A development brief for part of a site earmarked for 3,600 homes and nearly 20 acres of employment land just outside Luton has been deferred to allow for some further consultations on the final draft.
The land between Luton Road and the M1 motorway at Chalton is an allocated site in Central Bedfordshire Council’s Local Plan, which was adopted last year.
Located in Toddington ward, the site is separate from the majority of the north of Luton allocation within the local plan.
Applicant ig9 has submitted a development brief for the commercial section of the site, according to a report to CBC’s development management committee.
Late in the day
Conservative Cranfield and Marston Moretaine councillor Ken Matthews told the committee: “Very late in the day, it was drawn to our attention the brief hasn’t been considered in its final version by certainly Chalton Parish Council and possibly Sundon Parish Council, as well.
“Unfortunately, as they haven’t had the chance to consider the final version, it would be unsafe to proceed.
“Therefore, I’m moving deferral for up to two cycles so both parish councils and any residents, who haven’t had the opportunity to see this final version, can be consulted and input their responses.”
Independent Linslade Councillor Victoria Harvey asked: “Can we add that the local cycling and walking implementation plan is taken on board with this?
“There’s very little reference to the wider accessibility and cycling to the site. The development brief talks at significant length about sustainability.
Planning officer’s report
“In two or three month’s time we should have that plan for CBC. I wonder whether that could be looked at as part of the planning officer’s report because there’s no understanding of how it fits in with the wider network.”
Councillor Matthews, who chairs the committee, replied: “The brief might be back before us before that plan is published.
“From what the officer’s report says it meets the guidelines set out for development briefs. On that basis I’m not sure we can add anything to it.”
Conservative Caddington Councillor Kevin Collins agreed, saying: “While I sympathise with Councillor Harvey, if we defer this item, she’s free to make representations to the case officer and the applicant before it comes back to us.
“We defer or we don’t. We don’t defer with a few bits of discussion tacked on.”
Councillor Matthews added: “I think your course of action is clear, Victoria. Lobby the case officer at the appropriate time.”
Councillor Harvey suggested: “There’s a major problem with sustainable transport in this council and whether it’s being delivered through planning applications or development briefs.
“I’d like that recorded, as I’m getting increasingly concerned on that front.”
Brief might be changed
Asked whether the brief might be changed again before it returns to committee, Councillor Matthews explained: “My understanding is this is the final version from the developer.
“I don’t think there’s any scope for it to be altered unless the consideration by the two parish councils and any residents causes the developer to make a change.”
Conservative Ampthill Councillor Mike Blair, who posed the question, added: “The basis of my concern was that it said in the report that the residential part of the development brief hasn’t been submitted.
“Are we to expect that might be part of future considerations and taken together?”
Councillor Collins, who’s the executive member for regeneration and planning, remarked: “If they need to submit it at some point, it’s totally within their gift whether they wish to do it.
“If they feel it’s sensible to put both before us at the same time or to process them separately, and the case officer agrees, that will happen.”
The committee unanimously deferred the development brief for at least two cycles.
