Site Assessment Pro Formas

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access from north (Wood End Lane) frontage of site. There are approx. 4 bus services (2 routes) per hour stopping within 150m of the site. The site is within 500m of the start of a mostly off-road cycle route to Bedford town centre. Pedestrians: There is no footway on the side of both roads that the development would front on to. A new footway that side of the road or a pedestrian crossing to the existing footway would be needed.

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
proximity to working farm is only concern

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
No traffic congestion along the A422 in the vicinity of the site and the scale of development is unlikely to have an impact. The closest bus stop is 350m south of the proposed access on Bedford Road and has hourly services for routes 41 and 830. The nearest footpath is approximately 100m to the southwest. A segregated cycle lane is located approx 150m to the northeast. A new section of footway to connect to the existing footway (located to the southwest) is required - this is feasible in terms of space available. Provision of a connection to the nearby segregated cycle route should be considered

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Existing access may be suitable for a small number of dwellings, however it appears to pass through a private dirt road - confirmation of ownership required. No significant congestion in the vicinity of along the nearby A422. The closest bus stop is 550m south of the site, but there are no footpaths to reach it. No footpaths present along Wick End outside the site and no cycle paths in the vicinity. Provide confirmation of access arrangements. Investigation into footway connectivity

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns whilst near farm there are residentials around

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is a greenfield area located at the west side of Rookery Road in the village of Wyboston approximately 10 miles north-east of Bedford town centre. The frontage of proposed access is opposite 53 Rookery Road, an adopted and unclassified single carriageway of 30mph. The carriageway width varies but is approximately 5.0m. There is no footway immediately outside the site, however a footway of varying width between 1m – 1.6m is present on the east side of Rookery Road. There is no cycling route in the vicinity, although Rookery Road is very quiet. The closest bus stop is 350m from the site with 112 Ivel Sprinter stopping twice a day heading to St Neots / Biggleswade while the second closest 800m away serves the 905 connecting Bedford and Cambridge approximately twice per hour. The development only proposes residential use. A Transport Assessment would be needed to assess the overall impact of the developments in the area as the cumulative impact could be quite large on the local highway network. Improvement of pedestrian and cycle access would be needed - provision of a pedestrian crossing and designated cycle path.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
commercial noise sources to south east

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
No answers chosen.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access E boundary / Kimbolton Road. Closest cycle route is 2.4 km+, however, Kimbolton Road and the surrounding area seem relatively safe to cycle. 1 bus per hour. Improvements to the surface of the footway and vegetation clearance.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
residential area no noise sources no concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
++ The site is within a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access using existing single access onto Northill Road, but widened to become a two-way access. Traffic through Cople can be moderate at times, but the size of this development is unlikely to make a significant contribution to that. The number 74 bus to Bedford stops within 250m of the house on a mainly hourly (sometimes half-hourly) basis. There is an adequate pavement along the frontage of the site linking to the village, bus stops, pubs etc. There is no specific cycle connectivity however cycling towards the A421 via Cardington connects to a traffic-free cycle route on the edge of Bedford taking you towards the centre. Better cycle signage directing residents towards the traffic-free cycle path starting on the outskirts of Bedford would be beneficial.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
N/A in UAB

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access to the site is feasible from both Bedford Road and Manor Drive. There are three bus stops close to the site, one outside of the site in the south and the other two in a radius of 150m. The footway in Manor Drrive is around 2m and in Bedford Road around 1.8m. There is no provision for cyclists. A Transport Assessment (TA) will be required to identify the impact of traffic and for satisfactory facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists. Re-design or potential convert to signalise junction of the roundabout Bedford Road/Manor Drive/High Street suggested to mitigate the increase of traffic in the area.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
main noise sources is road traffic on this site, previous applicatins have failed due to this

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access onto Carlton Rd. It is not specified where on the frontage the access would be, ideally it should be towards the west of the site where the road visibility is significantly better. Traffic between Felmersham and the A6 can be moderate to busy at times, however 20 homes is unlikely to significantly change this. Bus stops in Felmersham are within 500m and have approx. 1 service per hour each direction (Rushden-Bedford). No pedestrian access and a pavement is not feasible as no other nearby footways to connect to within Felmersham. No specific cycle access but there are lots of quiet roads in the area that could be suitable for cycling, allowing access to local villages. Vehicular access should be towards the west of the northern frontage to provide better visibility at the new junction.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
No answers chosen.

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
No answers chosen.

