Call for Sites Form

Showing forms 61 to 90 of 461
Form ID: 413

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

65A Renhold Road Wilden Bedford MK44 2PX

Map 1233
Show full map

Residential

Residential

Farmland

CWS

Pasture

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

8

Self-build/Custom build homes

No answer given

10 dwellings per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Via the extant access to the north of the site, leading to Renhold Road.

Yes

No

No

No

All to be built within first five years.

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

All dwellings would be built to the Passivhaus standard, built using the Kingspan TEK Building System. Consequently, they will exceed all the requirements set out for energy efficiency and efficient use of water resources. Because of the low energy requirements of Passivhaus-compliant dwellings all heating requirements will be met from renewable sources (solar panels and air-source heating), as well as a high proportion of energy needs. Each dwelling would be fitted with an external EV charge point.

No uploaded files for public display

0.86

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

Nothing chosen

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

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

would consider eastern use

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 414

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

31 Hall End Road, Wootton

Map 1233
Show full map

Land adjacent to 31 Hall End Road

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No

Housing

Employment , Retail , All other types

15

Family houses , Older people housing

4 bedroom family houses or Care home for elderly and/or people with special needs/care.

No answer given

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

Employment for staff working in care home and related services.

15000 sq ft

Grocery store

15000

15000

No answer given

The site can accommodate 3 commercial units i.e. a grocery store, a restaurant (or a fast food store), and a gym or sports facility for local residents.

The site can accommodate 3 commercial units i.e. a grocery store, a restaurant (or a fast food store), and a gym or sports facility for local residents. We have adopted highway frontage of about 200 feet and access can be provided from anywhere suitable.

Suitable access is achievable

There is 200 feet frontage of adopted highway and access points can be made anywhere suitable, according to the size of the development. I propose access at the beginning of the plot towards the corner in North.

Yes

Yes

No

No

15

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2021 or as soon as possible. We already have consulted a couple of good architects in the area and are ready to commence the building work as soon as the planning permission is granted.

We will consider cleaner energy production for all developments i.e. solar panels on roofs. We will also plant trees on the site where possible so that the site remains green as much as possible. In addition, we are open to suggestions from the council to make the climate impact as minimum.

No uploaded files for public display

0.84

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

x The site is within a green infrastructure opportunity network but is likely to compromise the network.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

Nothing chosen

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 415

Land owner

No answer given

Yes

Plot 1 North Lodge Farm Goosey Lodge Wymington Northants NN10 9LU

Map 1233
Show full map

Equestrian agricultural

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No

Housing

Housing

To be confirmed

Family houses

No answer given

To be confirmed

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Wymington Lane / A6

Yes

No

No

No

one year

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

not considered as yet

No uploaded files for public display

2.08

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

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

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

noise and odour from Goosey Lodge

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 416

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Green End Farm Little Staughton Bedford MK44 2BU

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Agriculture

Residential

Agriculture

Residential and agricultural

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

17

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing

No answer given

20dph

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Indicated on plan. Good sight lines onto straight adopted highway in 30m.p.h restriction. Exact position can be determined by Highways department as all frontage owned by ourselves.

Yes

No

No

No

17

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Year 1

Houses on this level site will be carbon neutral. Almost due South facing aspect will maximise electricity generation from solar panels. The agricultural land to the North is in our ownership and can be utilised for ground source heat pumps. Any water runoff from the site can be harvested and/or dissipated onto the same. The site does not flood. The site sits on the 28A bus route into Bedford and also bus routes to Keysoe primary and Sharnbrook secondary schools. Facilities within walking or cycling distances include The Crown pub, All Saints Church, Baptist Church, Village Hall and Top End Stores. There are many footpaths and bridleways around the village. In short, car use is not essential to live here.

No uploaded files for public display

0.85

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 423

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land adjacent to Herdsman Cottage site 1

Map 1233
Show full map

Agriculture

Agri.

Agri.

Agri.

Agri.

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

To be determined by planning

Family houses , Older people housing

No answer given

No answer given

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Over track, there is also an option over the field adjacent to Coplowe Lane which is also being submitted for the call for sites.

Yes

No

No

No

One to five years

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

As soon as the plan is adopted.

TBA

No uploaded files for public display

1.23

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

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

Nothing chosen

no noise issues

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 424

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land adjacent to Herdsman Cottage site 2 Bletsoe

Map 1233
Show full map

Agriculture

Agri.

Agri.

Agri.

House

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

To be determined by planning

Family houses , Older people housing

No answer given

No answer given

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Through existing access and possibly over track in and out. There is also an option over the field adjacent to Coplowe Lane which is also being submitted for the call for sites.

