Question 47. What do you think about growing our villages?

As mentioned in response to Question 42, Thakeham consider the most appropriate siting of new development to be a flexible approach including dispersal across the District with a focus on extensions to existing villages, which the NPPF also states are the best way to achieve supply of large numbers of new homes (Paragraph 74). The current approach to small infill development within villages means that the threshold is rarely met to provide affordable housing or other community uses on-site, and s106 obligations are insufficient to enable significant infrastructure improvements. Thakeham is of the view that allocating sites for development in and adjacent to existing village settlements, will enable other uses such as new employment space, community space and new sustainable transport links to come forward for the benefit of rural communities. This will enable the benefits of economic growth of the district to be felt by these communities. The provision of new employment spaces within villages will considerably reduce travel distances across the district, helping the Councils’ to meet its net-zero carbon aspirations. South Cambridgeshire’s adopted Local Plan 2018 acknowledges that villages within the District face difficulties in securing an adequate supply of land for affordable housing to address local needs and comments that “most villages do not have housing site allocations, house prices are often high and existing social rented housing is usually under long term occupancy and rarely available to re-let.” This further reiterates the importance for new development to be allocated in villages, so that much-need affordable housing can be delivered. The Land east of Long Road, Comberton would provide a policycompliant level of affordable housing (40%), which based on 400 homes, could deliver 160 affordable homes, designed to seamlessly integrate with the rest of the development. As demonstrated in the appended Vision Document, the concept masterplan for the Land east of Long Road, Comberton could also deliver new homes and flexible co-working space as well as new open space and sustainable travel links into the centre of Cambridge. The site will help the Councils’ deliver sustainable development in a strategic location, allowing the village of Comberton to grow and thrive in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF (Paragraph 78). Please refer to the appended Vision Document titled 'Land east of Long Road, Comberton' produced by Thakeham.

We strongly support suitable growth within villages, particularly the villages located in the most sustainable locations. The focus on growing our villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within them and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers. It is important to ensure that existing businesses within the villages are able to stay open and provide services not only for the village that they are located, but also for smaller infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within and adjacent to larger settlements. Sustainably located villages such as Longstanton are ideally located and of a size to accommodate a suitable proportion of housing growth. Putting a focus on growing these would not necessarily see an increase in commuting by car and needing to travel to access services and facilities due to availability of services and easy access to public transport links. Conversely, it would assist with minimising the impact on the already at capacity highway infrastructure in and around Cambridge City Centre, which has recently had substantial housing growth. It would assist with sustainable public transport travel along The Busway from Longstanton to Cambridge City and surrounding villages and towns as a result of an expanded population. To ensure supply is maintained, local planning authorities are also required to monitor the progress in building out of sites, to comply with the housing delivery test. Currently, the supply of housing in South Cambridgeshire is only marginally above the 5-year requirement (5.05 years – Appeal Reference APP/W0530/W/19/3220761) and the Government’s recently published housing delivery figures for 2019 indicate delivery to be at 95% which, is below the government target. In addition to this, the current Local Plan 2018 for both South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City includes allocations for two new settlements at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield as well as the continued development of Northstowe. However, these larger growth sites will only be delivered later on in the plan period and as acknowledged within the Inspectors Report, there is ‘no requirement for these sites to deliver housing in the early years of the plan period and consequently there will be an opportunity to review progress through the preparation of a joint local plan.’ The Council will also be aware of the recent outcome of the Uttlesford Local Plan Examination, where the Inspector was concerned that an overreliance had been placed on the development of three new garden communities and that insufficient smaller sites had been identified throughout the rural area to ensure that a 5-year supply could be maintained. In recent years, South Cambridgeshire have focused development in larger villages and towns, of Cambridge City. This approach is supported up to a point, but it is critical that medium-sized villages such as Longstanton take some development. In recent years many villages across the Greater Cambridge area have lost vital services, such as shops which have closed, public houses have been converted into residential properties and bus services have been reduced. Longstanton is fortunate in this regard and has maintained a number of its key services and transport options. Now with much improved broadband connectivity and a significant increase in home working and ability to shop online, many of the historic barriers to sustainability in rural areas and villages are now reduced. It is therefore important to enable modest, appropriately-sized extensions to villages so that the remaining services can be supported and to enable much needed new market and affordable housing to be provided.