Highway comments
No answer given.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access directly onto High Street to the south or via 'Owlswick' to the east, linking to High Street. Via Owlswick would be better as it uses an existing access onto the main road, whereas a new direct access to High Street would likely be too close to the existing access for Owlswick. Wilden does have some moderate traffic around midday, but one additional house would not be expected to affect this. There is a bus stop within 600m with four daily services to Bedford and Great Barford. Pavement exists on High Street with a dropped curb to cross onto Owlswick. Adequate pedestrian access from the village to Owlswick already exists, but a small amount of work would be needed to extend it along Owlswck to the site. There are no nearby cycle routes, but there are several quiet roads which could be used for cycling into Bedford, as well as rights of way which could be used more for leisure. The vehicle access should be via Owlswick onto the High Street rather than directly onto High Street to prevent 2 junctions being too close together.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access onto Parrott Close. There is relatively high congestion in Oakley so measures to encourage cycle use towards Oakley should be considered. There is a pair of bus stops at the end of Parrott Cl 150m from the site, with the number 51 bus providing a service to Bedford and Oakley every 30 minutes. A new and well-paved pavement leads directly from the site. Whilst a generally well-connected site, cycle connectivity is very poor and there is significant congestion nearby. Encouraging cycling into Oakley by designating the path on Lovell Rd as a cycle/pedestrian path could help solve both problems.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
predominant concern is railway noise

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Vehicular access will be off New Road which presents no problems. Some moderate traffic in the area along New Road at peak times which could be worsened by the development and neighbouring proposed sites. The nearest bus stop is 400m away where the 27 bus provides 4 daily services to Bedford. However another stop approx 1km away provides a half-hourly service between Bedford and Cambridge. There is currently no pedestrian or cycle connectivity, however a connection to Woodpecker Close could provide this. There is also an access point to the Sandy-Bedford cycle track nearby, accessible via some quiet roads. Include a connection to Woodpecker Close to provide pedestrian and cycle connectivity. Better signpost the route to the nearby access point of the Sandy- Bedford cycle track.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
some concern from noise from industrial at New Road

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site location is west from the Home Road and South from the Green End Road in Kempston, around 3 miles south-west of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible from Home Road. Traffic generation from the potential residential development would generate an increase in traffic movements in Home Road, Green End Road, Ridge Road and in junction Home Road/Ridge Road. The closest bust stop is approximately 330m from north the site in Ridge Road. There are no public rights of way or formal cycleways way serving the site. A Transport Assessment (TA) will be required to identify the impact of traffic in Ridge Road as well as in the Home Road/Ridge Road junction. Potential signalisation of the Home Road/Ridge Road give way junction may required. Development of the footway across Home Road in the frontage of the site required as well as creation of a pedestrian access via Ibbett Close.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the western side of Home Road at Gibraltar which is in between Kempston Church End and Wootton. The site is approximately 3.2 miles west of Bedford town centre. The proposed development will be accessed via Home Road which has a 30mph speed limit. The proposed access is approximately 225m walking distance from the nearest bus stop on Ridge Road. The footway width is 1.2m with 0.5m verge on the access side of the carriageway for a part of the site and for the rest of the site there is no public rights of way. There is no formal cycleways way serving the site. The proposal would need to ensure a footway is constructed linking the proposed access with the existing footway roughly 20m to the south in order to access public transportation facilities.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located on New Road at Priory Farm approximately 10 miles northwest of Bedford town centre in the Village of Harrold. Two access point are available to the site, one from New Road and one for pedestrians only from the eastern side of the site to the High Street. The surface of this second access would need to be improved as part of the development. No significant congestion issues in the vicinity, however the potential development could have a moderate impact, particularly with the adajcent site 365. The closest bus stop is 100m east of the site in High Street. There are no footways outside the site in New Road, though there are good footways along High Street and cycling is possible by using the road surface. A Transport Assessment will be required to identify the impact on surrounding transport networks, including examining cumulative impacts of this site and the adjacent 365. Improved bus transport service with regular frequency. The proposal will require a road to adoptable standards for both sites in accordance with Bedford Borough Council's highway standards in terms of accommodating the carriageway/footway widths and the required radius kerbs. Consider marking on-street cycle lanes. The proposed pedestrian access should be improved and a minimum of 2.0m in width to link with the existing footway on High Street.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access to the site is feasible from Bedford Road and High Street road. There is ditch outside of the site and any access to it would need to take this into account. The proposal is not expected to have a significant impact on the overall highway network. However this section of (Old) Bedford Road and the use of the site will be intensified in comparison to existing use. The nearest bus stops with bus shelter present are located on Bedford Road opposite the junction with Park Road approximately 500m from the site. There is, in Bedford Road, a shared footway/cycleway of approximately 1.0-1.4m in width with verges either side of the shared facility. In view of the current national speed limit along (Old) Bedford Road, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) will apply in respect of determining the visibility splays and the Stopping Sight Distance (SSD). If separate accesses are proposed for each property then as well as the required vehicular sight lines subject of a speed survey, pedestrian visibility splays of 1.8m x 1.8m are also required at the back of the highway boundary on both sides of each access. Bedford Road forms part of the National Cycle Network Route 12 and links with National Cycle Network Route 51 to the south through Great Barford. Hence there is scope to widen the existing 1m shared footway/cycleway along Bedford Road and also outside the site.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
++ The site is within a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The access to the site is proposed between the west side of boundary with no. 15 School Lane and the open space on the west side. The nearest presence of bus stops with bus shelters are located on Bedford Road opposite the junction with Park Road approximately 485m west of the site. The carriageway width of School Lane at this section is approximately 5.6m and immediately outside the site there is a footway of width of 1.8m with grass verges to the east. On the opposite side of site there is also a footway of 1.8m in width. There is no provision for cyclists Although the speed limit on School Lane is 30mph, it is a classified road; therefore the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) will apply in respect of determining the visibility splays and the Stopping Sight Distance (SSD). The proposal will also require a road to adoptable standards in which case the geometry of the design of the road need to be in accordance with Bedford Borough Council’s(BBC’s) highway standards and must be accommodated within the curtilage of the site boundary. The parameters of the adoptable road include widths of carriageway/footways and also radius kerbs of the required junction. There is a scope to introduce a public transport provision for a bus service or an extension to an existing bus service through Park Road and School Lane to ensure that the walking distance to a bus stop is less than 400m in distance. A TA will be required to identify the impact of traffic on the highway and it will introduce improvements for sustainable measures for pedestrians, cyclists and for public transport.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Majority of the site falls in MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located west of Pavenham Road in the village of Felmersham approximately 7 miles northwest of Bedford town centre and just below the River Great Ouse. Access to the site is feasible from Pavenham Road via an upgrade of the access track. No traffic data in the vicinity however the proposed development is unlikely to cause significant issues. The closest bus stop is on The High Road approximately 300m from the site. There are no footways or cycle paths along the frontage of the site. Cycling is possible only by using Pavenham Road. Pedestrian mitigation likely not feasible given the distance from any other footways and narrowness of Pavenham Road north of the site.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
x The majority of the site is within flood zone 2.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access directly onto Roxton Road, some moderate traffic in the area at peak times which could be worsened by the development. There are a pair of bus stops within 250m where the 905 bus provides a half-hourly service between Bedford and Cambridge. There is a pavement running along the Roxton Road frontage of the site which can easily provide pedestrian accessibility, there is is a pedestrian crossing on Roxton Rd outside the site. There is a shared pedestrian/cycle path approx 500m further up Roxton Road which forms a route to St Neots - there is also access to the Sandy-Bedford cycle track nearby. Better signpost the route to the nearby access point of the Sandy-Bedford cycle track. Consider extending the shared cycle/pedestrian path on Roxton Rd so that it links with the site.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
Does not pose risk

