In 2006 when the Section 106 agreement had been reached between the developers and the then Mid Beds District Council, the following notes were made and have been sent to me. These will be useful when we later look at features that form part of a deed of variation that has since been signed (23rd December 2009), and compare with actuality in time to come. It may also be of interest to many Biggleswade residents who have never had a chance to see this level of information.
NOTE: I requested a copy of the Deed of Variation from CBC as I could not find it published on CBC web site. It is a 17 page pdf document, ask me if you want a copy.
______________________________________________
Letter to Bedfordshire on Sunday December 3rd, 2006 (unpublished)
Biggleswade is getting bigger but can it cope?
Some Observations
I applaud the article written by Simon Hutchinson, it was clear, well researched and reported and the observations made by fifteen-year old Richard are sensible and relevant. But oh dear what planet are our Councillors on?
Cllr Lawrence’s view that the access from the new development to the town will be at the A1 southbound is utter nonsense. The link road is already in place; it is Chambers Way and adjoins London Road, the main historic arterial Great North Road into Biggleswade. Indeed this is clearly marked on the plans submitted by the developer in June 2005 and in its Design Statement of June 2003. The London Road junction will need significant improvement, indeed it needs it now! Not traffic lights please; roundabouts work very well further south. The link spur is already at its eastern end where the Eastern Relief Road will link up with Saxon Way. I can only assume that Cllr Lawrence knows little of the plan and has more money than sense if he seriously thinks one may as well drive 8 miles to go shopping in Baldock instead of into Biggleswade. Guess which junction is not included in the Schedule 106 Agreement that is “giving” Biggleswade £40 million – that’s right – Chambers Way and London Road
Why would Cllr Wendy Smith think that either Hitchmead Road or Eagle Farm Road would be suitable as a link between the development and the town? They are on either side of Stratton School and one is alongside Hitchmead School so hardly sensible from a safety point of view. They both have houses fronting onto the road so it would also be an anti-social solution. They both open onto one of the Victorian roads that she identifies as having trouble dealing with the existing weight of traffic – Drove Road – why should it be loaded still further and be any better?
Long term resident Betty Constant is on the right track except that Biggleswade’s agricultural history will not be lost as it is just that, history. If it wasn’t for the Biggleswade History Society the record of our heritage would be lost but it is a hard struggle to keep it visible without a museum; something we have struggled to obtain for over 25 years. I wish that the developers had been asked to assist with the creation of a Heritage Room in the “new” Town Hall, itself an historic building; but we were not included in the plans.
Concerning the detailed plans for the development I note from Simon’s article, with some scepticism, that the “town’s residents will have the opportunity to express their views once more”. Seriously what is the point, we express our views and they are ignored. The outcome of the major Biggleswade Regeneration Health-Check in March 2002 has been largely ignored. Why should this be any different?
I should like to discuss the “revelation” that Biggleswade is set to benefit from £40 million worth of infrastructure and developer contributions. Most of the “contributions” are an essential feature of the development that is set to increase the population of Biggleswade by 5000; not something that would be of significant benefit to Biggleswade if the development did not take place.
Apparently the Section 106 agreement includes:
1. The Eastern Relief Road. I note that the agreement says, “Must be built before the 350th home is completed”; I trust that means, “Must be opened before the 350th home is completed” or is the statement deliberately worded? A road had to be built to provide a spine extension of the existing Saxon Gate link road for the development. The fact that it is going to have access onto Potton Road has only one benefit in that traffic from the Potton direction travelling south to the A1 will no longer have to route along Potton Road, Drove Road and London Road. The downside is that traffic leaving the estate to travel west or north will find that the journey is much shorter via Potton Road, St Johns Street, Sun Street and Shortmead Street. None of these roads are appropriate for current levels of traffic let alone an increase! HGVs must be banned from these roads and forced to go via the relief road; that will help.
2. New school. I believe that’s a lower school and nursery. Ensuring that there are adequate school facilities is a mandatory planning requirement; not an option.
3. New community centre. Other developments in Biggleswade have made provision for these. Somehow developers have either been allowed to submit a planning change to build more houses on the space or to just leave it vacant; Fairfield is an example here. The usual problem is that nobody is prepared to put up the cost of maintaining and staffing such a facility. So who will pay the ongoing costs of this one? If the intended charges for using such a facility are along the lines of those put forward by Cllr. Vickers recently for community use of the new Town Hall chamber (£100) it will not have much demand; no community group can afford such a charge.
4. New Pub. Is there a brewery seriously interested in opening a pub in this location? They have been rapidly closing them in many other parts of Biggleswade due to lack of trade. Here’s another opportunity for a planning alteration.
