Call for Sites

Search form responses

Results for DLP Planning Limited search

New search New search
Form ID: 633

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Manor Farm, Knotting

Map 1233

Agricultural

Residential development and agricultural land

Residential development and agricultural land

Residential development and agricultural land

Residential development and agricultural land

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

15

Family houses

No answer given

15 dph

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

No answer given

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

Access can be achieved via Melchbourne Road.

Yes

No

No

No

15

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024/25

Development of this site would have particular regard to the local and site environmental context, and through good and innovative design, this incorporating suitable mitigation measures, it would ensure the site is ‘future proofed’. Additionally, new development proposals would incorporate a mix of building conversion and new build and landscaping, including suitable planting strategies so as to maximise the principles of sustainable design. The allocation and redevelopment of this previously developed site would be sustainable.

0.91

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

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

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

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

+ 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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

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

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% of the site.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

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

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

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

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

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from 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.

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

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

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

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

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

The site is located on the east side of Melchbourne Road in the village of Knotting approximately 10 miles north of Bedford town centre. The access point is feasible via Melchbourne Road, which is a 40mph road. There is no traffic congestion in the area. The closest bus stop is directly outside of the site with no frequent bus route connection. There are no footways outside of the site, cycling is possible on-road. Reduce speed limit to 30mph through the process of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) for any residential development. Development of footway is necessary along the frontage of the site.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 645

Other (please specify)

Client

Yes

Willoughby Park - Land north of Roxton Road, Great Barford

Map 1233

Agricultural

A421 bypass

Residential

Residential

Residential/community use

No

Housing

Housing , All other types

500

Family houses

No answer given

up to 40 dpha

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

No answer given

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

34.62 ha including 24 ha of land for a Countryside Park

Countryside Park and other habitat enhancements, Community Facilities, Recreation provision including a MUGA, Cycle/Pedestrians Links, Play Areas, Planting, Attenuation

Suitable access is achievable

Suitable highway access can be achieved on to and from Roxton Road. Emergency access can be achieved off Birchfield Road. Pedestrian access off Penwrights Lane

Yes

No

No

No

180

300

20

0

2024

As part of the scheme being brought forward, means of mitigating climate change in accordance with Policy 51S will be thoroughly considered and where viable can be implemented as part of the proposals. Great Barford is a key rural growth settlement identified for development which can accommodate, sustainably, a strategic scale of development which will contribute to meeting local housing requirements. The site is located within close proximity to local services and facilities which are easily accessible by foot and cycle. The enhancement and creation of additional foot and cycle paths within the scheme design further improves the permeability of the site and connections to the surrounding area including the village hall which is located on the site’s south western boundary. Facilities provided on-site will enhance the range of recreational facilities found within the village. As part of the development proposals a Countryside Park totalling 29 ha is proposed, which will both enhance the setting of the settlement overall but also makes provision for informal green/amenity space, green corridors, retention of existing features, wildlife ponds, key landscape feature, existing and proposed pedestrian footpaths as well as open land for informal recreation. A detailed Drainage Assessment has been undertaken for the site which identifies that surface water run-off from the site will be accommodated in on-site attenuation basins and discharged back into the system at greenfield run-off rate. This ensures that flood risk will not be increased elsewhere and meets the tests of paragraph 163 of the NPPF. New landscaping and planting will be introduced as part of the development, to enhance biodiversity and the site’s environmental context. The development in line with Policy 51S will seek to explore the use of renewable energy sources and the proposals will also minimise the use of water in line with Policy 52.

43.4

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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? 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.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% 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.

+ The proposal includes or is within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space that includes an equipped children’s play area of at least 200m2 .

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.

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

+ 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. , x The site is not within 800m of a facility where cultural or social activities can be accessed.

+ The proposal is for or includes a community use or is likely to promote community collaboration and social interaction eg cultural, social, leisure and sporting uses.

