Call for Sites Form

Form ID: 936

Interest in land

Other (please specify)

Specify 'other' land interest

Please contact the agent: Sam Franklin, Landscope

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

Yes

Address of site

Lorna's Field Pavenham Road Pavenham Bedford

Location plan

Show full map

Current use of land

Agricultural

Adjoining use to the north

Holiday Park

Adjoining use to the south

Agricultural

Adjoining use to the east

Holiday park / Agricultural

Adjoining use to the west

Residential

Has the site been developed previously?

Proposed primary use

All other types

Other uses proposed

Nothing chosen

Number of dwellings proposed

Improved access to existing and additional mobile homes (not C3)

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

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

Not stated

Description

The proposal is to create a new and improved access for an established facility with appropriate landscaping adjacent to the highway to act as a visual screen. To then provide additional mobile home pitches on the northern and d eastern sides of the site with amentity and recreational areas between the new and the existing residential area of Close Road.

Can suitable access be achieved for the site?

Suitable access is achievable

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

A new access for the existing holiday park will be incorporated into the access for the site. The access point with the Pavenham Road will be to the east of the Close road junction using the existing field access.

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)

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

16+ years (2040 onwards)

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

No answer given

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

By providing high class accommodation and amenties in a rural location locally envcouraging people to holiday in the UK rather than addining to global warming by travelling abroad.

Attachments

File: Lorna's Field Submission

Site size (ha)

4.42

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?

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

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

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access 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

x The site is 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?

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

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

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access 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?

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?

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?

x The site is located within a source protection zone and the proposed use could harm water supplies eg because it is an industrial use

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?

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

12b. Able to address a particular housing need?

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

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?

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?

x A site accessibility score of 4 is recorded where 4 is 21 – 30 minutes’ walk.

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

xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

15e. Connect highway without constraint?

+ No access constraints

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 onto Pavenham Rd is well suited and more visible than the old access point. Little to no traffic in the area. There is a bus stop 50m from the proposed access point but it only has 4-5 services per day. There is a pavement along the site frontage which connects to the nearby bus stops and Pavenham village to the west. The footpath is paved and smooth but is narrow, about 1m wide. There is no specific cycle connectivity but the road is generally quiet. Provide a connection to the existing pavement along the frontage of the site. Consider reducing the speed limit on Pavenham Rd between the site and Pavenham from 40 to 30mph to better facilitate cycling.

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.