and Flooding. The Local Plan is Not Sound for site IC1 and IC3 due to; the inability of main sewer to cope with current demand and these sites will add to this burden, and; conflict of NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce flooding from new developments.

3. Lack of proper consultation.
The Local Plan is Not Legally Compliant due to NHDCs failure to allow prior consultation on sites IC3 and LS1.

4. Infrastructure.
The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 due to flawed modelling that fails to account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC transport policy.

5. Air Quality.
The Local Plan is Not Sound due to increased traffic pollution conflicting with NHDC air quality policy in respect of sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1.

6. Relocation of school.
The consequential impact on the village renders the Local Plan Not Sound for site IC3 and conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance historical characteristics of villages.

I write as a concerned resident of Ickleford in response to the above proposals.

As a general response I would like it documented that I lodge objections based on the following, which although may not be sound objections on planning grounds are my opinions as a local resident after the public meeting held in the village hall on 6th October and information imparted by our District Councillor:

Threat to school = disruption and destruction of the heart and sheer nature of the village - impacting on key 'triangle' feature of such local importance and centre of the community! And ....

1. Threat to erosion of boundaries from neighbouring Towns 2. Threat to local infrastructure = already crippled local routes between Central Beds, Hitchin and beyond. But we don't need to worry apparently, because Central Beds are far behind in the process apparently and of course the 700 new homes proposed for Henlow, plus the proposals for Lower Stondon and Arlesey won't have impact will they; NOT!!!
3. Misuse of current Green Belt designations 4. Proposed expansion in areas already noted as prone to flooding/flood risk = unsuitable.
5. The one single main sewer already over capacity = two noted areas adjacent to proposed site already experience regular drainage/surface flooding issues yet Anglian Water failing to respond and address accordingly.
6. Proposed development equates to a 40% increase on current dwellings/village size = unfair and disproportionate expansion when compared to that being proposed for some other local villages/areas.
7. Lack of consultation following failure to adhere to due process = loss of public engagement and responses; loss of opportunity and rightful voice that questions and undermines process; although may not represent grounds for legal challenge can a public enquiry into conduct of officers and elected members be requested?

More specifically I am in full support of the response submitted by Ickleford Parish Council on the four sites proposed.

IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes

Based on conflict between the local plan and NHDC/National policy, my objections and concerns are:

1. Building on Green Belt. The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, and IC3 due to conflicts with; National Planning Policy Framework and, NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt

2. Sewerage and Flooding. The Local Plan is Not Sound for site IC1 and IC3 due to; the inability of main sewer to cope with current demand and these sites will add to this burden, and; conflict of NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce flooding from new developments.

3. Lack of proper consultation.
The Local Plan is Not Legally Compliant due to NHDCs failure to allow prior consultation on sites IC3 and LS1.

4. Infrastructure.
The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 due to flawed modelling that fails to account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC transport policy.

5. Air Quality.
The Local Plan is Not Sound due to increased traffic pollution conflicting with NHDC air quality policy in respect of sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1.

6. Relocation of school.
The consequential impact on the village renders the Local Plan Not Sound for site IC3 and conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance historical characteristics of villages.

I write as a concerned resident of Ickleford in response to the above proposals.

As a general response I would like it documented that I lodge objections based on the following, which although may not be sound objections on planning grounds are my opinions as a local resident after the public meeting held in the village hall on 6th October and information imparted by our District Councillor:

Threat to school = disruption and destruction of the heart and sheer nature of the village - impacting on key 'triangle' feature of such local importance and centre of the community! And ....

1. Threat to erosion of boundaries from neighbouring Towns 2. Threat to local infrastructure = already crippled local routes between Central Beds, Hitchin and beyond. But we don't need to worry apparently, because Central Beds are far behind in the process apparently and of course the 700 new homes proposed for Henlow, plus the proposals for Lower Stondon and Arlesey won't have impact will they; NOT!!!
3. Misuse of current Green Belt designations 4. Proposed expansion in areas already noted as prone to flooding/flood risk = unsuitable.
5. The one single main sewer already over capacity = two noted areas adjacent to proposed site already experience regular drainage/surface flooding issues yet Anglian Water failing to respond and address accordingly.
6. Proposed development equates to a 40% increase on current dwellings/village size = unfair and disproportionate expansion when compared to that being proposed for some other local villages/areas.
7. Lack of consultation following failure to adhere to due process = loss of public engagement and responses; loss of opportunity and rightful voice that questions and undermines process; although may not represent grounds for legal challenge can a public enquiry into conduct of officers and elected members be requested?