+ 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

Includes parts of site 355 and 604. Vehicular access is proposed onto Roxton Road at two locations, whilst pedestrian access is proposed via Penwrights Lane. Pedestrian access should also be provided onto Roxton Road with the vehicular access, connecting to the existing pavement on Roxton Road. Penwrights Lane is currently an unpaved track so will need to be paved for adequate pedestrian access. Due to the size of the development, a signalised junction may be required. There is moderate traffic in Great Barford and the large size of this development would likely worsen this. The main village bus stops are within 200m where the 905 bus provides a half hourly service between Bedford and Cambridge. Roxton Road provides an existing adequate pavement and is only a short walk from the centre of the village. Penwrights Lane could provide a good 2nd pedestrian access but would need to be surfaced. There is no specific cycle connectivity however the national cycle network joins Roxton Road about 500m NE providing off-road or quiet-road connections to Bedford and St Neots. Pedestrian access should be provided alongside the vehicular access onto Roxton Road. Penwrights Lane will also need to be paved to be adequate for pedestrian access. There may be a need for a signalised junction due to the size of the development. Consider redesignating/upgrading the pavement on Roxton Road to a shared cycle/pedestrian path to link to the existing shared path further up Roxton Road.

Nothing chosen

only concern is noise from the bypass

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 690

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Cross Weir Farm, Chapel Lane, Souldrop, MK44 1HB

Map 1233

Mixture of B8 and B1 open and enclosed commercial storage and office units.

Agricultural land

Agricultural land

Chapel Lane

Agricultural land

Yes

Housing

Nothing chosen

20

Family houses

No answer given

TBC

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

No answer given

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

Access is via a dedicated access drive/road from Chapel Lane, located on the eastern edge of the site.

Yes

No

No

No

20

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

The site is presently in commercial use (mixed B8 storage) and lies within the settlement policy area which has been defined by the planning permissions granted on the land. Development of the site for residential purposes would reflect the dominant, surrounding land-use and would create a more sympathetic edge to the village as well as contributing to meeting housing requirements in the Borough. A development scheme can be advanced that would provide for a mix of dwelling types together with greenspace and landscaping in accord with Plan requirements and would create a sustainable development form

1.66

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ 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

x Protected species could be affected.

? Uncertain or insufficient information

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

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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 is within a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

+ All or a majority of the site is 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

The site is located on the west side of Chapel Lane in the village of Souldrop approximately 10 miles north of Bedford town centre. The access point is feasible via Chapel Lane, which is a 3.5m wide road and likely not sufficient for handling additional traffic without new passing places. The closest bus stop is 450m west of the site. There are no footways outside of the site and cycling is possible only on-road. Given the residential properties on either side of Chapel Lane and the absence of verges, there is likely no possibility to increase the road width, which would be required for vehicle passing points and footways. Improved bus transport service would improve connections in the village of Souldrop, passing places and footway implementation hould be investigated on Chapel Lane.

Nothing chosen

whole of cross weir farm adjacent to residential no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 701

Other (please specify)

Agent for agent. Please contact DLP Planning

Yes

Land West of Wilden Road, Salph End Renhold. 1.16 ha

Map 1233

Unused Paddock

Agricultural fields and residential dwelling.

Field

Wilden Road and field.

Field

No

Housing

Housing

30 to 40 dwellings

Family houses

No answer given

45 dwellings / ha

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

No answer given

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

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Improvement and relocation of existing access onto Wilden Road.

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

The site is located within a sustainable location and is within walking distance of Renhold Village Hall, Renhold Post Office / Oakwood Stores, Polhill Arms Public House, Renhold VC Primary School, Mark Rutherford Upper School & Community College and Putnoe Primary School. This would reduce reliance on the use of private cars. It is also within walking and cycling distance of employment opportunity on the fringes of Bedford including at Viking Industrial Estate and Elms Farm Industrial Estate. In relation to access to public transport, the site is located approximately 280m from two bus stops, which provide services into Bedford, Ravensden, Wilden and Renhold and reduces the reliability of future occupiers on private transport. Policy Compliance Policy 51S Climate Change Strategic Approach sets out the Council’s requirements to address climate change. The preamble to the policy advises that development will be expected to address both adaptation and mitigation through water and energy efficiency, appropriate layout, design and landscaping and the use of renewable energy. There is no reason why the site could not be built out to conform with policy standards in relation to design and would be constructed in line with the latest energy standards and building regulations. The development will conform to the policies regarding landscape, biodiversity retention and enhancement and renewable energy. Additionally, the site is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 and is therefore at the lowest risk of flooding.

0.97

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy

Exclude from further assessment

Nothing chosen

Nothing chosen

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

++ 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.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ 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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? 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.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

++ 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.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

x Proposal includes a main town centre use in an out of centre location.

