Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 640

Other (please specify)

Son of landowner

Yes

The Paddocks Off Silver Street Great Barford Bedfordshire MK44 3HU

Map 1233
Show full map

Agricultural

Residential

Agricultural

Agricultural

Non residential Institution (school)

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

5-6

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

No answer given

14 dph

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

Residential Care Home

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

On the Northern boundary from Silver Street. Please see the red arrow on the attached plan.

Yes

No

No

Yes

5-6

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

No answer given

No uploaded files for public display

0.37

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

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.

? 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

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.

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.

++ 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

Access onto Silver Street. Sliver Street is narrow and of poor quality, however it could be suitable for a development of this size with some resurfacing and a small amount of widening into the grass verge. Some moderate traffic in Great Barford on occasions however nothing that a development of this size will make worse. There are bus stops within 150m with a small number of infrequent local services, however 550m away are the main village bus stops where the 905 bus provides a half-hourly connection between Bedford and Cambridge. The spur of Silver Street that the site is on has no pavement and little space for pedestrians. There is a paved footpath approx 40m ESE of the site which could be connected to. There is no specific cycle connectivity however the national cycle network passes through Gt Barford so there are nearby off-road or quiet road connections to Bedford and St Neots. Resurface, widen and generally improve the Silver Street access. Look at creating a pedestrian link to the paved footpath 40m ESE of the site. If not possible, look at installing a narrow pavement along the Silver Street spur to the site.

Nothing chosen

consideration to school noise

Majority of the site falls in MSA.

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