More specifically I am in full support of the response submitted by Ickleford Parish Council on the four sites proposed.

IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes

Based on conflict between the local plan and NHDC/National policy, my objections and concerns are:

1. Building on Green Belt. The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, and IC3 due to conflicts with; National Planning Policy Framework and, NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt

2. Sewerage and Flooding. The Local Plan is Not Sound for site IC1 and IC3 due to; the inability of main sewer to cope with current demand and these sites will add to this burden, and; conflict of NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce flooding from new developments.

3. Lack of proper consultation.
The Local Plan is Not Legally Compliant due to NHDCs failure to allow prior consultation on sites IC3 and LS1.

4. Infrastructure.
The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 due to flawed modelling that fails to account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC transport policy.

5. Air Quality.
The Local Plan is Not Sound due to increased traffic pollution conflicting with NHDC air quality policy in respect of sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1.

6. Relocation of school.
The consequential impact on the village renders the Local Plan Not Sound for site IC3 and conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance historical characteristics of villages.

I write as a concerned resident of Ickleford in response to the above proposals.

As a general response I would like it documented that I lodge objections based on the following, which although may not be sound objections on planning grounds are my opinions as a local resident after the public meeting held in the village hall on 6th October and information imparted by our District Councillor:

Threat to school = disruption and destruction of the heart and sheer nature of the village - impacting on key 'triangle' feature of such local importance and centre of the community! And ....

1. Threat to erosion of boundaries from neighbouring Towns 2. Threat to local infrastructure = already crippled local routes between Central Beds, Hitchin and beyond. But we don't need to worry apparently, because Central Beds are far behind in the process apparently and of course the 700 new homes proposed for Henlow, plus the proposals for Lower Stondon and Arlesey won't have impact will they; NOT!!!
3. Misuse of current Green Belt designations 4. Proposed expansion in areas already noted as prone to flooding/flood risk = unsuitable.
5. The one single main sewer already over capacity = two noted areas adjacent to proposed site already experience regular drainage/surface flooding issues yet Anglian Water failing to respond and address accordingly.
6. Proposed development equates to a 40% increase on current dwellings/village size = unfair and disproportionate expansion when compared to that being proposed for some other local villages/areas.
7. Lack of consultation following failure to adhere to due process = loss of public engagement and responses; loss of opportunity and rightful voice that questions and undermines process; although may not represent grounds for legal challenge can a public enquiry into conduct of officers and elected members be requested?

More specifically I am in full support of the response submitted by Ickleford Parish Council on the four sites proposed.

IC1 (Duncots Close) - 9 homes
IC2 (Burford Grange) - 40 homes
IC3 (Bedford Road) - 150 homes
LS1 (North Ickleford, near Lower Stondon) - 120 homes

Based on conflict between the local plan and NHDC/National policy, my objections and concerns are:

1. Building on Green Belt. The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, and IC3 due to conflicts with; National Planning Policy Framework and, NHDC Strategic Objectives on Green Belt

2. Sewerage and Flooding. The Local Plan is Not Sound for site IC1 and IC3 due to; the inability of main sewer to cope with current demand and these sites will add to this burden, and; conflict of NHDC policies not to develop in areas prone to flooding, and to reduce flooding from new developments.

3. Lack of proper consultation.
The Local Plan is Not Legally Compliant due to NHDCs failure to allow prior consultation on sites IC3 and LS1.

4. Infrastructure.
The Local Plan is Not Sound for sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1 due to flawed modelling that fails to account for increased traffic from Central Bedfordshire, and conflicts with NHDC transport policy.

5. Air Quality.
The Local Plan is Not Sound due to increased traffic pollution conflicting with NHDC air quality policy in respect of sites IC1, IC2, IC3 and LS1.

6. Relocation of school.
The consequential impact on the village renders the Local Plan Not Sound for site IC3 and conflicts with NHDC policy to protect and enhance historical characteristics of villages.