12.1 To deliver on the ‘Big Themes’ of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan (GCLP) and the agenda for growth in the region it is vital that villages grow commensurate to their scale and sustainability credentials. Affording sustainable levels of growth to villages will assist in safeguarding existing services, public transport links and infrastructure which local people currently rely upon. In addition, delivering growth in villages will diversify the local community and allow others to benefit from village life should they wish to do so. Martin Grant Homes Ltd also recognise the importance of ensuring development is commensurate to the size of the host settlement, as this will ensure the character and identity of the village is preserved and enhanced. 12.2 The adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 currently categorises villages into four different types (rural centres, minor rural centres, group villages and infill villages) according to how ‘sustainable’ they are in terms of facilities and services. Our client broadly agrees with the current Settlement Hierarchy in the adopted Local Plan and the need to focus larger scale development at Rural Centres. 12.3 Designated Rural Centres, such Impington and Histon, should be a focus for sustainable levels of housing growth. The opportunity for growth in these villages should be supported by a thorough Green Belt review to ensure that otherwise sustainable sites are not excluded from development. Histon and Impington has extensive and high quality public transport links which promote sustainable travel and is located immediately adjacent to the Cambridge city boundary. It is our client’s belief that living in Histon and Impington is as sustainable as living in the outer suburbs of Cambridge. 12.4 As evidenced in our client’s representations to Questions 39 and 40 the Land at Ambrose Way, Impington represents a sustainable development site for housing on land which fails to contribute effectively to the purposes of the Green Belt. Accordingly, this land should be released from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development. A residential development at this site would be capable of delivering on all four of the ‘Big Themes’ identified in the Issues and Options document.

We support this Option. It is vital that a spatial strategy is adopted which allows villages to expand and as a result, will enable local services and infrastructure to be enhanced. As a consequence, this will result in locations becoming more sustainable. As set out in our response to Question 40, the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan and in particular Policy S/10 does not allow Group Villages like Orwell to grow beyond the development framework – this cannot be considered sound. We therefore suggest a strategy is adopted which allows for villages to grow and thrive by providing opportunities for sustainable expansion alongside supporting and enhancing local infrastructure. Such a strategy will then accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’).

There is opportunity to expand existing settlements without creating new ones. Whilst there is a need for new settlements, the ability to expand existing settlements should be reviewed first. There any many settlements on the periphery of Cambridge and key service centres which would benefit from some growth. Growth of existing settlements results in improvements to community facilities and services which improves the social sustainability.

Pigeon consider that the existing villages of South Cambridgeshire offer greater potential to fulfill the needs for jobs and homes in the district than has been recognized in the current Local Plan. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas. Such an approach enables communities to grow and thrive, particularly where they benefit from location within strategic corridors where sustainable travel options exist. The community infrastructure base, whilst in many cases requiring expansion, nevertheless forms a sound base for further growth that does not exist in new settlements, for example. The net impact on the existing community of such development, where well-planned and of high quality can be positive. Moderate expansion of villages through the identification of small to medium size sites avoids many of the lead-in problems that delay delivery of development in new settlements and should form a strong element of the next Local Plan. The scale of growth proposed at villages should properly reflect improvements to the sustainability of the settlement due to planned improvements to public transport infrastructure such as those being proposed between Cambourne and Cambridge where this would not conflict with other NPPF considerations such as heritage, ecology and flood risk.

