Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 453

Interest in land

Other (please specify)

Specify 'other' land interest

Agent

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

Yes

Address of site

Land at Chawston Lane, Chawston, Bedfordshire, MK44 3BH (see location plan)

Location plan

Show full map

Current use of land

Existing buildings comprising internet car sales with associated office, storage and workshop and agricultural land

Adjoining use to the north

Chawston Lane

Adjoining use to the south

Agricultural land

Adjoining use to the east

Contractors Depot, office and B8 storage building

Adjoining use to the west

Farm Yard

Has the site been developed previously?

Yes

Proposed primary use

Employment

Other uses proposed

Nothing chosen

Number of dwellings proposed

No answer given

Type of housing proposed

Nothing chosen

Other type of housing

No answer given

Density proposed

No answer given

Proposed tenures

Nothing chosen

Other tenures proposed

No answer given

Permanent or transit?

No answer given

Site privately owned?

Nothing chosen

Number of plots proposed

No answer given

Proposed type of employment

B1/B8 1.2 hectares (see site plan)

Gross floorspace proposed

Up to 6000 square metres

Proposed type of retail

No answer given

Net floorspace proposed

No answer given

Gross floorspace proposed

No answer given

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?

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.

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)

2025/2026

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?

2025/2026

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

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.

Attachments

No uploaded files for public display

Site size (ha)

8.26

Site size threshold

Above

Overriding constraint?

None

Stage1 conclusion

Include in next stage of assessment

Stage 2 Assessment of suitability, availability & achievability

Site is available

Stage 2 conclusion

Include in next stage of assessment

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 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

1c. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

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

+ 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.

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.

x Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers 25-50% 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 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

3d. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

3e. Accessible on foot or by bus 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?

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

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?

x The proposal does not include and is not 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?

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

9a. On previously developed land?

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

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

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

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?

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

11a. At risk of flooding?

x The majority of the site is within flood zone 2.

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

0 Residential development not proposed.

12b. Able to address a particular housing need?

0 Residential development not proposed.

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

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

14a. Likely to encourage social cohesion?

0 Neutral.

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 minutes’ walk.

15c. Accessible on foot to a primary school?

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

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

15e. Connect highway without constraint?

+ No access constraints

15f. Highway or junction capacity issues

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

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

The site is currently greenfield and employment, while the proposal aims to convert it to employment only. The site would be accessed from Chawston Lane to the North, a one lane single carriageway with no footpath or verges on either side of the road. Depending on the type of employment proposed, the small width of the road could become an issue. Chawston Lane currently connects to the A1 approximately 150m East of the site entrance. However, as part of a scheme from Highways England to improve the A428 between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbet, this junction will be closed off and a new link road connected to the A1 providing a new safer access via Roxton Rd roundabout. There are a number of dirt paths through the fields, suitable for cycling, in the vicinity. The closest bus stop is 500m from the site with 112 Ivel Sprinter stopping twice a day heading to St Neots / Biggleswade while the second closest 1km away serves the 905 connecting Bedford and Cambridge approximately twice per hour. A Transport Asssessment would be needed to assess the impact of the development on the local highway network. Improvement of pedestrian and cycle access would be needed - provision of a footpath and designated cycle path.

Contaminated Land

Nothing chosen

Environmental Health note

employment use may impact on resiential amenity

Mineral Safeguarding Area

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

Site assessment conclusions

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.