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.

x The site is separated from 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.

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

+ 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.

+ The development will meet identified housing 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.

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

++ 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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

Access proposed to the east of the site on Wilden Road. The site sits along a bend in the road, which is quite narrow and visibility is currently poor. There is moderate congestion in the vicinity at peak times which the site would contribute to. The closest bus stop is just 200m away on Church End, offering bus line 27, with 1 bus per hour. Wilden road is narrow and has a 1m wide footway on only one side. There are no cycling facilities in the surrounding area. Additional assessment would be required of access suitability given visibility on this sectio of Wilden Road. Footway widening required outside the site. Shared cycle paths could be implemented along Wilden Rd to the north and/or Church End. Investigate increase in bus frequency, or additional bus lines.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 754

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Land at Ford Lane, Roxton

Map 1233

Unused agricultural land

Agricultural land

Ford Lane Road/Residential

Agricultural land

Residential

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

100

Family houses , Flats

No answer given

TBC

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

No answer given

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

The current access is unsuitable/requires improvement

Access is proposed via Ford Lane, located to the south of the site.

Yes

No

No

No

100

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024 Timeframe is based on formal planning stages.

The site is presently agricultural land and lies adjoining/in close proximity to Roxton and development can be planned to positively respond to the structure, from and character of the settlement. Development of the site would have particular regard to its environmental context, including landscape and biodiversity through suitable mitigation and enhancement measures. The site is largely unconstrained and is not safeguarded for other purposes, and there are no infrastructure issues that would constrain development. The site, also, can accommodate an appropriate level of development and offers the scope to create an attractive, integrated housing area

8.72

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ 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.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

xx Development would be in flood zones 3a or 3b.

+ 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

The site is located on the north side of Ford Lane in Roxton, approximately 10 miles east of Bedford town centre. Access to the site is feasible only from a small part of Ford Lane, which is a narrow road with width of around 2.5-3m. The closest bus stop located in Bedford Road opposite the junction with Park Road approximately more than 800m northwest of the site. There is no presence of footways along the frontage of the site on Ford Lane or around the site. On the north and west side of the site, there are some cycling routes. A Transport Assessment (TA) will be required to identify the impact of traffic on the highway as well as mitigations measures. The carriageway will need to expant to 5.5m with 2.0m footways on either side of the carriageway where it is possible. From the TA should identified a consideration for satisfactory facilities for both pedestrians and cyclists, especially in Ford Lane.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

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.

Form ID: 773

Other (please specify)

PLease contact the Agent: DLP Planning Ltd

Yes

Land at High Barns Farm, Roxton, MK44 3ET 6.1 ha

Map 1233

Agricultural storage and commercial (Use Class B1, B2 and B8)

Agricultural Land

Agricultural Land

Agricultural Land

Agricultural Land

Yes

Employment

Nothing chosen

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

B1 (a-c), high calibre employment site. B2/B8 uses appropriate to the scale of the site and surrounding area

TBC - Commensurate to 6.1ha gross site area

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Access is via Woodend Lane, located to the south of the site. The access point has sufficient visibility splays onto the public highway.

Yes

No

No

No

No answer given

B Uses

No answer given

No answer given

2027/28 Timeframe based on a three-year period for marketing, establishing occupier requirements and formal planning stages.

The site, historically, was used for a mix of livestock and arable farming. Over the last 15 years however, a number of the buildings have become unsuitable for agricultural uses and redundant, and instead have become used for a range of commercial/employment purposes.

6.18

Above

None

Include in next stage of assessment

Site is available

Include in next stage of assessment

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

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

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

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

+ 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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? 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.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

0 No renewable energy generation scheme included and efficiency standards that meet normal standards.

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

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

xx A site accessibility score of 0 is recorded where 0 is more than 30 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. , xx There is no public transport within 10 minutes’ walk to enable access to a major employer.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

0 Proposal does not include a main town centre use.

Nothing chosen

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

xx The site is more than 0.5 miles from a defined settlement policy area or the built form of a small settlement.

+ All or a majority of the site is 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).

0 Residential development not proposed.

0 Residential development not proposed.

x The site is not 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.