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
? Part of a site is within flood zone 2 or 3 but the area proposed for development is in flood zone 1.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
See also site 530. Access is proposed via Parkside. This should be suitable however it would be best to implement a priority junction for what would then be a spur of Parkside. No significant traffic congestion in the area, and this development is unlikely to have anymore than a moderate impact. There are bus stops approximatly 100m away where the number 50 bus provides a roughly hourly service between Bedford and Rushden. There is a pavement on Parkside which should be continued onto the site, however it currently lacks a dropped kerb at a crossing point. There is a shared cycle/pedestrian path alongside the A6 approx 100m away towards Clapham. Implement a priority junction on Parkside as existing to allow uninterrupted traffic flow between Radwell Road and the site. Continue the existing pavement into the site and include dropped kerbs.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns beyond southern agricultural which would not be insurmountable

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
This site is a small part of site 1228. The site is located north of Northampton Road and Grange Lane in the Bromham area approximately 3.5 miles west of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible via Grange Lane without issues. No traffic data available in the immediate vicinity, however the proposal could cause some issues on Grange Lane as well as at the junctions of Northampton Road/Grange Lane and Grange Lane/Springfield Drive. The closest bus stop is 180m east of the site in Springfield Drive and another one 350m west of the site on Northampton Road. Shared cycle path/footway directly from the southwest of the site. Assessment required of the impact of the development on the junctions of Northampton Road/Grange Lane and Grange Lane/Springfield Drive for potential traffic increase.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the north side of a road to the west of Colmworth Road, west of the village of Little Staughton approximately 10 miles north of Bedford town centre. The site entrance provides easy access into the development and away from the main house. The Site is fully enclosed and does not obstruct the view from other peoples property or the site lines. The closest bus stop is 450m east of the site on Grays Grove Road. However, there are no footways serving the site or anywhere in the vicinity. Cycling is possible only on-road. Size of development unlikely warrants required footpath mitigation. Consider marking on-street cycle lanes.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located on Mansion Lane approximately 10 miles north-west of Bedford town centre in the Village of Harrold. Two access points are available to the site, one from Mansion Lane and one for pedestrians only from the southwestern corner of the site to the High Street. Mansion Lane access likely to be ok for a small number of homes. No significant congestion issues in the vicinity, however the potential development could have a moderate impact, particularly with the adjacent site 345. The closest bus stop is 100m south of the site in High Street. There are no footways outside the site in Mansion Lane and cycling is possible by using the road surface. A Transport Assessment will be required to examine cumulative impacts of this site and the adjacent 345. Improved bus transport service with regular frequency. Consider marking on-street cycle lanes.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Employment