Yes

No

No

Yes

One to five years

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

As soon as the plan is adopted.

TBA

No uploaded files for public display

2.39

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise issues

Nothing chosen

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 425

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Swan Works Box End Road Bromham Beds, MK43 8LT

Map 1233
Show full map

Industrial Buildings/Car Wash

Road/housing

Field

Road

Field

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

8

Self-build/Custom build homes

No answer given

11.5

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

There are currently 4 access points used to enter the site

Yes

Don't know

No

No

1-5 yrs

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

We intend to focus on using self-build houses that pay attention to sustainable design features from charging points for electric vehicles and to provide more bike storage areas. To investigate house building that incorporates where possible materials made from recycled materials. Look at having rooftops and drainage systems capable of harvesting recycled rainwater. To considering a building’s lifecycle at the development stage, by investigating how to implement measures to lower its environmental impacts over its lifetime and adapting these over time to optimise its efficiency and decrease its carbon footprint.

No uploaded files for public display

No answer given

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

+ The site is within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network and able to enhance the network.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

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

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

adjacent site would need to be considered

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 426

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Swan Works Box End Road Bromham Beds, MK43 8LT

Map 1233
Show full map

Industrial Building/Waste grassland

Road/housing

Field

Road

Field

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

105

Family houses

No answer given

30

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

There are currently 5 access points used to enter the site

Yes

Don't know

No

No

1-5 yrs

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

We intend to focus on using house builders that pay attention to sustainable design features from charging points for electric vehicles and to provide more bike storage areas. To investigate house building that incorporates where possible materials made from recycled materials. Look at having rooftops and drainage systems capable of harvesting recycled rainwater. To considering a building’s lifecycle at the development stage, by investigating how to implement measures to lower its environmental impacts over its lifetime and adapting these over time to optimise its efficiency and decrease its carbon footprint.

No uploaded files for public display

4.09

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

+ The site is within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network and able to enhance the network.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

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

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

adjacent site would need to be considered

Nothing chosen

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 428

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land adjacent to 156 High Street Riseley Bedford MK441DR

Map 1233
Show full map

Paddock

Houses

Houses

Open Countryside

Houses

No

Housing

Housing

7 retirement bungalows

Older people housing

Retirement bungalows for local people

10 to hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Existing access is fine. A transport report is available.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