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

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

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

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

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

Access via Woodend Road, a single track road serving this development only. As the road does not serve anywhere other than the development site, it is likely that a single track road will be sufficient, however some additional passing places are likely to be required. No other traffic problems in the area. The nearest public transport is a bus stop in the village of Roxton over 1.8km away. Woodend Road does not have any pedestrian connectivity - there is space for a footway to be constructed to connect to the footway on Bedford Road, however this is 1km so is likely not feasible. For cycle connectivity there is a shared path on Bedford Road 1km away and Woodend Lane will likely be fine to cycle along as it only serves this development. The nearest public transport is nearly 2km away and there is no pedestrian connectivity to get there. There is a shared cycle/pedestrian path on Bedford Road however this is over 1km from the site, all of which has no pedestrian infrastructure. The size of this development is unlikely to make mitigation of this scale feasible.

Nothing chosen

current agricultural and commercial use new proposed use is employment and there is no nearby NSP

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

This site is an isolated rural location and not prominently visible or easily accessible from the strategic highway network. It is therefore not a preferred location for an employment site.

Form ID: 827

Other (please specify)

Please contact the agent: DLP Planning Ltd.

Yes

Land off Memorial Lane, Felmersham 2.06 ha

Map 1233

Agricultural

Residential, School & Play area.

Agricultural

Agricultural

Village Open Space & Residential

No

Housing

Housing

Up to 30 Dwellings

Self-build/Custom build homes , Older people housing

No answer given

Up to 15 dwellings per hectare

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

No answer given

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

Access to be taken off Memorial Road.

Yes

No

No

No

Up to 30 Dwellings

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2024

The site is located in a sustainable location within the village of Felmersham and in close proximity to Pinchmill Primary School and Village Hall. Means of mitigating climate change in accordance with Policy 51S will be thoroughly considered at application stage and where viable can be implemented as part of the proposals.

2.03

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.

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

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ 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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? 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.

++ Opportunity area for fewer than 3 ecosystem services.

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.

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

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

+ The proposal includes or is within 400m walking distance of a publicly accessible open space that includes an equipped children’s play area of at least 200m2 .

x The proposal does not include and is not within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ 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.

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

0 The site is located within a source protection zone but the proposed use is unlikely to be a risk to water supplies.

+ 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.

+ The development will meet identified housing 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.

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

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

? Potential access requiring mitigation

+ No capacity issues

The site is located west of Memorial Lane in the village of Felmersham approximately 7 miles northwest of Bedford town centre and just south of the Great Ouse river. Access point to the site is feasible from Memorial Lane. No significant traffic issues in the vicinity and a development of this size is unlikely to cause significant impacts. However, Memorial Lane is likely too narrow to provide vehicle access to this number of homes. Access would likely need to be directly off Radwell Road. The closest bus stop located 350m east of the site. There is a footway along the Radwell Rd frontage of the site. Cycling is possible only by using Pavenham Road. Potential increase in the width of Memorial Lane or provision of access directly onto Radwell Road. Improve footway along Radwell Rd and consider designating a shared pedestrian/cycle path.

Likely to require contaminated land assessment and remediation if required.

no noise concerns

Entire site falls within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 852

Other (please specify)

Please contact the agent: Andrew Parry, DLP Planning Ltd

Yes

Land at Rushden Road Milton Ernest 1.39 ha

Map 1233

Employment

Highway/Commercial Uses

Open Space and Residential Use

Residential Use

Agricultural Land

Yes

Employment

Nothing chosen

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

No answer given

Nothing chosen

No answer given

B1, B2 and B8

B1, B2 and B8 TBC

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

Suitable access is achievable

Existing access off Rushden Road

Yes

No

No

No

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

2025

The site lies immediately adjacent to the Milton Ernest Settlement Boundary and is therefore well located to the village’s services and facilities which includes a public house and primary school. The Queens Head bus stop, which is within walking distance of the site, provides a regular service to and from Bedford. Development of this site would have particular regard to the environment and biodiversity within it and through suitable mitigation measures would ensure the site is future proofed (Policy 30). Additionally, proposals would incorporate landscaping and open spaces, including suitable tree planting and through design, layout and orientation maximise the principles of sustainable design. Land at Rushden Road primarily comprises previously developed land, the National Planning Policy Framework encourages the effective use of such land for redevelopment. Overall, it is considered that any future proposal would meet the Councils policy standards for new sustainable development.