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site can at present only be reached from the A1 Great North Road southbound carriageway. There may be safety concerns regarding the proposed access point onto a busy dual carriageway. There is a Highways England scheme to improve the A428 between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbet that will affect the current site, and it appears future site access will instead be onto a new 'service road' as opposed to directly onto the A1. There appears to be no bus stop facilities in the near vicinity of the site. The site lacks accessibility to footways and there is no provision for cyclists in the immediate vicinity. The roundabout would require traffic modelling with all developments included in order to ascertain whether it has the capacity for further loading of traffic generated by the development. The new adoptable roads must be designed to commercial specification as for an industrial road. There appear to be no bus stop facilities in the near vicinity of the site, however Bedford Road is a bus route and this service should be considered for extension into the site to provide good accessibility for public transport. There is no provision for cyclists, and given the scale of development then consideration for satisfactory facilities for cyclists should be given and identified in the TA, however opportunities may be limited.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
road noise from A1

Minerals & Waste
Area of mineral working about to be restored consists of lakes and lower land areas adjacent to river.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Part of the site falls within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located at the property no. 127 Cotton End Road (North side) between the junctions of Chapel Lane and Northwood Lane. Cotton End Road is a single carriageway road with footways of approximately 1.2m in width on either side at this location and carriageway width of approximately 5.5m. The existing vehicle access is suitable for up to 5 dwellings. Cotton End Road and the surrounding area have moderate/high traffic congestion during peak hours. The current eastbound and westbound bus service to Wilstead operating Monday to Saturday (exc Bank holidays) is no. 44 by Grant Palmer Limited. In addition, Stagecoach also operates no. 81 between Bedford, Elstow, Clophill, Silsoe, Barton-le-Clay and Luton. There is also limited Sunday service in operation for both services. There is no provision for cyclists, however given the 30mph speed limit and built environment with frontages on-road cycling is possible. The footways on either side of Cotton End Road are 1.2m approximate in width and verge at the rear of footway. This would need to be upgraded to at least 1.8m given that there will be an increase in pedestrian activity.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Similar comments as for site 20. Access via a new access point onto Wood Lane. No traffic congestion in the area. There are bus stops within 300m where the 9A and 9B buses combined give a service to both Bedford and Hitchin approx. every 30 minutes. Both potential access points have adequate pedestrian access. There is a shared pedestrian/cycle path towards Bedford on High Road 200m from the site. Extend the shared cycling/pedestrian path along the pavement on Wood Lane and Manor Way to directly connect to the site. Provide pedestrian access at all proposed access points.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is a Greenfield site and located in the village of Wootton approximately 6 miles south-west of Bedford town centre. The sites proposed access is along Hall End Road and is reportedly considered acceptable by BBC highways through application 19/00894/MAO. There is moderate traffic congestion along Hall End Road and the development could worsen this. The nearest bus stop is located 550m away on Cause End Road. Acceptable footway is located on the opposite side of Hall End Road and it is also considered a bicycle friendly route. Provide crossing to the footway on the opposite side of Hall End Road. A Transport Assessment would be required to assess the impact of this scale of development on the local highway network.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
school to be considered

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The developer proposes a new access cul-de-sac and a shared access drive from Wick End, which is very narrow and with no footways - however, vehicle access appears feasible. No traffic congestion along the A422 in the vicinity of the site and the scale of development is unlikely to have an impact. The closest bus stop is just outside the site with hourly services for routes 41 and 830. There is a footway present outside the site, however this requires partial clearing. Nearest segregated cycle path is 500m to the northeast. A secondary pedestrian access should be provided on the Bedford Road perimeter, where there is an existing footway. This footway should be cleared to ensure it is the required width. Provide on street signed connectivity to existing segregated cycle path.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is currently likely greenfield as is much of the surrounding area. The development only proposes residential use. 4 access points are indicated, onto Colesden Road, which is a narrow two-way single carriageway with 40 mph speed limit. There are no footpaths or cycle paths along the road and no opportunities to connect to other footpaths nearby. The closest bus stop is on Colesdon Road with the 112 running twice per day. There is no potential to link to other footpaths in the surrounding area likely to be feasible, given the scale of the proposed development. Cycle connectivity to Colesdon Rd which is classed as cycle friendly suggested.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
xx The proposal has the potential to cause very high harm (which may reach the level of substantial harm) to a heritage asset. Development with this level of impact will be removed from further consideration unless it can be demonstrated that the harm can be avoided, mitigated or outweighed by substantial public benefits.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the south side of Thurleigh Road in the village of Milton Ernest approximately 5 miles north of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible from the northeast corner of the site from Thurleigh Road. There is no significant traffic in the area. The closest bus stop is 650m west from the site on Rushden Road. There are six bus routes in the area, 22, 50, 825, 828, 830 and VL14. There is no footway serving the site and cycling is possible only on-road. A Transport Assessment would be required to identify the impact of traffic in the network and satisfactory facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists. Consider marking on-street cycle lanes.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
twinwoods business park may be a source of noise

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
++ The site is within a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access from Riseley Road. No specific footway or cycle connectivity but the rural location reasonably allows for cycling on most local roads. Bus stop east on B660 served by route 28A. Scale of development unlikely warrants cost of mitigations/improvements

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise issues

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
No answers chosen.