7

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

We are aware of the "Reducing UK emissions Progress Report to Parliament Committee on Climate Change", June 2020 and await The "Buildings and Heat Strategy", due later this year, which will take low-carbon heating from a niche market in the UK to the dominant form of new heating installation by the early-2030s. It should be supported by a national effort to improve the energy efficiency of UK buildings along with ensuring their safety and comfort as the climate warms. 1.0 Introduction 1.1 The government has introduced regulations to make new buildings more energy efficient. 1.2 All new dwellings require a calculation to demonstrate compliance with the current building regulations. This is carried out using a government established Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP). 1.3 The calculation is based on the energy balance taking into account a range of factors that contribute to energy efficiency: • Materials used for construction of buildings • Thermal insulation for the building fabric • Ventilation characteristics of the dwelling and ventilation equipment • Efficiency and control of the heating system(s) • Solar gains through openings of the dwelling • The fuel used to provide space and water heating, ventilation and light-ing • Renewable energy technologies 1.4 The SAP scale runs from 1 (poor) to 100 (excellent) and is based on estimated annual energy use for space heating, hot water, ventilation and internal fixed lighting. A SAP of 100 now represents zero energy cost for these items. It can be above 100 for dwellings that are not exporters. • Target Emission Rate (TER) 1.5 The TER is based on a notional dwelling of the same size and shape. The TER is estimated using a parallel SAP calculation base on the same dimensions as the proposed dwelling, but using a set of reference values for the building fabric and the heating systems etc. These reference values include ‘U’ values for main building elements that correspond to those required to meet the elemental method of compliance with Part L1 of the Building Regulations. • Dwelling Emission Rate (DER) 1.6 This is the estimated annual carbon dioxide emissions per square metre due to space heating, domestic hot water, ventilation and internal fixed lighting minus any carbon emissions saved by the generation of electricity. Within the DER calculation default is used for internal fixed lighting which cannot be changed, the DER is an output from the SAP calculation. • U-Value 1.7 The U-value describes how well a building element conducts heat. It measures the rate of heat transfer through a building element over a given area, under standardized conditions. The usual standard is at a temperature gradient of 24 °C, at 50% humidity with no wind (a smaller U-value is better). Fabric U-Values Element Average (W/m2K) Wall 0.26 Floor 0.22 Roof 0.14 Openings 1.47 2.0 Site Address 2.1 The development site is located at High Street Riseley, Site Location. 3.0 Description of Proposed Development 3.1 The proposal is for 6 retirement dwellings. 4.0 Building Regulations 4.1 The proposed dwellings will be designed to comply with the requirements of Part L1 of the Building Regulations and to that end all construction details will be selected to meet those requirements. 5.0 Site Analysis 5.1 Orientation is dictated by existing planning constraints and the site circumstances. 6.0 Energy Efficiency Assessment 6.1 A predicted carbon emissions statement has been calculated taking into consideration the design, layout and materials of the development. 7.0 Materials • Walls 7.1 The materials proposed for the external walls will be chosen to increase the efficiency of the proposed development. 7.2 The current Building Regulations u-value for external walls is 0.30w/m2k this proposal aims to have external walls that are 0.25w/m2k which is a 16% improvement. 7.3 This will contribute to better heating and energy efficiency. 7.4 The development has been designed with windows and doors openings to co-inside with frame dimensions to limit the amount of wasted materials. 7.5 The insulation this figure has been calculated on is based upon one similar to Kooltherm K10 Soffit Boards, which has a very low impact on the environment and is classified as Zero ODP. 7.6 The BRE green guide rating for such a wall is A+ • Ground Floor 7.7 Again the proposed materials for the ground floor will be chosen to increase the efficiency of the development. 7.8 The current building Regulations u-value for ground floor is 0.25w/m2k where as our proposals for the ground floor is 0.22w/m2k which is a 12% improvement. This will contribute to better heating and energy efficiency. 7.9 The BRE green guide rating for such a ground floor is B • Roof Insulation 7.10 The proposed materials for the roof insulation will be chosen to increase the efficiency of the development. 7.11 The current Building Regulations u-value for a roof is 0.16w/m2k where as our proposal for the roof is 0.14w/m2k which is a 12.5% improvement. This will contribute to better heating and energy efficiency. 7.12 The BRE green guide rating for the roof is A+ • Lighting 7.13 Lighting within the dwellings has been designed so that fittings are central in each room maximising the spread of light. 100% of the light fittings within the development (internal and external) will be energy efficient fittings providing a prediction of 45.98Wh/year saving. • Space Heating 7.14 The proposed boiler for the development is based upon one similar to Worcester Greenstar, Heatslave which provides hot water and heating. TRV’s will be installed away from a heat source. 7.15 This boilers efficiency is 90.3% which is 4% above the permitted efficiency. 7.16 Pipe work for the heating system will be insulated to increase efficiency. • Windows 7.17 The proposed windows and doors for the development have been selected to provide maximum efficiency, these are double glazed PCV-U units, air filled providing a u-value of 1.5w/m2k. 7.18 The full specification of the contribution will need to be refined and this statement demonstrates one way of achieving a carbon reduction. However the advice in the Council’s SPD, Climate Change and Pollution states: precise details of some of the matters to be covered in the sustainability statement, for example, construction materials may not be known at the planning stage, particularly, if an outline planning application is being submitted. 7.19 This is not an outline application however; it is an application where some of the construction materials are not be known at this stage. Once the principle of the development has been established it will be possible to provide full details of the construction materials in order that a further detailed assessment of the carbon reduction can be clarified. The paragraph in the SPD then goes on to mention: where it is appropriate to do, conditions may be used to ensure that features referred to in the sustainability statement are actually delivered as part of the development. 7.20 The SPD then lists a number of planning conditions and on page 39 a condition is listed for an energy audit for full applications of between 1 to 49 dwellings. It is considered that a planning condition would be both reasonable and necessary, and thereby accord with the Secretary of States’ advice and further would follow your own guidance in order that you can be satisfied that the objectives of policy CP26 can be achieved. 7.21 Nonetheless the submitted Sustainability and Energy Efficiency Statement demonstrates that a carbon reduction of 12% could be achieved by suggesting a number of specifications for the materials used in the construction, details of roof insulation, and suggestions of light positioning, space heating and details of windows. One option, and as suggested in the climate change and pollution SPD, would be to condition the levels of the technical details that are suggested in the sustainability statement in order for the LPA to be satisfied that a carbon reduction of around 12% could be achieved.

