RISELEY NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN: SITE SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT Version 4
SITE NUMBER: 512
SITE NAME: Land adjacent to 156 High Street
SITE LOCATION: Adjacent to 156 High Street
CATEGORY CRITERION R/A/G rating ASSESSMENT
SUITABILITY
1. Will development of the site be compatible with existing neighbouring land uses?
The High Street borders the North West boundary. There is limited residential use on the North East
and South West boundaries with gardens. The South East boundary looks onto agricultural land.
2. Is the land in or adjacent to a conservation area?
The whole site is within the conservation area.
3. Will the site impact upon identified heritage assets (including listed buildings and their setting)?
A Grade II listed building (135 High Street) and its listed outbuilding are opposite the road.
4. Will the development adversely affect the natural environment, including trees and hedgerows, of the neighbourhood?
Hedges and trees will be maintained. It has always been grassland and it is proposed to keep some of
the site as open land.
5. Will the development detract from the existing rural character of the village?
The site currently is Village Open Space. The site would fill in a green space but this is not visible from
the road due to tall trees bordering the road.
6a. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: sewers?
Anglian Water have stated that the sewer capacity in Riseley is already at the maximum. However they have a statutory duty to upgrade the sewers tocope with any increase in capacity required by developments approved by the local authority.
6b. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: watercourses?
There are no watercourses on the site.
6c. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: surface water drainage?
Remedial work would be needed to mediate surface water run-off because the site slopes towards
the High Street.
6d. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: traffic flow and road
infrastructure?
With 7 units on site the could be 16 vehicles there would be minimal impact on traffic flow. However,
careful design of the access splay will be required to take account of the angle of access and the slope
onto the site to afford clear sight lines in both directions.
6e. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: schools?
The proposal includes older people's housing so there is likely to be minimal impact on local schools.
6f. What impact would developing the site have on existing infrastructure: public rights of way?
A public right of way runs on the South side of the site and will need to be accommodated.
7. Would development on the site contribute positively to the infrastructure?
It is proposed that housing for older people would be provided.
8. Is the site currently in or adjacent to the Settlement Policy Area?
The site is adjacent to the Settlement Policy Area.
9. Is the site readily accessible by all users from the rest of the village? (Users are defined as motorists, pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities)
There would be good vehicular access but there is no pedestrian access on that side of the road.
10. Is the site on the floodplain?
No - the site is higher than the High Street.
AVAILABILITY
11. Is the site available for development now or some other time in the future?
The site is described as being available for development now.
ACHEIVABILITY
12. Does the size of the site (No. of units) broadly conform with the findings of the Housing Needs Survey?
The proposed number of dwellings is 7. The Housing Needs Survey recommended that around 20
dwellings would be needed over the next 5/10 years. This site is commensurate with those needs.
13. Is it viable to develop the site? Yes.
SCORE SUMMARY: RED = 1
AMBER = 8
GREEN = 9
Source https://www.riseleyvillage.co.uk/report-of-the-site-suitability-assessments-conducted-by-riseley/
The applicants have undertaken notable public consultation locally in an attempt to demonstrate that
there is a local need and desire for retirement housing as required by the exceptions part of Policy 7S
and in accordance with a Briefing Note prepared by the Planning Policy Team on how policies 5S, 6
and 7S should be applied. This public consultation has been conducted by the land owners and
focuses solely on the application site. The applicant reports 83 responses were received, with 70 in
support, 12 objecting and 1 abstention to the proposal. The public consultation resulted in 18 people
expressing an interest in purchasing a bungalow. The applicants state they had a local response rate
of 13.6%
Source Planning Officer 2020
The Paddock
Community Support
Summary
A pre application public consultation was carried out over the three weeks between Friday 17 July and Friday 7 August 2020. This was done under Covid 19 conditions.
• A website was built and published www.thepaddockriseley.co.uk
• An A5 four page leaflet was hand delivered to every address in Riseley (530) on the weekend of 18 and !9 July 2020. Copies were also available in Riseley Village Stores and the Fox and Hounds pub. The leaflet asked residents to visit the website to comment. (A copy of the leaflet can be found in this document)
• The website was also publicised on the “Riseley and Friends” Facebook page.
• The website pages are:
o Home
o Plans - 4 plans and aerial photo of the site and its surroundings
o Allotments- full details on the disabled friendly allotments
o Landscape -full details of landscaping plan with 15 photos
o Need -extract from the 2019 Riseley Housing Needs survey plus details of other potential sites in Riseley
o Local connection -full explanation of the age and local connection restriction requirements
o Considerations -details of studies already carried out, full detail on Village Open Space Policy AD40 as it applies to part of The Paddock
o Open days -details of the two open days
o Leaflet -copy of the four page A5 leaflet
o Comment -“Bedford Borough Council have designated part of The Paddock as a Village Open Space and they think it serves Riseley better if it remains totally undeveloped. They want to know if you support or object to seven bungalows, for people over 55 with a local connection to Riseley, being built on the rear portion of the site”.
