Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 602

Interest in land

Other (please specify)

Specify 'other' land interest

Land Promoter

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

Yes

Address of site

Land east of Hookhams Lane, Salph End, Renhold

Location plan

Show full map

Current use of land

Agriculture

Adjoining use to the north

Site adjoins a live application to the west for 28 dwellings (19/02194/MAO). To the north are residential properties fronting Hookham Lane. To the south is Crossways Nursing Home and to the east is a strong tree belt with agricultural fields beyond. The Location Plan provides the boundary of the site that is being promoted by Gladman. However, a Concept Plan also accompanies the submission demonstrating how the site functions along side the live planning application to the west.

Adjoining use to the south

No answer given

Adjoining use to the east

No answer given

Adjoining use to the west

No answer given

Has the site been developed previously?

Proposed primary use

Housing

Other uses proposed

All other types

Number of dwellings proposed

Circa 100 dwellings, but the scale if flexible and to be discussed with the Council.

Type of housing proposed

Family houses , Self-build/Custom build homes

Other type of housing

No answer given

Density proposed

30 dph (this is also flexible and to be discussed with the Council).

Proposed tenures

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

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

No answer given

Gross floorspace proposed

No answer given

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

The site is capable of delivering community uses, which will be discussed with the Council.

Description

The type of use will consulted on with the Council and local community.

Can suitable access be achieved for the site?

Suitable access is achievable

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

Access has been demonstrated through the application to the west for 28 dwellings (19/02194/MAO)

Is the site available for development now?

Yes

Is the site currently subject to a planning application?

Is the site currently being marketed?

Don't know

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

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

100

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?

2026/20207

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

The proposals will accord with the Council’s Local Plan climate change policies. Gladman welcomes a meeting with the Council to discuss the Council’s policy climate change policies and how the scheme can be shaped to meet those targets. An initial concept plan has been provided as part of this Call for Sites Consultation. This is indicative at this stage but can used as basis for early discussions on the design of the proposals, including climate change objectives.

Attachments

File: Location and concept plan

Site size (ha)

5.93

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

? The site is within or adjoining 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?

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 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?

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

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?

? The site is within or adjoining 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?

++ A site accessibility score of 8 is recorded where 8 is 0 – 10 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?

0 Proposal is not employment related.

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?

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

9a. On previously developed land?

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

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

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

10a. Within a groundwater source protection zone?

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

11a. At risk of flooding?

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

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?

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

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? +

+ 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?

? The site is within or adjoining 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?

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

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

15e. Connect highway without constraint?

x Serious access constraint wider impacts

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

Access is dependant on a live application to the west (19/02194/MAO) on Hookhams Lane requiring demolition of an existing residential property (see site 680 below); however a search of the Bedford planning portal indicates that this was refused in Oct 2020. There is moderate congestion in the area during peak times, which this development would contribute to. The closest bus stop is 450m North on Hookhams Lane, with bus line 27, which offers a service of 1 bus per hour. A shared cycle route is just 160m south of the site entrance. Access does not currently appear possible given the rejection of planning permission for demolition of the existing property to the west. Footway would require widening and improving to meet required standards. Connection should be provided to shared cycle path to the south of the site.

Contaminated Land

Nothing chosen

Environmental Health note

no noise concerns

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.