7.11 There should be more flexibility within the Local Plan to consider growing villages such as Harston, given its access to nearby services, facilities and transport links, which combine to make Harston a sustainable location for new development. Land to the south of Station Road is a sustainable location and opportunities to grow village such as Harston by allocating residential sites are considered to be part of an appropriate spatial strategy for the district. 7.12 The principle of spreading some growth (new homes and jobs) out to the villages is supported. The NPPF advises, at paragraph 78, that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. It adds that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. 7.13 The ability of new development to support rural communities is especially important given the loss of rural services experienced in recent years. The impact of these service loses on rural communities is accentuated when considering pre-existing low service levels compared to better served, urban areas. The ‘Dispersal: Villages’ option therefore presents an opportunity for sustainability enhancements within rural communities. 7.14 The approach of directing some growth to the villages should also take account of existing and proposed public transport improvements. With reference to Harston, whilst it is a relatively small village, it benefits from being within the A10 corridor, plus close proximity to further facilities and services available in nearby villages.

7.7 The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing needs towards growth at existing villages. Sustainable development in rural areas is supported under paragraph 78 of the NPPF, which requires planning policies to identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Development within existing villages can help to sustain existing and deliver new facilities and infrastructure, support shops and business uses and meet both the market and affordable housing needs of the local community.

4.69 The councils’ previous approach has been to restrict development in the villages. The NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas, paragraphs 77 to 78. Of critical importance is paragraph 78 where it states “Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where there this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.” The current adopted policy is extremely prescriptive in relation to the defined boundary and does not act in this manner. The councils have accepted that greenfield land would need to be released and we agree with the general development strategy approach to locate development in locations where people can choose to walk or cycle to local services. 4.70 To allow development in certain village that are sustainable would help to support existing facilities and provide wider opportunities in these villages and increase diversity. If a reasonable level of development is permitted this would ensure a range of house types, tenures etc and employment that would add to diversity. This would require a different approach to settlement hierarchy than in the current adopted Local Plan. If the councils are intending to be innovative, it is important that is fully taken into account in relation to how businesses and residents will communicate and use services in the future such as shops, GP surgeries etc. 4.71 We believe development should be provided within the villages to provide a balanced sustainable pattern of development for the future that allows the rural areas to complement the main strategic growth centres that are already committed and planned. The failure to identify growth within other settlements will act as a constraint and will restrict and not support the approach identified to support a thriving rural economy and provide inclusive communities. 4.72 We believe that a settlement hierarchy should be developed based on sustainability criteria for the villages. The level of services and facilities available in the villages varies significantly and this will be an important consideration. 4.73 In relation to the land the subject of these representations, the settlements should be considered as a combined assessment due to the vast range of services and facilities available. This approach is supported by paragraph 78 of the NPPF where it acknowledges that in a rural situation not all the services need or will be in one settlement. Development in one settlement can clearly support the needs of others. This supports our submissions that a more detailed assessment of services/facilities should be considered in respect of the designation for small settlements in the Plan. It is highly unusual that two villages within such close proximity offer a full range of educational services, preschool, primary schools, special needs schools, secondary school, a range of employment opportunities, new proposed cycle and footpath links and proposed improvements to existing public transport links. 4.74 The current adopted Local Plan relies heavily on the larger sites coming forward to deliver housing/employment and this can often be restricted due to the delivery of infrastructure. Smaller site allocations would provide a variety of delivery without such constraints and a broader market offering. It is important however, to ensure that sites are allocated to provide certainty.