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access will be as existing, however for this size of development it will need to be widened and paved. Little traffic in the area and a development of this size is likely to make a difference, however in conjunction with other neighbouring ones may contribute to congestion. There is a bus stop 50m away where the number 50 bus provides an hourly service to Bedford. There is a pavement directly outside the site. There is no cycle connectivity however the pavement on Milton Road is wide and well paved so could easily become a shared path. A Transport Assessment is required to assess cumulative impacts of this site and others proposed in the vicinity. Widen existing access point to make it more suitable for a development of this size. Suggest upgrading the pavement on Milton Road to a shared path.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns twinwoods health centre possibly a source but not irresolveable

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the south side of Renhold Road in Wilden area approximately 4.5 miles northeast of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible via the extant access to the north of the site, leading to Renhold Road. There is no significant traffic congestion in the area. There is a bus stop on the other side of the road approximately 70m east from the site entrance. There is a green verge in the frontage of the site, but there is no formal footway. Cycling is feasible on-road. A footway and crossing facilities for pedestrians required to allow for safe access to the bus stop on the other side of Renhold road.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
would consider eastern use

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located in the outskirts of Wootton. Access is only feasible from Hall End Road, for all users. Hall End Road at this point is very narrow (~6m wide) which might cause some vehicle access issues. At the site, the developer adopted highway frontage of about 50m to mitigate this. There is no footpath in the vicinity, not much open space on the side of the road next to the development. Hall End Road is a quiet, bicycle-friendly road. There are no designated cycle routes in the vicinity. The closest bus stop is 200m away, used by bus 68 to Bedford twice per day and a bus 53 bus stop to Bedford, 1.1km away and travelling approximately 3 times per hour. On-road cycle route could be signed although the route might be too narrow. There is space on the opposite side of the road where potentially a cycle route or a footpath could be constructed linking to footpaths to the north and south on Hall End Road. The cost of this might be prohibitive.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Current access passes through existing industrial estate from Wymington Lane to the West. If Goosey Lodge Estate access is used, access would require minimal work. However, if the site requires vehicle access North to Bedford Road (A6), more changes to the highway are required. Moderate traffic peaks occur at lunchtimes and PM, scale of development not known to comment on impact. There are no footways in the surrounding area. The stretch of the A6 to the north has a footway on its southern side. The closest bus stop is 650m North of the site close to the crossing between Wymington Lane and A6. While there are no official cycling routes in the area, the rural landscape contains unofficial paths through the fields which could be improved to provide a link to the A6.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
noise and odour from Goosey Lodge

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access onto Green End, light traffic in the area. 4 bus services per day to Bedford from a stop approx 50m from the site. There is a narrow but good quality pavement on Green End opposite the site, but a pedestrian crossing would be needed to access it from the site. No specific cycle connectivity but there are several quiet roads and bike-friendly rights of way in the area. Pedestrian crossing on Green End connecting the site to the pavement on the opposite side of Green End.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access via currently unpaved track onto Coplowe Lane, a single track road. No significant traffic in the area. Bus stops are approx. 700m from the site, but there are only three buses per day and no footpath between the site and the bus stop. There is no footway access to the site and construction of a path to Bletsoe is no possible without very large investment and construction work to widen Coplowe Lane, including significant earthworks and plant removal. Coplowe Lane is very narrow and would require additional passing places to cater for the added traffic. Pedestrian and cycle access to the site is not feasible due to the width of the road between the site and Bletsoe village/bus stop

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise issues

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access is from Coplowe Lane frontage of site. Although there is no significant traffic in the area, Coplowe Lane is very narrow and unlikely to properly support additional traffic without the installation of additional passing places as a minimum. A bus stop is 300m from the site, but there are only 3 services per day and no path to the stop. Due to the width of Coplowe Lane, the addition of pedestrian and cycle links is not feasible without large-scale, expensive engineering works. Coplowe Lane would require additional passing places to cater for added traffic. Pedestrian and cycle access is not feasible due to the width of the road between the site and Bletsoe village/bus stop.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise issues

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
No answers chosen.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Mo objections subject to provision of: - access to acceptable standards including visibility splays - improvements to pedestrian route into Bromham - testing of Box End Rd / Bromham bypass slip road junction

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
adjacent site would need to be considered

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site located in Box End Road in Bromham, approximately 3.8 miles from the Bedford city centre. The proposed development will be accessed via Box End Road which has a 30mph speed limit. The closest bus stop located in the north of the site, around 450m away. There is a footway of 1m on Box End Road, but there is not any the formal cycleways way serving the site. A Transport Assessment (TA) will be required to identify the impact of traffic and for satisfactory facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists. Given the proposal, a road to adoptable standards is required in accordance with Bedford Borough Council's highway standards. Demolition of the current properties on the site will be needed.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
adjacent site would need to be considered

