Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 768

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

Land and Buildings lying to the East of Church Lane and South Side of Elliot Court, 'The Cloisters' Church Lane, Bedford, MK41 0EU 0.7 ha

Location plan

Show full map

Current use of land

Garages, church hall and dwelling houses

Adjoining use to the north

Class C3 Dwelling Houses

Adjoining use to the south

Class C3 Dwelling Houses

Adjoining use to the east

Class C3 Dwelling Houses

Adjoining use to the west

– Class D1 – Non residential institution (Place of Worship)

Has the site been developed previously?

Yes

Proposed primary use

Housing

Other uses proposed

Housing , All other types

Number of dwellings proposed

Type of housing proposed

Family houses

Other type of housing

No answer given

Density proposed

See attached site design equates to 26dph to accommodate community uses

Proposed tenures

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

D1 – Non-residential institution – Church Hall

Description

Proposed re-location of existing Church Hall

Can suitable access be achieved for the site?

Suitable access is achievable

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

Access is from the existing access onto Church Lane as shown on attached plan and through a new access from Elliott Cresent.

Is the site available for development now?

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?

2024

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

The site is within a sustainable location in close walking distance to key amenities. Renewable energy and water efficiency measures will be included as appropriate.

Attachments

No uploaded files for public display

Site size (ha)

0.73

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

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

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 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.

+ 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 the urban area.

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 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?

+ 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?

N/A in UAB

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?

+ The site is not on 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?

+ 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 the urban area.

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 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

Access using existing access on Church Lane. Most roads within 1km show moderate traffic in weekday peaks, but not directly outside the site. 6 bus services per hour 330m from the site - number 10 bus twice an hour and number 5 bus four times an hour. Adequate footway passes site, but access to site could ideally be widened and resurfaced to better accommodate wheelchair users. A shared cycle/pedestrian path is on Goldington Road 500m from the site, towards the town centre. Allowing cycles to use paved paths in Goldington Green Park would cut distance to this path to 225m. Resurface and widen footway access to site (approx 10m length). Look at allowing cycles to use paved paths on Goldington Green to give better access to Goldington Rd.

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 is suitable for allocation for residential use following the relocation of the church hall. Access should be onto Church Lane. A masterplan and design code should accompany a planning application in order to address potential impacts on the historic environment, including the nearby Grade II* St Mary's Church. Improvements to pedestrian and cycle routes, as well as enhancement of green infrastructure will also be required, as will a site specific flood risk assessment to address all sources of flooding. Site is proposed for allocation HOU6 The Cloisters, Church Lane, Bedford.

Supporting documents

File: Site layout Option 1

File: Indicative Site Layout

File: Heritage Impact Assmt