4.68 The councils’ previous approach has been to restrict development in the villages. The NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas, paragraphs 77 to 78. Of critical importance is paragraph 78 where it states “Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where there this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.” The current adopted policy is extremely prescriptive in relation to the defined boundary and does not act in this manner. The councils have accepted that greenfield land would need to be released and we agree with the general development strategy approach to locate development in locations where people can choose to walk or cycle to local services. 4.69 To allow development in certain village that are sustainable would help to support existing facilities and provide wider opportunities in these villages and increase diversity. If a reasonable level of development is permitted this would ensure a range of house types, tenures etc and employment that would add to diversity. This would require a different approach to settlement hierarchy than in the current adopted Local Plan. If the councils are intending to be innovative, it is important that is fully taken into account in relation to how businesses and residents will communicate and use services in the future such as shops, GP surgeries etc. 4.70 We believe development should be provided within the villages to provide a balanced sustainable pattern of development for the future that allows the rural areas to complement the main strategic growth centres that are already committed and planned. The failure to identify growth within other settlements will act as a constraint and will restrict and not support the approach identified to support a thriving rural economy and provide inclusive communities. 4.71 We believe that a settlement hierarchy should be developed based on sustainability criteria for the villages. The level of services and facilities available in the villages varies significantly and this will be an important consideration. 4.72 In relation to the land the subject of these representations, the settlements should be considered as a combined assessment due to the vast range of services and facilities available. This approach is supported by paragraph 78 of the NPPF where it acknowledges that in a rural situation not all the services need or will be in one settlement. Development in one settlement can clearly support the needs of others. This supports our submissions that a more detailed assessment of services/facilities should be considered in respect of the designation for small settlements in the Plan. It is highly unusual that two villages within such close proximity offer a full range of educational services, preschool, primary schools, special needs schools, secondary school, a range of employment opportunities, new proposed cycle and footpath links and proposed improvements to existing public transport links. 4.73 The current adopted Local Plan relies heavily on the larger sites coming forward to deliver housing/employment and this can often be restricted due to the delivery of infrastructure. Smaller site allocations would provide a variety of delivery without such constraints and a broader market offering. It is important however, to ensure that sites are allocated to provide certainty.

The new Local Plan will need to plan for a significantly higher number of new homes to support the economic growth potential of the Greater Cambridge area. As part of a hybrid approach to the distribution of new development, the new Local Plan should provide greater flexibility in allowing villages to grow to ensure their future vitality and viability, especially for those villages outside of the Cambridge Green Belt. This is essential in supporting a prosperous rural economy. This approach accords with Paragraph 78 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019, which states that: “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.” The current settlement envelopes for villages, such as Guilden Morden, are so tightly drawn around the existing built-form that there is little room for villages to grow and thrive. Greater consideration needs to be given in identifying suitable land within and adjacent the village boundaries to accommodate sustainable growth, especially in non-Green Belt locations. New development which could enhance the sustainability of the community, through the provision of additional footfall and potential for new community facilities, amenities, transport improvements to be delivered alongside housing to provide a betterment to the wider community, would contribute to a sound and sustainable spatial strategy for the new Local Plan. New housing will bring new residents to help sustain the current village facilities and amenities (primary school, church, community pub). New development also offers opportunities for new community facilities to be delivered alongside housing, which can be enjoyed by new and existing residents Summary of Comments: The new Local Plan will need to plan for a significantly higher number of new homes to support the economic growth potential of the Greater Cambridge area. As part of a hybrid approach to the distribution of new development, the new Local Plan should provide greater flexibility in allowing villages to grow to ensure their future vitality and viability, especially for those villages outside of the Cambridge Green Belt. This is essential in supporting a prosperous rural economy.

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. Foxton contains a primary school, convenience store and post office, places of worship, village hall, sports and recreation grounds, public house and a cluster of business units at Burlington Park. The promoted development at land off Royston Road in Foxton would support the existing services and facilities in the village. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridgeshire. Therefore, it is requested that small sized sites such as land off Royston Road in Foxton is allocated to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including small sites that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, Foxton has a railway station and is served by buses. The Greater Cambridge Partnership has proposed two transport improvement projects in Foxton, which are the Foxton Rural Travel Hub and the Melbourn Greenway, which would deliver new walking and cycling routes and facilities. Therefore, the promoted development at land off Royston Road in Foxton would be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. As set out in the call for sites submission, there are no significant constraints to development at land off Royston Road in Foxton. The trees and hedges on the site that contribute to the landscape character would be retained as part of the promoted development, and additional planting would be provided to protect and enhance that character.