5. £680,000 for town centre improvements and a new Multi-use Games Area and indoor sports hall at Saxon Pool. How much do the readers think will be left over for town centre improvements after building the facility at Saxon Pool – answer – not a lot! In any case do we not already have such a facility at the Recreation Centre adjacent to Stratton School? Is the intent to absorb the centre into the school? If so there is no gain just a change of location. In fact the Town Centre contribution is going to be drip fed, as are all the other elements of the agreement: £25,000 before the planning permission is implemented, £148,174 before 350th unit is completed, £148,175 before 750th and £148,175 before 1000th will we notice the difference I wonder?
6. Shops. Great, how many units are to be built and will they be as popular as those at Saxon Gate where they have stood empty for months on end? Take a look at the agreement, it makes for interesting reading.
7. £6.5 million to upgrade existing schools. Again a mandatory requirement to ensure adequate school facilities to cope with the increased population.
8. £945,000 for health care facilities. If the money was to be spent to be of benefit to the town it could be spent at the existing site. Purchase land to increase car parking facilities and add a storey to the existing centre. A simplistic view perhaps but how is a facility on the edge of town with inconvenient transport facilities for those most in need going to benefit the town?
9. A public transport contribution of £623,000. How much of this will disappear into a major rework at the southern junction with the A1 where it is currently planned to install traffic lights – can you imagine what it will be like especially on Monday morning and Friday evening to have the A1 stopped by traffic lights! Perhaps there will some other essential work but will it be what the town really needs? There are improvements long overdue; if the developers really want to make a difference why don’t they dip into their pockets and get some minor improvements implemented now? The Sun Street/Shortmead Street junction is in there for a mini-roundabout but does not have to be implemented until 6 months from the occupation of the 250th unit – so don’t expect work just yet! This comes with all sorts of traffic calming bumps (like Gamlingay) at junctions along St John Street and the western half of Potton Road …. but not at the perilous Rose Lane junction! The long-awaited Baulk/London Road has an improvement planned at 500 units – a traffic signal junction with improved pedestrian and cycle facilities and a bump in the road! So what about the transport review recently held in the Town Hall; shouldn’t that have been before this agreement?
10. £157,000 for the library. This figure is for all three phases and is again drip fed: £36,250 before 400 units completed, £36,250 before 800 and £36,250 before 1200 units completed. That’s right it is £108,750 – the balance comes with the next development phases; they might it be 10 years down the line!
11. £100,000 for the Ivel and Ouse Countryside Project. The sum per property that is being “donated” is, I am led to believe, below the established figure for substantial developments. Also the release of this money will be phased as are all the others and will cover the four phases, not just the first phase which has been approved; £60,945 before the 100th house.
What do you think of £207,143 having been agreed for Public Art? Will we get a say in how that is used or will it be used for irrelevant displays of some unheard of artist on an ego trip?
Do the majority of Biggleswade’s residents have a view? If so they don’t take the opportunities presented to them – let’s get more at the annual Town Meeting – yes there is one! Let’s see a proper Town Management Group with shared activities undertaken by residents, Chamber of Trade and the three involved Councils.
Letter to Biggleswade Chronicle February 2008 (unpublished)
Biggleswade’s £40m – Some Observations
I suspect that the majority of residents have seen the headlines declaring Biggleswade is being “given” £40 million by developers in return being allowed to develop the land to east of the town; this is known as the Schedule 106 Agreement. How many people have taken the trouble to read it or seen a summary of what it contains …. or what it doesn’t contain?
Recent statements in another publication by two of our Town Councillors have said that access from the new development to the town will be at the A1 southbound and that either Hitchmead Road or Eagle Farm Road would be suitable as a link between the development and the town. Both are clearly incorrect.
Firstly, the link road is already in place; it is Chambers Way and adjoins London Road, the main historic arterial Great North Road into Biggleswade. This is clearly marked on the plans submitted by the developer in June 2005 and in its Design Statement of June 2003. The London Road junction will need significant improvement, indeed it needs it now! The link spur is already at its eastern end where the Eastern Relief Road will link up with Saxon Way. Guess which junction is not included in the Agreement – that’s right – Chambers Way and London Road!
Secondly, neither Hitchmead Road nor Eagle Farm Road would be suitable as a link between the development and the town. They are on either side of Stratton School and one is alongside Hitchmead School so hardly sensible from a safety point of view. They both have houses fronting onto the road so it would also be an anti-social solution. They both open onto the narrow Drove Road so would also load The Baulk?