No uploaded files for public display

0.69

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

xx Protected species recorded on the site

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

x Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers 25-50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

? The site is within or adjoining a defined settlement policy area or within the 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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 429

Land owner

Executors of land

Yes

Meadow House Norfolk Road TURVEY Beds MK438DU

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Agricultural

Agricultural

Agricultural some residential

Residential

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

25

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing

To match Turvey Parish neighbourhood plan housing needs. Mixture of owner occupier 2/3 bed and starter homes

8-9 DPH

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

To match Turvey Parish neighbourhood plan housing needs

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

30ft wide access at the end of Norfolk Road, marked on attached plan. It will require an improvement

Yes

No

No

No

2024

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

The development and use of land and buildings will be built in line with Council policy to address climate change, adapting to anticipated future changes and mitigating against further change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

No uploaded files for public display

2.88

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

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

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 430

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

The Close High Street Swineshead Bedford MK44 2AA

Map 1233
Show full map

Field

Residential

Wooded area

Garden

Residential

No

Housing

Housing

4

Family houses

No answer given

0.25 acre per property

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

High Street, Swineshead

Yes

No

No

No

4 dwellings

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

Energy efficient properties using modern eco-friendly materials

No uploaded files for public display

0.39

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 431

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land to the north of Top End, Renhold, Bedfordshire, MK41 0LS.

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Agricultural

Residential (Class C3)

Woodland

Residential (Class C3)

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

25

Older people housing

No answer given

10 dwellings / ha

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Directly onto Top End Road.

Yes

No

No

No

25 dwellings

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024/25

The proposed development will keep in nature of the village, with the ‘Ends’ layout being preserved by green space without the whole of the site being developed. This will be in the form of woodland to extend the current woodland adjacent to the site, and open green space for communal use that will protect the views of current properties in the area. This area will also be subject to tree and hedgerow planting. Consideration will be given to providing electric vehicle charging bays. Traffic will be minimised, as the proposed development will be for more elderly people, so the need to travel for school runs and child related activity will be vastly reduced. At either end of the site are bus stops, one at the old Three Horseshoes pub and the other at Becher Close.

No uploaded files for public display

3.94

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

Nothing chosen

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 432

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land off Elstow Road Bedford (Approx. 0.3 ha)

Map 1233
Show full map

None - under utilised land within central Bedford

Disused railway

Residential

Commercial

Residential

Don't know

Housing

Nothing chosen

14

Family houses , Flats

No answer given

Approx. 47 per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Existing access is via a private road leading to Elstow Road. This road may need to be upgraded to enable residential development to take place on site. There may be alternative access routes into the site that need examining further.

No

No

No

Yes

No answer given

14 dwellings

No answer given

No answer given

2030

All dwellings will be built in line with latest central government regulations relating to energy efficiency. Regard will also be made to latest local authority recommendations and guidance.

No uploaded files for public display

0.29

Above

Site already allocated in development plan

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

+ The site is within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network and able to enhance the network.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

+ The proposal includes or is within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space that includes an equipped children’s play area of at least 200m2 .

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

N/A in UAB

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

x Serious access constraint wider impacts

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

noise from nearby depot

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

This site is already allocated in the development plan LP2030 Policy 14.

Form ID: 433

Other (please specify)

Agent: Shaun Greeves. G C Planning Partnership. Bedford I Lab Stannard Way Priory Business Park Bedford MK44 3RZ

Yes

Land off Wood Lane, Cotton End, Bedford MK45 3AP.

Map 1233
Show full map

Vacant

Agriculture

Residential

Agriculture

Residential

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

20

Family houses

No answer given

30 dwellings / ha

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

To the centre of the site frontage onto Wood Lane. A Transport Statement has been carried out for this site and submitted with an application for outline planning permission for up to 20 dwellings

Yes

Yes

No

No

20 dwellings

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Year 2 (2025)

6.1 The council has declared a climate emergency. Please explain how your proposal will respond to climate change (see Local Plan 2030 Policy 51S) The proposed development would assist in response to climate change through reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed dwellings would be energy and water efficient and well insulated. They would have means of generating renewable energy and would be fitted with EV charging points. The site would have a SuDS and address climate change. The development would deliver net gains in biodiversity, far exceeding 10%, through extensive landscaping on the site boundaries within a 5m deep landscape strip. The development would assist in maintaining services and facilities within the village thereby contributing to the sustainability of the local community.

No uploaded files for public display

0.78

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 435

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Thurleigh Farm Centre Cross End Thurleigh Bedfordshire MK44 2EE

Map 1233
Show full map

Disused open farm/children's' activity centre

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Residential Properties

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

9-11

Family houses

No answer given

No answer given

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

There is an existing vehicular access from Cross End which would be suitable for the development

Yes

No

No

No

9-11

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Subject to obtaining planning consent we would expect the development to start within one year post adoption and for the development timescale to be less than a year

The houses would be constructed incorporating solar panels and rainwater reuse drainage systems - they would access their heat through a community biomass burner and or air source/ground source heat pumps.