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
Does not pose risk

Mineral Safeguarding Area
No answers chosen.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the east side of High Street in the village of Riseley, approximately 10.3 miles north of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible via High Street via the southwest corner of the site. The High Street has moderate traffic congestion. The nearest bus stop is located approximately 50m south from the site entrance. There is no footway directly serving the site however there is a 1.5m footway on the other side of High Street. Cycling is possible on-road. An informal crossing point on High St to tie into the existing footway opposite the front of the site.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The development is located on agricultural land in the north east part of the village of Turvey. Access is indicated to be provided via Norfolk Road, a single carriageway of about 4m width. The appropiateness of this access will need to be confirmed. No traffic data is available for Norfolk Rd, however Bedford Rd to the south does not appear to be congested. There is a medium quality, slightly narrow footpath on both sides of the road. There are no cycle paths in the vicinity but Norfolk road is a quiet residential road. The closest bus stop is about 350m from the site serving bus route 41 which connects to Bedford/Northampton once per hour. Confirm vehicle access is possible in marked location. The quality of the footpath could be improved. Widening would also be useful as it does not appear to be 2m or over. IT is noted that this may not be feasible due to the width of the road. On the opposite side there is a fair amount of grassy area that could be used to widen the pavement

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Vehicle access to High St could be provided with minimal works. High St and the surrounding areas have some moderate congestion peaks and occasionally severe congestion 500m West of the site. The closest bus stop is adjacent to the site, with bus route 28, VL13 and VL14, low levels of service. The closest cycle route is more than 3km to the East, in Wood End. The road is narrow with a footway on one side, which is <1m wide. Going West from the site, there is no room for expansion on either side of the road. Going in the East direction there is room for the footway to be made wider than 2m, allowing for prams and wheelchairs. Alternatively, this could become a cycle or shared cycle-friendly path.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located north of Top End Road in the village of Renhold approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Bedford town centre. Access to the site will be from Top End Road. Some moderate traffic along Top End Road, however traffic generation from the potential development would likely not cause significant issues. The nearest bus stops are south on Top End Road approximately 200m in distance. Most of the frontage of the site has footway of 1m and cycling is possible only by using the road. Improve footways along site frontage for pedestrians and consider marking onstreet cycle lanes along Top End Road.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
N/A in UAB

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
x Serious access constraint wider impacts

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Access is proposed via an existing private road linking to Elstow Road. This private road would need to be widened, repaved, have a pavement installed and no longer be used by the neighbouring car hire centre as parking for it to be feasible. Moderate traffic congestion in the area. Bus stops 100m away provide four services per hour into the centre of Bedford, and less frequent services to Hitchin, Luton and Shortstown. There is currently no pedestrian access so a pavement will have to be included with the proposed access road.The Bedford- Sandy cycle path has an access point approx. 800m from the site, accessible via mostly quiet residential roads. The private road linking to Elstow Road would need to be widened, repaved, include a pavement and not be used for parking for this site to be feasible. This probably is possible but would be very difficult.

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
noise from nearby depot

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access onto Wood Lane. A small section (approx 50m) of Wood Lane would need to be widened and have pavements installed to adequately serve the development. There is no traffic congestion in the area. There are bus stops within 800m which provide a service between Bedford and Hitchin approx. every 30 minutes. There is no pavement on Wood Lane at the site entrance, however there is space to implement one and connect to the existing pavement further down Wood Lane. There is a shared pedestrian/cycle path on High Road approx. 500m away. Extend the existing pavement on Wood Lane further along to reach the site entrance. Extend the shared pedestrian/cycle path on High Road along Wood Lane to directly connect to the site.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located north of Cross End Road in the village of Thurleigh approximately 8 miles north of Bedford town centre. There is an existing vehicular access from Cross End which would be suitable for the development. No significant congestion in the vicinity and the proposal would not cause significant problems. The nearest bus stop is located 750m west from the site on Cross End Road. There are no footways serving the site and mitigation to connect to nearby footways is not feasible given distance and number of dwellings proposed. Also no cycle access, and Cross End does not appear to be cycle friendly. Footway connectivity not feasible given the scale of the development and the distance from other footways.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
N/A in UAB

9a. On previously developed land?
+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
There are two existing access points onto Ampthill Road which have previously been used for a large office car park, so will be suitable for this number of homes. There is moderate traffic congestion in the area, however given the sites previous use, the repurposing to residential is unlikely to have any significant impact. There are bus stops approximatly 100m eithier side of the site where there are three services per hour of the number 3 bus, in addition to less frequent services of the number 42, 68 and 44 buses. There is a wide, wellpaved footpath directly outside the site accessible via both access points. There is a bus lane directly outside the site which is also signed for use by cyclists. Pedestrian access as existing is good, however it would be ideal if a new pedestrian access were created in the centre of the site.