• We received 83 responses from the website
• 70 respondents voted support, 12 respondents voted object and 1 asked to comment but abstain
• In 11 households, two different people sent in a response (3 objector households and 8 supporter households)
• Counting each household where two people voted the same way, as one household, we have a response rate of 13.6%, with 86% voting support and 12.5% voting object with 1 abstention.
• We had two requests for a paper copy of the response form.
• The majority of respondents left detailed comments in addition to voting support or object. (see all the comments in full in this document) There are 12 pages and 5,576 words of support and 3 pages and 1,030 words of objection.
• There was an active Facebook debate on Sunday 19 July with 54 comments (see detail in this document)
• A Village zoom meeting was held on Friday 24 July 2020- there were 12 attendees including an objector.
• Site Open Days were held on Saturday 25 and Sunday 26 July 2020- 52 people visited the site over the two days. One disabled visitor was driven around the site by car. Two objectors visited the site.
• The public consultation has resulted in 18 people expressing an interest in purchasing a bungalow. We were clear to all interested parties that an age restriction and a local restriction will apply to the first and subsequent sales. The Riseley Housing Needs Survey carried out in July 2019 identified the need for 15 retirement bungalows for local people which ties in with the 18 people expressing an interest in purchasing a bungalow
Considerations
This is a small scale development, for local people, by local people, just seven bungalows set well back from the High Street.
We have lived adjacent to The Paddock for 50 years and will continue to do so.
Most developers do not build detached bungalows for local people and no other site in Riseley is offering to do so.
These bungalows will free up large family houses in Riseley.
Traditionally this would be considered as an infill site.
Bedford Borough Council back in 1984 designated part of The Paddock as a Village Open Space/View and they are convinced that it serves Riseley better if it remains totally undeveloped. The Paddock currently has no public access and we propose retaining an open space at the front together with providing 11 allotments, which will have public access. This is a much better use of the site than just keeping it as it is.
We have carried out extensive studies and based on our previous planning application Bedford Borough Council have confirmed that:
The bungalows will not contribute to flooding problems in the High Street
The site is well related to a defined Settlement Policy Area
The increase in traffic will be negligible and there are no highway issues
There are no ecology issues
The density proposed and the space around the buildings including garden depth, would be in keeping with the character of the built form within the village of Riseley.
The proposal is not considered to give rise to adverse impacts upon neighbour amenity with respect to overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of light or overbearing impacts
There will be plenty of car parking spaces and there will be no need for any parking on the High Street
Extensive archaeological digging has confirmed that there are no archaeological issues
Riseley Housing Needs Survey, July 2019, indentified a need for fifteen, 2/3 bedroom, retirement bungalows for local people
The Paddock is in the Riseley North Conservation Area but because of the careful and thought through layout and the fact that the hedges and mature trees remain untouched, coupled with the low roof lines of the bungalows, it will have no detrimental impact on the Conservation Area or on the Listed buildings on the High Street.
Village Open Space Policy - fine print.
Bedford Borough Council dropped the word "Important" in 2013
Part of The Paddock is designated by Bedford Borough Council as a Village Open Space, Policy AD40 and they specifically consider that:
The gap provides visual relief in an otherwise built up area punctuating the street scene;
The open space assists the transition between village and countryside providing a soft edge to the village which is pleasing visually.
The planning inspector who reviewed the 2013 Bedford Local Plan made this comment:.
"I am concerned about the overly stringent wording of Policy AD40 which states that development will not be permitted on land designated as a village open space. I consider that in reality an important consideration in determining proposals on such areas will be whether the reasons for designation would be compromised if the development was allowed to proceed. There may, for instance, be occasions where the loss of a small part of an open space may not prejudice the overall integrity of the space or undermine its contribution to the local area. Furthermore it may be the case that the retention of a designated space may be outweighed by other material considerations, for instance significant community benefits that could not otherwise be achieved."
As a result the statement below was added to the Village Open Space Policy AD40 in the adopted plan:
Development will not be permitted on land designated as a village open space unless it can be demonstrated that the reasons for designation are not compromised or that other material considerations outweigh the need to retain the Village Open Space undeveloped.
Not compromised
The gap provides visual relief in an otherwise built up area punctuating the street scene;
Our carefully designed layout does not compromise this reason for designation. The retention of the mature trees and hedges means that the street scene remains essentially unchanged.
The open space assists the transition between village and countryside providing a soft edge to the village which is pleasing visually.
Again our carefully designed layout will not compromise this reason for designation. The real transition to the countyside is further down the High Street. There is no view into the site except through the entrance and there are no views through the site to the open countyside. With the low roof lines of the bungalows and the low density of development and the open space at the front of the site, we will continue, as much as we ever have, to assist the transition between village and countryside providing a soft edge to the village which is pleasing visually.