No uploaded files for public display

1.56

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

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

+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 436

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Technology House 239 Ampthill Road Bedford MK42 9QQ

Map 1233
Show full map

Vacant - redundant car parking

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

250+

Family houses , Older people housing , Flats

No answer given

1/2/3 bed houses / flats

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Existing access is suitable - there are two access points out on to Ampthill road from the edge of the site which in previous times under office use would have a 1000+ cars coming into and out of the site during office hours.

Yes

No

No

No

250

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No uploaded files for public display

3.07

Above

None

Include in next stage of assessment

Site is available

Include in next stage of assessment

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area UAB.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

N/A in UAB

+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

+ The site is within or adjoining the urban area.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

concerns include rail noise, commercial activity to north including supermarket and EMR

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

Site is suitable for allocation, potentially along with site to the north (site 505 former Camford works) for a mix of residential and business uses. Opportunities also to provide open space with public access in a part of town where this is much needed. Key issues to be addressed include: Masterplan to be prepared taking account of noise environment (railway and neighbouring uses), Provision of new urban park (will re-provide Urban Open Space with public access benefit). Safe pedestrian connection to Cauldwell School, Access strategy, Assessment of ground contamination / remediation strategy, Site specific flood risk assessment. Site is proposed for allocation in combination with Site 505 HOU3 Land at Ampthill Road, Bedford.

Form ID: 441

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Bromham Grange Northampton Road Bromham MK43 8PB

Map 1233
Show full map

House and Garden

Northampton Road with agriculture beyond

Existing Residential

Existing Residential

Paddock

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

6

Family houses

No answer given

8 / acre

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Access direct from Northampton Road

Yes

No

No

No

2024

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

No answer given

No uploaded files for public display

0.40

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

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

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 442

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land at back of post office Church End Thurleigh Bedford Title No BD224855

Map 1233
Show full map

Fallow used for private recreation

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No

Housing

Housing

Not known but in excess 25

Family houses

No answer given

No answer given

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

.Gate at Church End

Yes

No

No

No

25 n.b. deed of covenant in favour Bedfordshire C.C for 50% enhanced value upon sale.

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Notknown

No uploaded files for public display

4.18

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

consider palmer motorsport

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 443

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

The Polhill Arms 265 Wilden Road Salph End Renhold Beds. MK41 0JP

Map 1233
Show full map

Part car park, part beer garden for The Pollhill Arms Public House

The Polhill Arms Public House

Grassland for grazing

Agriculture

Grassland for grazing

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

40 to 45

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes

No answer given

30 dwellings per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

The site is easily accessible from the public highway (Wilden Road).

Yes

No

No

No

40

5

No answer given

No answer given

year 1

See accompanying statement

No uploaded files for public display

0.16

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

xx Protected species recorded on the site

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

0 The proposal appears to have no impact on heritage assets and their significance.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

would need to consider PH noise

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 444

Land owner

No answer given

Yes

Land at Oakcroft Stagsden Bedford MK43 8SF

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Residential

Agricultural

Residential

Agricultural

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

48

Family houses

No answer given

25 per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Access to the site is via the Oakcroft turning on Stagsden High Street, as demonstrated on the site location plan.

Yes

No

No

No

48

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

The site will be developed in such a manner to contribute towards Bedford Borough Council's goal of carbon neutrality by 2030.

No uploaded files for public display

1.91

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

+ The proposal includes or is within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space that includes an equipped children’s play area of at least 200m2 .

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

x Serious access constraint wider impacts

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 445

Land owner

No answer given

Yes

LAND AT STAGSDEN ROAD (SOUTH), BROMHAM WEST OF A428

Map 1233
Show full map

Agriculture

Agriculture

Agriculture

Agriculture

Residential / Agriculture

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

40

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing

No answer given

15 Units per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Access from Stagsden Road

Yes

No

No

No

YES

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2023 onwards (subject to planning permission)

Since most building-related carbon emissions come from energy use, the first—and easiest—step in addressing emissions is reducing consumption through energy efficient design.

No uploaded files for public display

2.73

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

xx Protected species recorded on the site

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

only consideration is road noise

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 446

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

18A The Lane, Wyboston, Bedford, MK44 3AP

Map 1233
Show full map

Part Storage and part business

Agriculture

Residential

A1 Trunk Road

Residential and Lorry Storage Depot

Yes

All other types

Housing , Employment

60

Family houses

No answer given

30 units per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

Warehousing, Storage, Depot, Manufacturing.

