Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 450

Interest in land

Land owner

Specify 'other' land interest

No answer given

If you are not the landowner of the site you are submitting, do you have permission to submit?

N/A

Address of site

Former PoW Camp The Baulk Clapham Bedford MK41 6AA

Location plan

Show full map

Current use of land

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

Adjoining use to the north

Solar PV Farm

Adjoining use to the south

Residential properties and agricultural land

Adjoining use to the east

Residential properties and golf course

Adjoining use to the west

Agricultural land

Has the site been developed previously?

Yes

Proposed primary use

Housing

Other uses proposed

Employment , Retail

Number of dwellings proposed

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

Type of housing proposed

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

Other type of housing

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

Density proposed

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

Proposed tenures

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

Other tenures proposed

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.

Permanent or transit?

No answer given

Site privately owned?

Nothing chosen

Number of plots proposed

No answer given

Proposed type of employment

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.

Gross floorspace proposed

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

Proposed type of retail

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.

Net floorspace proposed

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.

Gross floorspace proposed

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.

Number of hotel rooms proposed

No answer given

Amount of development proposed

No answer given

Description

No answer given

Can suitable access be achieved for the site?

Suitable access is achievable

Where will the site’s access point(s) be?

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.

Is the site available for development now?

Yes

Is the site currently subject to a planning application?

Is the site currently being marketed?

Are you aware of any issues that might affect the viability of developing the site?

1-5 years (2024/25-2028/29)

6-10 years (2029/30-2033/34)

No answer given

11-15 years (2034/35-2039/40)

No answer given

16+ years (2040 onwards)

No answer given

What year, post adoption of the plan, would you expect development to start on site?

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

The council has declared a climate emergency. How the proposal will respond to climate change

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.

Attachments

No uploaded files for public display

Site size (ha)

1.69

Site size threshold

Above

Overriding constraint?

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Stage1 conclusion

Exclude from further assessment

Stage 2 Assessment of suitability, availability & achievability

Nothing chosen

Stage 2 conclusion

Nothing chosen

1a. Within or adjoining UAB SPA or built form of a small settlement

x The site is not within or adjoining the urban area or a defined settlement policy area, or within the built form of a small settlement

1b. Accessible on foot to a food store?

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

1c. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

1d. Accessible on foot or by bus to a major employer?

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.

1e. Outside, adjoining or within the air quality management area?

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

2a. Within or adjoining site of nature conservation importance

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

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

2c. Potentially able to achieve a net gain in biodiversity?

? Uncertain or insufficient information

2d. Able to link into the green infrastructure opportunity network?

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

2e. Likely to impact on an area currently providing ecosystem services.

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

3a. Proposing a renewable energy scheme or extra energy efficiency standards?

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

3b. Within or adjoining the urban area, a defined settlement policy area or 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

3c. Accessible on foot to a food store?

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

3d. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

3e. Accessible on foot or by bus to a major employer?

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.

4a. Likely to impact on designated or nondesignated heritage assets or their settings? For more detailed assessment see HELAA supporting document. www.bedford.gov.uk/LocalPlan2040

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

5a. Likely to increase future economic and employment opportunities?

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

6a. Proposing a main town centre use in, on the edge or outside of a town centre?

+ 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.

7a. Within 400m of an existing open space or proposing open space within it?

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

7b. Within 800m of a sports facility or proposing a sports facility within it?

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

8a. Likely to have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding landscape?

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

8b. Within the existing settlement form?

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

9a. On previously developed land?

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

9b. On best and most versatile agricultural land ie grades, 1, 2 or 3a?

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

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?

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

11a. At risk of flooding?

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

12a. Likely to provide a mix of housing, including affordable housing?

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

12b. Able to address a particular housing need?

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

13a. Within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed?

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

14a. Likely to encourage social cohesion?

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

14b. Likely to help make the area safer? +

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

15a. Within or adjoining the urban area, a defined settlement policy area or 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

15b. Accessible on foot to a food store?

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

15c. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

15d. Accessible on foot or by bus to a major employer?

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.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?

x Serious access constraint wider impacts

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues

+ No capacity issues

Highway comments. For more detailed assessment see HELAA supporting document. www.bedford.gov.uk/LocalPlan2040

Access is proposed onto The Baulk, however this is a PRoW with no right of way for vehicular traffic, not a highway. No traffic in the area. There is a bus stop just over 1km away however it has very irregular services. The only pedestrian access is The Baulk, a PRoW - however if this is used for vehicular access as proposed then there would then be no pedestrian access. There is no specific cycle connectivity however there are several paved PRoWs in the area which would be suitable for cycling. The Baulk is poorly surfaced and currently has no right of way for vehicular traffic. For this development to be feasible, The Baulk would need to become an adopted public highway with assoicated improvements in paving, width and maintenance. However even if this were possible, it would then remove the only pedestrian access available. The extent of the works required would be very large and require consultation with the council and highway authorities.

Contaminated Land

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

Environmental Health note

some industrial activity immediately to the south east of the site

Mineral Safeguarding Area

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

Site assessment conclusions

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