Question 47. What do you think about growing our villages? While villages may not be the entire focus for all growth, it is critical that they play a significant contribution to the overall mix of development. In particular as locations for small and medium sized sites. Moreover it is important to understand that there are several different types of villages within the Greater Cambridge area ranging from large villages with a large range of shops, services, and services, to smaller villages with fewer facilities. The level of growth being attributed to each settlement should take into account a wide range of factors and it is important that the role of new development, which is rightly identified in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan as an advantage, should not be underplayed or underestimated. Growth in villages is essential to enable them to grow and thrive and to support existing services and infrastrcuture such as public transport, schools, and shops. The growth is also essential to support a prosperous rural economy. It should also be noted that some of the challenges identified within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan may not necessarily be applicable to all villages. For example, under section 5.3.3 of the Plan, it identifies that spreading homes to villages 'Can result in increased commuting by car, and travel to access…services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors'. In this instance, Scott Propoerties' site to the south of The Causeway, Kneesworth SG8 5JD is located within close proiximity to local shops, services, schools, and facilities including medical facilities, together with regular bus services. Furthermore, the town of Royston lies just 1.5 miles to the south of Kneesworth and contains a full range of services, retail offers, employment opportunities and leisure and recreational facilities. It also has a mainline railway station providing regular services to London and Cambridge. In settlement hierarchy terms Royston is a Market Town, a higher tier in sustainability terms than any of the settlements in South Cambridgeshire a factor which should not be overlooked. Accordingly, we consider that the site is in a highly sustainable rural location. Summary of Comments: Support for a strategy that includes growth in villages at a level that is commensurate with their size and scale and enables sustainable growth.

The dispersal of development in the Greater Cambridge villages is considered to be a suitable option for accommodating the housing and employment needs of the Greater Cambridge area. The NPPF aims to significantly boost the supply of housing by ensuring that sufficient land is available to meet the needs of the population. Whilst there is an existing 20% buffer applied as part of the Local Plan in accordance with the NPPF, it is considered that consistent under-delivery over the Plan period will affect the requirement for housing in the new Plan period. The forthcoming Plan will be required to ensure that an appropriate amount of housing, particularly affordable housing is delivered which also takes into account any historic underdelivery from the previous Plan period. With particular regard to rural housing, paragraph 77 of the NPPF states that planning policies should reflect the local housing need and support development which meets this need. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF sets out that to deliver sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will maintain or enhance the viability of the rural community. The Greater Cambridge Issues and Options document acknowledges that there are problems with the long-term sustainability of its villages due to an ageing population and a decline in existing services and amenities. As such, para 78 of the NPPF is relevant, which requires planning policies to ensure that housing is delivered in rural communities to ensure they grow and thrive. South Cambridgeshire District Council has a track record of the under-delivery of housing, particularly affordable housing. The 2019 Annual Monitoring Report shows that only 25% of housing delivered was affordable. The Greater Cambridge Housing Delivery Strategy acknowledges the unaffordability of housing within Cambridge, and states that a greater proportion of affordable housing is required in the greater Cambridge area. This requires the allocation of a variety of sites to meet local needs and to ensure the sustainability of village settlements. The Greater Cambridge Issues and Options document states that smaller sites are unlikely to contribute to improvements to infrastructure. We therefore consider that the Plan should consider the allocation of sites larger than 1ha on sustainable sites within villages in order to provide opportunities for new homes and public benefits. The addition of new homes and employment opportunities into the rural communities in the borough would assist in diversifying the population and ensure that sustainable, balanced communities are delivered. Summary of Comments: Para 78 of the NPPF requires planning policies to ensure that housing is delivered in rural communities to ensure they grow and thrive. The Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy also notes that existing villages have an ageing population and there is a decline in the provision of amenities and services in rural communities. There is therefore a need to inject new market and affordable housing in rural areas to ensure balanced and mixed communities are established, which in turn ensures that local facilities and amenities continue to be retained.