2 Hectares

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Access roadway off of The Lane

Yes

No

No

No

The site could be completed within this time period.

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

Use top of the range insulation methods. Incorporate the use of solar energy. No gas to be provided on site. Provide electric charging points for vehicles. Harvest rainwater and reuse as appropriate.

No uploaded files for public display

2.42

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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

Nothing chosen

noise fom A1

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy. This is not a preferred location for an employment site as it does not relate well to existing settlements and it would be intrusive.

Form ID: 447

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land at Wootton Park Farm Hall End Road Wootton Bedfordshire MK43 9HT

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Wootton Upper School

Agricultural land

Agricultural land

Woodland

No

Housing

Employment , Retail

430-515 houses @ 25-30 dph.

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing , Flats

We suggest a mix of housing to meet local needs. This will include a range of house types and a range of unit size.

We have assumed a density of circa 25-30 residential units per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

We suggest the site will be predominantly a market housing scheme, however, any scheme will require to meet local policy in terms of affordable housing (rent and shared ownership) and private rented housing as required.

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

We suggest that there should be areas of employment use within the development. The type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

Type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest that there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest that there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest that there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

There are a number of accesses to the site. The accesses have been marked with the blue dots on the site plan. A description of each access is as follows: 1. Via an existing road to the north of the site on the western boundary of Wootton Upper School. This provides direct access to Hall End Road. 2. Via adjoining land to the east of the site which provides access to Cranfield Road. This adjoining land is within the ownership of Bedfordshire County Council and this land has previously been promoted for development. There are two fields which could provide access and these have been marked on the plan with blue dots, although the exact location of the access could be anywhere across these fields. 3. Via an access to the north east of the site which provides access to Church Row and Jenkyn Road.

Yes

No

No

No

430-515, dependant on land used for other uses (such as employment and retail)

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The land is available and therefore the land could be developed immediately or it could be development in parts or as part of a phased development.

This site is adjacent to Wootton Wood which is designated as a County Wildlife Site. Wootton Wood extends to approximately 40 hectares (100 acres) of woodland which has historic and ecological importance. Wootton Wood is also within the ownership of Clapham Park Farms Limited, the same owner as this land which has been submitted. As part of any development of this land submitted, the adjoining woodland could be enhanced , for example the woodland could potentially be used as a site for carbon offsetting or to achieve net biodiversity gain. We would seek to ensure any building on the site is energy efficient and includes renewable energy where possible, for example installing solar PV energy and air source heat pumps. The design and construction of the buildings should utilise low embodied energy materials. If the whole site was developed we envisage some commercial development within the overall layout and design to encourage local employment opportunities to reduce travel to other areas of the Borough and further afield. The development of this site will provide direct access to Wootton Upper School (which forms the northern boundary) which will reduce traffic along Hall End Road and Church Road. A link road could extend through this site and then further east, through land within the ownership of Bedfordshire County Council to Cranfield Road. This link road could be utilised by the residents of the Berry Farm development which is situated to the east of Cranfield Road and the existing development to the north and south of Fields Road.

No uploaded files for public display

17.24

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

x Serious capacity constraint

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.

Nothing chosen

school to the north would need to be considered

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 448

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Land to the rear of 6 Grange Court Bromham Bedford MK43 8PF

Map 1233
Show full map

House and Garden

Northampton Road with agriculture beyond

Existing Residential

Existing Residential

Former Builders Yard

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

c5

Family houses

No answer given

8 / acre

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Direct access from Northampton Road

Yes

No

No

No

2024

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

No answer given

No uploaded files for public display

0.26

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

xx Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers more than 50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

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

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 449

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Land off Molivers Lane Bromham Bedfordshire MK43 8LE

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Agricultural

The Leslie Sell Scout Activity Centre and part agricultural land

Agricultural land

Woodland and agricultural land

No

Housing

Employment , Retail , All other types

Approx 250. This site is available in parts if a smaller site is required or as part of a phased development.

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing , Flats

We suggest a mix of housing to meet local needs. This will include a range of house types and a range of unit size.

We have assumed a density of circa 25 residential units per hectare.

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

We suggest the site will be predominantly a market housing scheme, however, any scheme will also meet local needs and policy in terms of affordable housing (rent and shared ownership) and private rented housing as required.