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
concerns include rail noise, commercial activity to north including supermarket and EMR

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
Does not pose risk

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access from Northampton Road. Footways serve the site but are overgrown and need improvements, including a shared cycle and footway opposite the site. Bus stops in close proximity. Some congestion within Bromham but scale of development would not exacerbate significantly. Clear footway on southern side of Northampton Road or provide crossing to northern footway which is in better condition.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
The site is located on the west side of Mill Hill in the village of Thurleigh, approximately 5.3 miles north of Bedford town centre. The access point is located to the south of Mill Hill. There is no significant traffic congestion in the vicinity. The nearest bus stop is located approximately 100m from the site entrance, on High Street. There is no formal footway along the site frontage, however a connection could be provided to the footway opposite in the NE, which may also need widening. Cycling is only possible using quiet roads in the vicinity. Provide a crossing for pedestrians to reach the opposite footway and the bus stop. Consider marking on-street cycle lanes through Thurleigh.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
consider palmer motorsport

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located south of Wilden Road in the village of Renhold approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible from Wilden Road. Traffic generation from the potential development may have a moderate impact on Wilden Road as well as to the junction of Wilden Road/Brickfield Road. The closest bus stops are within a radius of 450m, one in Hookhams Lane and one in Church End Road. The frontage of the site has a footway of 1m and cycling is possible only by using the road. Improve footway provision along site frontage for pedestrians and consider marking on-street cycle lanes along Wilden Road.

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
would need to consider PH noise

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
x Serious access constraint wider impacts

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Existing access to the site is via Oakcroft, however this access is likely not sufficient for the number of dwellings proposed. No significant congestion in the vicinity of the site along the nearby A422, however data for High Street is not available. The closest bus stop is 200m away on High Street, with footways on both High Street and Oakcroft leading to it. The bus stop in question has hourly services for routes 41 and 830. There are no designated bicycle lanes or cycling friendly roads in the site's proximity, however cycling is possible using the road surface. Determine whether vehicle access constraints can be overcome or an alternative access location can be provided.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
xx Protected species recorded on the site

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Vehicle accessibility requires entrance to site on A422. Moderate traffic peaks on Stagsden road by the roundabout. Closest bus stop 470m East of site on Stagsden road, bus stop providing on route 41, 830, A2 and G provinding overall 1+ bus per hour. A shared footway/cycleway opposite the site on the A422 provides accessibility. Width is limited though, lower than 2m. Providing footways on the site side of the A422 or A428 and crossings to tie into existing provision, widening of the existing pedestrian footways could be possible. Improvements to existing shared footways around the A428/A422 roundabout.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
only consideration is road noise

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? All other types

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
Currently a storage and business site, adjacent to the A1 (dual carriageway) with site access onto The Lane. The development proposes residential and employment use. The width of The Lane at this section is varied and approximately 5.6m and good quality footway is present on the opposite side of site albeit is less than the standard minimum of 2m in width. There is no cycle lane or quietway in the vicinity and although the roads in the area are generally low traffic, The Lane sometimes sees some congestion due to it's connection to the A1. The closest bus stop is approximately 200m from the site with 905 connecting Cambridge and Bedford stopping twice per hour and monthly W9 and W10 services. A Transport Assessment would be needed to assess the overall impact of the developments in the area as the cumulative impact could be quite large on the local highway network. Improvement of pedestrian and cycle access would be needed - provision of designated cycle path and potentially widening of the footpath

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
noise fom A1

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
x Serious capacity constraint

Highway comments
The site proposes three accesses, via existing road to the north of the site on the western boundary of Wootton Upper School to Hall End Road, via adjoining land to the east to Cranfield Road and via an access to the north east of the site which provides access to Church Row and Jenkyn Road. This provides good access, however, the site is likely to generate a large amount of traffic, which, along with significant traffic already generated by the school, could cause congestion and safety issues on the existing road network. Hall End Road / Church Road and Cranfield Road are both on a bicyclefriendly route, but there are no designated cycle lanes. There are no footpaths on the short access roads that would connect the new development and Hall End Road and Church Road, but are footpaths on the other side of Hall End Road / Church Road and Cranfield Road. A Transport Assessment would be required to understand the impact on the local highway network as together with the other nearby sites in the vicinity, significant traffic generation can be expected. On the access roads directly off Hall End Road and Church Road, footpaths should be added with crossing facilities on Hall End Road / Church Road and Cranfield Road.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
school to the north would need to be considered

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Located just west of Site 441 - comments related to both sites. Access from Northampton Road. Footways serve the site but are overgrown and need improvements, including a shared cycle and footway opposite the site. Bus stops in close proximity. Some congestion within Bromham but scale of development would not exacerbate significantly. Clear footway on southern side of Northampton Road or provide crossing to northern footway which is in better condition.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
? Potential access requiring mitigation