Apparently the town’s residents will have the opportunity to express their views once more. Seriously what is the point, we express our views; the outcome of the major Biggleswade Regeneration Health-Check in March 2002 has been largely ignored, why should this be any different?
I should like to discuss the “revelation” that Biggleswade is set to benefit from £40 million worth of infrastructure and developer contributions. Most of the “contributions” are an essential feature of the development that is set to increase the population of Biggleswade by 5000; not something that would be of significant benefit to Biggleswade if the development did not take place.
1. The Eastern Relief Road. “Must be built before the 350th home is completed” – so what are the first 350 householders going to do? The developers would have had to provide a spine extension of the existing Saxon Gate link road for the development in any case. The fact that it is going to have access onto Potton Road has only one benefit in that traffic from the Potton direction travelling south to the A1 will no longer have to route along Potton Road, Drove Road and London Road. The downside is that traffic leaving the estate to travel west or north will find that the journey is much shorter via Potton Road, St Johns Street, Sun Street and Shortmead Street. None of these roads are appropriate for current levels of traffic let alone an increase! HGVs must be banned from these roads and forced, not just directed, to go via the relief road; that will help.
2. New school. I believe that’s a lower school and nursery. Ensuring that there are adequate school facilities is a mandatory planning requirement; not an option.
3. New community centre. Other developments in Biggleswade have made provision for these. Somehow developers have either been allowed to submit a planning change to build more houses on the space or to just leave it vacant; Fairfield is an example here. The usual problem is that nobody is prepared to put up the cost of maintaining and staffing such a facility. So who will pay the ongoing costs of this one?
4. New Pub. Is there a brewery seriously interested in opening a pub in this location? They have been rapidly closing them in many other parts of Biggleswade due to lack of trade. Here’s another opportunity for a planning alteration.
5. £680,000 for town centre improvements and a new Multi-use Games Area and indoor sports hall at Saxon Pool. How much do the readers think will be left over for town centre improvements after building the facility at Saxon Pool – answer – not a lot! In any case do we not already have such a facility at the Recreation Centre adjacent to Stratton School? Is the intent to absorb the centre into the school? If so there is no gain just a change of location. In fact the Town Centre contribution is going to be drip fed, as are all the other elements of the agreement: £25,000 before the planning permission is implemented, £148,174 before 350th unit is completed, £148,175 before 750th and £148,175 before 1000th will we notice the difference I wonder?
6. Shops. Great, how many units are to be built and will they be as popular as those at Saxon Gate where they have stood empty for months on end? Take a look at the agreement, it makes for interesting reading.
7. £6.5 million to upgrade existing schools. A mandatory requirement to ensure adequate school facilities to cope with the increased population.
8. £945,000 for health care facilities. If the money was to be spent to be of benefit to the town it could be spent at the existing site. Purchase land to increase car parking facilities and add a storey to the existing centre. A simplistic view perhaps but how is a facility on the edge of town with inconvenient transport facilities for those most in need going to benefit the town?
9. A public transport contribution of £623,000. How much of this will disappear into a major rework at the southern junction with the A1 where it is currently planned to install traffic lights – can you imagine what it will be like especially on Monday morning and Friday evening to have the A1 stopped by traffic lights! Perhaps there will some other essential work but will it be what the town really needs? There are improvements long overdue; if the developers really want to make a difference why don’t they dip into their pockets and get some minor improvements implemented now? The Sun Street/Shortmead Street junction is in there for a mini-roundabout but does not have to be implemented until 6 months from the occupation of the 250th unit – so don’t expect work just yet! This comes with all sorts of traffic calming bumps (like Gamlingay) at junctions along St John Street and the western half of Potton Road …. but not at the perilous Rose Lane junction! The long-awaited Baulk/London Road has an improvement planned at 500 units – a traffic signal junction with improved pedestrian and cycle facilities and a bump in the road! So what about the transport review recently held in the Town Hall; shouldn’t that have been before this agreement?
10. £157,000 for the library. This figure is for all three phases: £36,250 before 400 units completed, £36,250 before 800 and £36,250 before 1200 units completed. The balance comes with the next development phases; they might it be 10 years down the line!
11. £100,000 for the Ivel and Ouse Countryside Project. The release of this money will cover the four phases, not just the first phase which has been approved; £60,945 before the 100th house.
12. Public Art
What do you think of £207,143 having been agreed for Public Art? Will we get a say in how that is used or will it be used for an irrelevant display of some unheard of artist on an ego trip?
Do the majority of Biggleswade’s residents have a view? If so they don’t take up all the opportunities available to air them – let’s get more at the annual Town Meeting this year; yes there is one and it is mandatory!
No comments:
Post a Comment