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

We suggest there should be areas of employment use within the development. The type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

The type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

We suggest that there should be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

No answer given

As part of the development of this site, an extension to the neighbouring activity centre to the south could be provided. We also recommend the northern area of the site is utilised for open space and landscaping to achieve a net gain in biodiversity. The amount can be determined depending on local need.

As part of the development of this site, an extension to the neighbouring activity centre to the south could be provided. We also recommend the northern area of the site is utilised for open space and landscaping to achieve a net gain in biodiversity.

Suitable access is achievable

The existing access to the site is to the south east of the site which provides access to Molivers Lane. There is the potential for further access to be provided through adjoining agricultural land to the south of site. We are aware this area of land to the south has previously been submitted to the Council for potential development as part of the Call for Sites exercise. There is the further potential for this site to be accessed through the adjoining agricultural land to the east to provide access to Oakley Road.

Yes

No

No

No

250

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The land is available and therefore the land could be developed immediately or it could be development in parts or as part of a phased development.

We suggest that 50% of the site could be developed. The remaining 50% could be utilised for landscaping, carbon offsetting and achieving a net gain in biodiversity. The undeveloped area of land could be in the northern area of the site. The site is immediately adjacent to other woodland and the Scouts activity centre to the south. As part of the development of this site the additional land on this site could also be utilised to provide additional facilities for the village such as land for outside recreation / sports facilities if required and a potential extension to the existing neighbouring facilities. Any development of this site will include renewable energy technology such as solar PV and air source heat pumps. The construction of the development should utilise low embodied energy materials. We envisage commercial development within the development of the site to enable local employment opportunities to reduce travel. The site is immediately adjacent to a bridleway which provides access to a number of footpaths and open spaces for potential residents.

No uploaded files for public display

20.96

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

x Proposal includes a main town centre use in an out of centre location.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not on best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

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

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

+ The proposal is for or includes a community use or is likely to promote community collaboration and social interaction eg cultural, social, leisure and sporting uses.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Entire site falls within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 450

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Former PoW Camp The Baulk Clapham Bedford MK41 6AA

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural buildings and storage (no grass or arable land on the site), brownfield site

Solar PV Farm

Residential properties and agricultural land

Residential properties and golf course

Agricultural land

Yes

Housing

Employment , Retail

Approx 32 dwellings. This site is available in parts if a smaller site is required or as part of a phased development.

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing , Flats

We suggest a mix of housing to meet local needs. This will include a range of house types and a range of unit size.

We have assumed a density of circa 25 residential units per hectare.

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent , Affordable Housing - Shared ownership

We suggest the site will be predominantly a market housing scheme, however, any scheme will also meet local needs and policy in terms of affordable housing (rent and shared ownership) and private rented housing as required.

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

There could be areas of employment use within the development. The type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

The type and size of the employment facilities could be determined to meet local need.

There could be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

There could be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

There could be areas of retail use within the development. The type and size of the retail facilities could be determined to meet local need.

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

The site is accessed direct from the Baulk. The blue dots on the plan show how the Baulk connects to the public highway network. The Baulk has sufficient capacity in width etc for this development.

Yes

No

No

No

32

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

The land is available and therefore the land could be developed immediately or it could be part of a phased development.

The development of this site should utilised low embodied energy materials. The design of the building should utilise renewable energy technology such as air source heat pumps and solar PV. The site is directly adjacent to an existing solar PV farm which is situated to the north. The site provides direct access to the Baulk which provides good access to other public rights of way. This site is a brownfield site. The site was previously used as part of a Prison of War camp and now the buildings are used for agricultural purposes. The development of this brownfield site will have minimal environmental impact and could be used to achieve net gain for biodiversity.

No uploaded files for public display

1.69

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

+ Proposal includes a main town centre use in or on the edge of a town centre. , x Proposal includes a main town centre use in an out of centre location.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

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

+ All or a majority of the site is previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

+ A site accessibility score of 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

x Serious access constraint wider impacts

+ No capacity issues

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.

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

some industrial activity immediately to the south east of the site

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 451

Land owner

No answer given

N/A

Prospect Place Odell Road Sharnbrook Bedford MK44 1JL

Map 1233
Show full map

Vacant

Residential

Countryside

Residential

Countryside

No

Housing

Housing

5

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes

No answer given

17 dwellings per hectare

Market housing - Owner occupied

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

The site benefits from direct access off Odell Road, which forms the site's eastern boundary. Whilst the existing access would require improvement, it is capable of serving development. There are adequate sight lines available to provide a safe access.

Yes

No

No

Yes

1 year

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

Building would be in accordance with or exceed current building regulations. The development will look into including "passive house" features such as solar energy, ground source heating, insulation and locally sourced materials which will increase sustainability and reduce carbon emissions.