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is located north of Northampton Road and Chestnut Avenue in the Bromham area approximately 3.5 miles west of Bedford town centre. The existing access to the site is to the southeast of the site which provides access to Molivers Lane, with a secondary potential access from Northampton Road. The scale of the development could cause cause significant traffic generation, however there is no current traffic data available for nearby roads. The closest bus stop is located approximately 400m east of the site on Springfield Drive. There is no footway and no formal cycle track on the approach to the site, however Molivers Lane has footways on both sides, and nearby roads are quiet and conducive to cycling. There is the potential for further access to be provided through adjoining agricultural land to the south of the site. A Transport Assessment would be needed to assess the impact of the development on the highway network. Construction of footways/pedestrian access to link to existing facilities would be required.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Entire site falls within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
No answers chosen.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
x Serious access constraint wider impacts

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access is proposed onto The Baulk, however this is a PRoW with no right of way for vehicular traffic, not a highway. No traffic in the area. There is a bus stop just over 1km away however it has very irregular services. The only pedestrian access is The Baulk, a PRoW - however if this is used for vehicular access as proposed then there would then be no pedestrian access. There is no specific cycle connectivity however there are several paved PRoWs in the area which would be suitable for cycling. The Baulk is poorly surfaced and currently has no right of way for vehicular traffic. For this development to be feasible, The Baulk would need to become an adopted public highway with assoicated improvements in paving, width and maintenance. However even if this were possible, it would then remove the only pedestrian access available. The extent of the works required would be very large and require consultation with the council and highway authorities.

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
some industrial activity immediately to the south east of the site

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the built form of a small settlement.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access is proposed off Odell Road, which should not be an issue. No significant congestion of note in the vicinity, and nothing a development of this scale would impact. Suitable footway on the opposite side of the road and wide verge on the site's side which could easily accommodate one. No designated cycle routes nearby, however the road is wide and suitable for cycling. Nearest bus stop is 130m to the northeast, with services roughly half hourly. Provide footway or shared footway/cycle path along the site's frontage. Alternatively mark on-street cycle lanes and provide crossing to footpath opposite for pedestrians.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access onto Church Road with a new access point. No traffic in the area. Bus stops within 100m of the site but only approx. 4 services per day per direction. Also no indication 'on the ground' that bus stops exist (only shown on maps), these should have signs at the very least. Pavement exists on Church Road but is <1m wide. No cycle connectivity but there are some gravel PRoWs in the area which combined with quiet roads makes cycling to St Neots possible. Widen pavement along frontage of the site. Give a visible marker of the bus stops on Church Road, e.g. a sign on the lamp post.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
commercial activity to the North of the site may have an impact on development

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Employment

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
x The majority of the site is within flood zone 2.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Highway comments
The site is currently greenfield and employment, while the proposal aims to convert it to employment only. The site would be accessed from Chawston Lane to the North, a one lane single carriageway with no footpath or verges on either side of the road. Depending on the type of employment proposed, the small width of the road could become an issue. Chawston Lane currently connects to the A1 approximately 150m East of the site entrance. However, as part of a scheme from Highways England to improve the A428 between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbet, this junction will be closed off and a new link road connected to the A1 providing a new safer access via Roxton Rd roundabout. There are a number of dirt paths through the fields, suitable for cycling, in the vicinity. The closest bus stop is 500m from the site with 112 Ivel Sprinter stopping twice a day heading to St Neots / Biggleswade while the second closest 1km away serves the 905 connecting Bedford and Cambridge approximately twice per hour. A Transport Asssessment would be needed to assess the impact of the development on the local highway network. Improvement of pedestrian and cycle access would be needed - provision of a footpath and designated cycle path.

Contaminated Land
No answers chosen.

Environmental Health
employment use may impact on resiential amenity

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

a) What is the primary use you propose for the site? Housing

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement
X The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?
+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance
+ The site is not within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

2b. In an area where protected species are known or likely to exist?
x Protected species could be affected.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?
? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?
No answers chosen.

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?
No answers chosen.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings?
x The proposal has the potential to cause harm to heritage assets. This harm may range from low to high. There may be options to avoid, reduce or mitigate this harm and where sites have not been ruled out altogether for other reasons, further assessment will be undertaken to more fully explore impacts on significance and options for harm reduction and mitigation. This further assessment may ultimately lead to the conclusion that the site should not be allocated.

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?
No answers chosen.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?
No answers chosen.

8b. Within the existing settlement form?
xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

9a. On previously developed land?
x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?
? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?
+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

11a. At risk of flooding?
+ The site is within flood zone 1 (areas that have been shown to be at less than 0.1% chance of flooding in any year).

15e. Connect highway without constraint?
+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues
+ No capacity issues

Highway comments
Access east onto Kimbolton Rd. No traffic in the area. There is a bus stop 500m away but it is not clearly marked, only has 4 services per day, and there is no pedestrian connection between it and the site. There is no pedestrian or cycle access to the site, although lots of quiet roads which could be used for cycling. Importantly, there is no pedestrian connection to the bus network or any other local services. Scale of development unlikely warrants cost of mitigations/improvements

Contaminated Land
Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health
no noise concerns

Minerals & Waste
No answer given.

Natural England Risks Opportunities
No answers chosen.

Mineral Safeguarding Area
Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.