1.10

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ 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

? Uncertain or insufficient information.

? 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.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

+ Proposal includes permanent economic and employment opportunities.

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

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

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

+ All or a majority of the site is 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).

0 Residential development not proposed.

0 Residential development not proposed.

+ 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

Access as existing onto the A6. No significant traffic congestion in the area. Nearest bus stops are 500m away where the number 50 bus provides a roughly hourly service between Bedford and Rushden. There is no current pedestrian access however there is a pavement 50m from the site at Butterfield Court and a large grass verge between there and the site for an extended pavement. There is no specific cycle connectivity however there are several quiet roads in the area that could be used for cycling. Extend the existing pavement from Butterfield Court to the site entrance. There is a large grass kerb in place currently so this shouldn't be a problem.

Nothing chosen

need to ensure that noise from employment use did not impact nearby residential prmeises

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

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

Form ID: 910

Other (please specify)

Please contact the agent: Andrew Parry, DLP Planning

Yes

Land at Rushden Road/ Marsh Lane Milton Ernest 5 ha

Map 1233

Agricultural

No answer given

C3

No answer given

C3

No

Housing

Nothing chosen

50

Family houses

No answer given

15-20 dwellings per net ha

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

No answer given

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

Access can be achieved via Rushden Road (A6) and Marsh Lane.

Yes

No

No

No

50

No answer given

No answer given

No answer given

During 2024/25 based on the following indicative timeframe: - Submission and determination of application – Q1 2025 - Sale of Site - Q3 2024 - Reserved Matters Application – Q4 2024/25 - Commencement Q2 2025/26 Development timeframe assumes full build out by 2026/27 (c.25-30 completions per annum) This timetable assumes no further progress with site assessment at potential allocation through the Milton Ernest Neighbourhood Plan.

The site lies immediately adjacent to the Milton Ernest Settlement Boundary and is therefore well located to the village’s services and facilities which includes a public house and primary school. The Queens Head bus stop, which is within walking distance of the site, provides a regular service to and from Bedford. The site offers the opportunity to improve residential amenity and highway safety along its frontage with the A6 Rushden Road. Development of this site would have particular regard to the environment and biodiversity within it and through suitable mitigation measures would ensure the site is future proofed. Additionally, proposals would incorporate landscaping and open spaces, including suitable tree planting and through design, layout and orientation maximise the principles of sustainable design. Assumptions for net developable area take account of substantial allowances for landscape along the north and eastern site boundary.

5.04

Above

Site not in accordance with the emerging development strategy , Site already allocated in development plan

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.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

x The site is within or adjoining a site of nature conservation importance

x Protected species could be affected.

? 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.

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% 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.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ 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

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

+ No capacity issues

A new access would have to be created onto the A6 however the proposed access location is fine. No significant traffic congestion in the area, and the development is unlikely to have more than a moderate impact. There are bus stops within 200m where the number 50 bus provides a roughly hourly service between Bedford and Rushden. Both proposed access points (A6 and Marsh Lane) have direct access to a suitable pavement. There is no specific cycle connectivity however there are several quiet roads in the area which could be used for cycling, or alternatively the existing pavement along the A6 could be widened using the verge and converted into a shared cycle path. Ensure that there is a pedestrian and cycle connection to Marsh Lane even if it is not used for vehicular access as this is a far more attractive option for pedestrians and cyclists. Investigate potential for a shared cycle path along the site frontage.

Nothing chosen

no noise concerns

Site does not fall within the boundary of a MSA.

The site has been excluded from further assessment at Stage 1. Part of the site is allocated for residential development in the Milton Ernest Neighbourhood Plan (Policy ME H1). The remainder of the site is not in a location which is in accordance with the development strategy.