No uploaded files for public display

0.28

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

x Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers 25-50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

+ The site adjoins a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 452

Other (please specify)

Planning Agent

Yes

Land at Chapel Farm Church Road Colmworth Bedford MK44 2JX

Map 1233
Show full map

Equestrian, Agricultural

Residential, Agricultural

Agricultural

Agricultural

Highway, Residential

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

52

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes

Family houses including level of self-build if/as required by policy

15

Market housing - Owner occupied , Affordable Housing - Affordable rent

Combination of market/affordable as required by policy

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

A new access point would need to be created onto Church Road but it is anticipated that this is able to be achieved. There is also an existing field access to the south-west corner of the proposed housing allocation that could be used although this is unlikely to be the preferred option.

Yes

No

No

No

1-5 years

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2026

The intention is for any development to have strong sustainability credentials which involves incorporating renewable sources of energy and being proactive with respect to water/energy efficiency. Any proposal intends to be compliant with LP Policy 51S.

No uploaded files for public display

3.65

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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.

Nothing chosen

commercial activity to the North of the site may have an impact on development

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 453

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Land at Chawston Lane, Chawston, Bedfordshire, MK44 3BH (see location plan)

Map 1233
Show full map

Existing buildings comprising internet car sales with associated office, storage and workshop and agricultural land

Chawston Lane

Agricultural land

Contractors Depot, office and B8 storage building

Farm Yard

Yes

Employment

Nothing chosen

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

B1/B8 1.2 hectares (see site plan)

Up to 6000 square metres

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

As part of the improvements proposed by Highways England regarding the A428 Black Cat to Caxton Gibbett shows a new road from the Black Cat through the clients land on the eastern side with a road into the site linking to Chawston Lane. See site plan for specific location.

Yes

No

No

No

2025/2026

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025/2026

The development will use carbon efficient building materials in its construction as well as utilising efficient energy and water systems internally alongside solar panels on the roof to create energy which can be used by the building/s. Externally there will be bicycle provision to encourage sustainable modes of transport and electric car charging points as well as a link to the footpath onto Chawston Lane. The scheme will also incorporate landscaping and provide a net gain in biodiversity.

No uploaded files for public display

8.26

Above

None

Include in next stage of assessment

Site is available

Include in next stage of assessment

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

x Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers 25-50% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

x The site is separated from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

x All or a majority of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land as defined in the NPPF.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

x The majority of the site is within flood zone 2.

0 Residential development not proposed.

0 Residential development not proposed.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

+ The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with a regular bus service (at least hourly) which enables travel 8am-6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer or it is possible to walk to a major employer within 10 minutes.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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.

Nothing chosen

employment use may impact on resiential amenity

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

This site is within a village setting and not prominently visible from the strategic highway network. It would be intrusive and impact on Chawston village. It is therefore not a preferred location for an employment site.

Form ID: 454

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Land opposite College Cottages, Kimbolton Road, Pertenhall, MK44 2AZ

Map 1233
Show full map

Grassland

Dwellings

Agricultural land

Kimbolton Road

Dwellings

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

3

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes

No answer given

14 dwellings per hectare to reflect the character of the area and dwellings opposite (College Cottages)

Market housing - Owner occupied , Market housing - Private rented housing

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

There is a hand gate onto Kimbolton Road and this can be widened, see site location plan which shows its position.

Yes

No

No

No

2024/2025

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024/2025

The development will use carbon efficient building materials in its construction as well as utilising efficient energy and water systems internally alongside solar panels on the roof to create energy which can be used by the dwellings. Externally there will be bicycle provision to encourage sustainable modes of transport and electric car charging points. The scheme will also incorporate landscaping and provide a net gain in biodiversity with bird and bats boxes and native planting.

No uploaded files for public display

0.20

Below - exclude at stage 1

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

0 The site is not within or adjoining the green infrastructure opportunity network or the impact of the proposal is neutral.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

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.

0 Proposal is not employment related.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space.

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

0 The proposal is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape.

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

x The site is not previously developed land as defined in the NPPF.

? The classification of the site is not known or it is not clear whether is classified as grade 3a or 3b.

+ The site is not located in a source protection zone.

+ 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).

x The site is unlikely to provide a mix of housing and/or is unlikely to include affordable housing.

x The development will not meet identified needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

+ The site is within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

0 Neutral.

+ The development is likely to increase public surveillance or increase activity.

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 minutes’ walk.

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

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

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1 because its location is not in accordance with the development strategy.