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. The promoted development at land west of Linton could support the existing services and facilities within the village, including the primary schools, secondary school, convenience stores and post office, village hall, health services including a medical centre, public houses, cafes and restaurants, and bus services. The promoted site is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village and to employment at Granta Park. The site would be well-related to the transport infrastructure improvements proposed in the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Cambridge South East Transport project, including cycle routes to Granta Park and Babraham Research Campus, travel hubs, greenways, and the new public transport route into Cambridge. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years, and that such sites are located within villages in South Cambridgeshire. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridge. Therefore, it is requested that small/medium sized sites, such as land west of Linton, are allocated in the emerging GCLP to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including those that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, the promoted development at land west of Linton is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport, and would be well-related to the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s proposed Cambridge South East transport improvement projects including public transport route. A Vision Document has been prepared for the promoted development, which was submitted with the call for sites response. The key design principles for the proposed development are as follows: • To respect the heritage assets and the setting of the Grade II Listed cottages at Little Linton Farmhouse. • To protect the existing landscape character and existing habitats and ensure an acceptable impact on River Granta Meadows. • To maintain existing views across the site. • To provide a sustainable drainage system for the proposed development including attenuation ponds, swales and permeable paving. • To prove suitable access points and pedestrian connections for the proposed development. • To provide a noise buffer to separate the main road from dwellings. • To maintain an easement from the high voltage overhead cables and pylon. • To deliver a high quality development that is consistent with the character of Linton and the surrounding area.

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. The sites promoted for development by EDBF would support the existing services and facilities within those villages, typically including the convenience/village stores, primary schools, and bus services. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years, and that such sites are located within villages in South Cambridgeshire. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridge. Therefore, it is requested that small/medium sized sites, including those promoted by EDBF, are allocated in the emerging GCLP to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including those that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of planmaking. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, the sites promoted for development by EDBF are mostly accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the villages, and in some cases are well-related to the transport improvement projects proposed by Greater Cambridge Partnership.

The CDF does not propose specific sites. Our response supports development which delivers new homes which are accessible to public transport, local services and jobs, where, with quality design, affordable housing across a range of tenures can be delivered seamlessly as part of the community. Priority should be given to densification in urban areas and previously developed land as well as to development along public transport corridors and on the edge of Cambridge, where housing and jobs can be delivered most sustainably having regard to the goal of achieving net zero carbon by 2050. No one option will provide the level of housing delivery that the local plan identifies as being required and therefore a mixed strategy will be required. Small and medium sized sites should also play a part in this, supporting and enhancing the sustainability of rural communities and providing a proportionate level of growth where needed. We believe that a focus on a mixed strategy is best advocated which is resilient and flexible and provides the homes needed quickly and reliably. The major strategic sites do provide a subsistence level of delivery, but they don’t provide the necessary choice to meet demand and generally provide below policy levels of affordable housing.

A good idea if it is done sensitively and helps the village community, its schools, shops businesses and churches etc to thrive.

43. At present, Cambourne is classified as a Rural Centre in the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. Rural Centres are the largest, most sustainable villages within the district. However, since the adoption of the Local Plan, Cambourne has been reclassified as a town. As such, the 6 settlement hierarchy within the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan must be updated to reflect this significant change. 44. Additionally, Cambourne is the largest and most sustainable settlement in South Cambridgeshire. The Cambourne West development is one of four linked villages alongside Great Cambourne, Lower Cambourne and Upper Cambourne which make up the new settlement. These villages provide Cambourne with an exemplar range of jobs and services including new schools, community and leisure facilities and employment opportunities, particularly at Cambourne Business Park. 45. These services, alongside the recent announcement of the preferred route of the East West Railway between Bedford and Cambridge with a new station at Cambourne as well as plans for the Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) to link Cambourne to Cambridge City Centre, make the settlement the optimum location for additional growth moving forward. 46. The Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) have confirmed that the Cambourne to Cambridge Public Transport Route is a priority project and will form the first phase of the CAM. The project will deliver a reliable and sustainable public transport service between Cambourne and Cambridge, as well as new cycling and walking facilities into the city. The GCP have recognised that a new reliable, public transport route will create sustainable travel choices, connect communities and support growth. 47. Furthermore, the planned location for the new Cambourne Rail Station to serve the East West Rail service to the south of Cambourne, make this area an opportune location for considering future growth opportunities. There will inevitably be demand for infrastructure in the form of shops, business and homes around the new station and location for this growth should be considered as part of the Greater Cambridge Plan. 48. Given this, the settlement boundaries for Cambourne should be reconsidered and reassessed to allow for further sustainable development to come forward. Significant flexibility should be given towards the development of housing and jobs on the edges of Cambourne to provide a sustainable location growth.