Form ID: 918

Other (please specify)

Agent

Yes

Land south of Odell Road, Sharnbrook

Map 1233

Agricultural

Residential

Agricultural land/ecological habitat

Residential

highway/agricultural land

No

Housing

Housing , Retail , All other types

397

Family houses , Older people housing

No answer given

35 dwellings per net ha

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

No answer given

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

Land for up to 2FE Primary School (2ha) Land for Local Centre (1ha) 25ha minimum formal and informal open space

Land to the east of Odell Road, presents an exceptional opportunity to deliver the strategic objectives of the adopted Local Plan. The land, which is in a single ownership and is otherwise without physical constraint, adjoins the settlement edge and in close proximity to the village centre. The site, as master-planned can accommodate a substantial proportion of residential growth (circa 400 dwellings) and meet the future requirement(s) for a 2FE Primary School and the creation of a new Local Centre together with the creation of a 25ha countryside parkland greenspace area (countryside park), which will enhance local recreation, open space and green infrastructure provision. The creation of this area, adjacent to the River Gt Ouse will serve to both enhance the setting of Sharnbrook but will also provide opportunities for the delivery of ecological mitigation and enhancement. Land to be managed for Ecology and a Riverside Park would additionally introduce a series of new footpath connections, linking to those currently within the area and providing greater linkages to the open countryside

Suitable access is achievable

Access can be achieved via Odell Road and a comprehensive access and movement improvement scheme forms part of the master plan.

Yes

No

No

No

150

250

No answer given

No answer given

2026/27 - Submission and determination of application – Q2 2024/25 - Sale of Site – Q1 2025/26 - Reserved Matters Application – Q3 2025/26 - Commencement Q2 2026/27 Development timeframe assumes full build out by 2032/33 (c.50-60 completions per annum) Note that this timeframe can be achieved cumulatively with delivery of the same landowner’s interests off School Approach. This timetable assumes no further progress with site assessment and potential allocation through the Sharnbrook Neighbourhood Plan

The settlement of Sharnbrook provides a good range of local services and facilities and includes a post office, convenience store, a pharmacy, restaurants, cafes, public houses, a Sharnbrook Primary School and Sharnbrook Academy, which has a ‘good’ ofsted rating, hence its designation as a Key Service Centre. The site is well-located immediately adjacent the existing settlement form and would offer easy access to new and existing facilities on foot or by cycling as part of seeking to encourage model shift. The site would also contribute to traffic calming along the existing Odell Road and contribute to a reduction in congestion at school ‘drop-off’ and collection. Sharnbrook is also served by several bus routes, including bus route 50 (Bedford – Kettering) and bus route 51 (Bedford – Rushden Development of this site would have particular regard to the environment and biodiversity within it and through suitable mitigation measures would ensure the site is future-proofed and seeks to deliver biodiversity net gain. Additionally, proposals would incorporate landscaping and open spaces, including suitable tree planting and through design, layout and orientation maximise the principles of sustainable design.

46.76

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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk.

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ The site is not within or adjoining the air quality management area.

? The site is within the impact risk zone of an SSSI / National site network site

xx Protected species recorded on the site

? Uncertain or insufficient information

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

+ Opportunity area for 3 or more ecosystem services covers less than 25% 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

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.

+ The proposal includes or is within 800m of a publicly accessible sports facility.

? It is uncertain what effect the proposal is likely to have on the landscape / more information is required.

+ 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.

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

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

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

+ The site is likely to provide a mix of housing and include affordable housing.

+ The development will meet identified housing needs eg elderly, care, travellers.

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

+ The proposal is for or includes a community use or is likely to promote community collaboration and social interaction eg cultural, social, leisure and sporting uses.

+ 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 6 is recorded where 6 is 11 – 20 minutes’ walk

x The site is within 10 minutes’ walk of a bus stop with an infrequent bus service (less frequent than hourly each day) which enables travel 8am6pm Monday to Friday to a major employer.

+ No access constraints

? Potential capacity problem requiring mitigation

The site is located on the east side of Odell Road, in the village of Sharnbrook approximately 8.8 miles north of Bedford town centre. Congestion in the vicinity is limited to school start and finish times. There is a bus stop in the vicinity of the site near the Odell Road/School Approach roundabout. There are no footways serving the site. However, north of the Odell Road/School Approach roundabout there is a 1.6m footway on the other side of Odell Road. There are no specific provisions made for cyclists although they can use the carriageway. A Transport Assessment will be required to identify the impact of traffic on Odell Road as well at the Odell Road/School Approach roundabout. The proposal will require a road to adopted standards in accordance with Bedford Borough Council's highway standards in terms of accommodating the carriageway/footway widths and the required radius kerbs.

Nothing chosen

noise from school and Santa Pod

Part of the site falls within the boundary of a MSA.

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

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.