Skip to main content

Planning » Application Comments

Help with this page (opens in a new window)

18/03100/MAO | Outline planning application for up to 160 dwellings including vehicular access from Gold Lane, emergency only access from the A4280, pedestrian and cycle links, public open space, car parking, drainage, landscaping and other associated works. All matters are reserved except for access. | Land Off Deep Spinney Biddenham Bedfordshire
  • Total Consulted: 513
  • Comments Received: 701
  • Objections: 687
  • Supporting: 1

Search Filters

Collapse All|Expand All|Showing 1-10 of 699|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

D Myles 17 Leybank Hildenborough Kent TN11 9EH

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

for comments see documents tab

Isabel & Jamie Meads 37 Wittenham Way Chingford London W4 6JR

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

for comments see documents tab x 2

Zoe Jones 32 Parkside Crescent Meanwood Leeds LS6 4JU

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

for comments see documents tab

Iain Finnigan 46 Day's Lane Biddenham Bedford Bedfordshire MK40 4AE

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 250 houses in Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o I believe that Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies and I wish it to remain protected.
o Planning inspectors have recognised the importance of this visual separation between communities around Biddenham, which I agree with.
o There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 250 houses would negatively impact already existing traffic problems on Gold Lane, through the village and at the Bromham Road/Deep Spinney roundabout.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed.
o As I understand it the Borough's housing needs are met within the current Local Plan so this additional housing is not required, and nor should it be allowed on this protected open space.
The traffic is already intense at the roundabout near the By-pass all during the day and more so peak times. With 160 proposed homes this will increase and will negate any supposed benefits new proposed transport Manton Lane improvements are said to bring. The infrastructure will not cope. And Biddenham as an ancient Roman settlement is lost.
Yours faithfully
Miroslawa Finnigan

I oppose the application to build 250 houses in Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o I believe that Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies and I wish it to remain protected.
o Planning inspectors have recognised the importance of this visual separation between communities around Biddenham, which I agree with.
o There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 250 houses would negatively impact already existing traffic problems on Gold Lane, through the village and at the Bromham Road/Deep Spinney roundabout.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed.
o As I understand it the Borough's housing needs are met within the current Local Plan so this additional housing is not required, and nor should it be allowed on this protected open space.
Yours faithfully
Iain Finnigan

Irene Marsden 79 Peter Crescent Rishton Lancs. BB1 4RG

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
I visit Biddenham regularly. Such a development would harm the character and nature of the village.
Yours faithfully
Irene Marsden

Anthony & Julie Smith & Marsden -Smith 129 Deep Spinney Biddenham MK40 4QJ

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
There is already sufficient new housing being developed in this area without regard to infrastructure.
Yours faithfully
Julie Marsden-Smith

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
I have little faith in this planning department upholding the collective objection of the Biddenham community.
Yours faithfully
Anthony Smith

Derek & Francia Slade 65A Main Road Biddenham MK40 4BE

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
Yours faithfully
Derek Slade

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
Gold lane is the most dangerous road in Queensland cannot take anymore traffic
Yours faithfully
Francia Slade

Gerbaud Frédérique France 7200

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
Yours faithfully
Gerbaud Frédérique

Richard Cole 9, Penelope Close CV33 9JD

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
Yours faithfully
Richard Cole

Elizabeth Morbey 55 Braemar Place Aberdeen AB10 6EQ

Comment submitted date: Tue 19 Feb 2019

I oppose the application to build 160 houses West of Gold Lane Biddenham
My reasons are as follows:
o The land the developer proposes to build on is protected as open space by Borough Council policies (AD42 and AD43) and the importance of visual separation between communities has been recognised by the Planning Inspector. This application will cause harm our open space and will reduce separation.
o The developer has failed to consult the public on this application and, other than an insufficient reduction in scale, has failed to deal with the concerns of over 600 material objections to their last application on the same site less than a year ago.
o Access to this site via Gold Lane is wholly inappropriate. There is no safe access to the land proposed for development and traffic from 160 houses will exacerbate existing traffic problems at the Deep Spinney roundabout and on Gold Lane where the narrow road is already a safety hazard.
o The Bedford Western Bypass is already struggling to cope with existing traffic density which will be made even worse once this significant approved development has been built.
o With the significant growth in housing stock to the west of Bedford over recent years the local infrastructure is already incapable of supporting existing demand. Existing schools, surgeries, roads, junctions and public amenities will not cope with the increase in population and traffic density brought about by this application.
o The scale and density of the scheme is materially inconsistent with existing developments in the area making this development completely out of character with the village resulting in a weakening of the village's notable attractiveness.
o Biddenham has special characteristics which set it apart from the expanding adjoining urban development and these must be maintained, as indeed is acknowledged by the Borough Council.
o The environment and biodiversity would be adversely affected and the delicate balance of nature harmed, including the destruction of 55 metres of ancient hedgerow in Gold Lane and potentially harming the famous Biddenham Pond.
o This application is contrary to the extant Local Plan given that the new Local Plan 2030 has not yet been adopted rendering this application premature.
Yours faithfully
Elizabeth Morbey

Showing 1-10 of 699|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

an idox solution (opens in a new window)