8.7 The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing needs towards growth at existing villages. Sustainable development in rural areas is supported under paragraph 78 of the NPPF, which requires planning policies to identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Development within existing villages can help to sustain existing, and deliver new, facilities and infrastructure, support shops and business uses and meet both the market and affordable housing needs of the local community. 8.8 The sites are a sustainable location for development and a significant opportunity to support Papworth. The development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to Papworth and the local area, including: ● A landowner who wishes to work with the community in order to shape a proposal which meets the needs of and can provide wider benefits to the village. VJF own extensive areas of land in and around Papworth and have the ability to provide community facilities or areas based on the needs of local residents; ● Locating residential development in a sustainable location, within close proximity to existing and proposed services, facilities, infrastructure and employment opportunities; ● The opportunity to deliver a substantial amount of affordable housing to help meet the needs of Papworth and the wider District, including the potential to possibly deliver an element of custom and self-build; ● Delivery of a substantial amount of open space which would be accessible to new and existing residents and would provide connectivity with the allocated recreation ground extension; ● Supporting Papworth’s economy, including local shops and services; and ● Enhancing biodiversity levels across the sites. The site is predominantly agricultural land and can currently be considered to be of low ecological value. The proposals present an opportunity to deliver a biodiversity net gain of at least 10%.

Summary: As part of a hybrid approach to the distribution of new development, the new Local Plan should provide greater flexibility in allowing villages to grow to ensure their future vitality and viability, especially for those villages outside of the Cambridge Green Belt. The new Local Plan should allocate new employment sites in the rural area, which can support local business needs. This is essential in supporting a prosperous rural economy as required under Paragraph 83 and 84 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. Full text: As part of a hybrid approach to the distribution of new development, the new Local Plan should provide greater flexibility in allowing villages to grow to ensure their future vitality and viability, especially for those villages outside of the Cambridge Green Belt. The new Local Plan should allocate new employment sites in the rural area, which can support local business needs. This is essential in supporting a prosperous rural economy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. In particular, Paragraph 84 states that: “Planning policies and decisions should recognise that sites to meet local business and community needs in rural areas may have to be found adjacent to or beyond existing settlements, and in locations that are not well served by public transport. In these circumstances it will be important to ensure that development is sensitive to its surroundings, does not have an unacceptable impact on local roads and exploits any opportunities to make a location more sustainable (for example by improving the scope for access on foot, by cycling or by public transport). The use of previously developed land, and sites that are physically well-related to existing settlements, should be encouraged where suitable opportunities exist. both through conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings.”

Please see section 8.0 of the accompanying representations document.

52. Please refer to response to Question 40.

A. Please refer to response to Question 40. B. Additionally, we believe it is important that growth in villages is planned for in the Local Plan and not restricted by existing or emerging Neighbourhood Plans. It is for the strategic plan to lead on the overall strategy and to not allocate land in villages in our view would be a serious omission which would put the delivery of the housing requirement at risk, particularly in the short term. C. With reference again to the recent St Albans experience, it was clear from the first week of the examination hearing sessions that the lack of consideration given to small sites and a reliance on strategic scale development was a serious failing of the plan which caused the examination to be halted. The GC Authorities can avoid this by planning positively for small sites in villages, which we believe should play a key role in the strategy.

ELB2216 219082 Page 5 of 7 Below, we address the advantages and challenges associated with our preferred option, identified in the Plan. Q 47: What do you think about growing our villages? Advantages 1. Can help to sustain existing facilities and infrastructure in the village. We agree that new development in villages can achieve this objective. 2. Can help provide for a diversity of population in the village. We agree that new development in villages can achieve this objective. Additional advantages which should be recognised in the Plan are that: • Such developments help to meet local housing need and often incorporate an element of affordable housing which helps local families to stay in the area; • New development may not just sustain existing facilities but also offers opportunities for increasing choice and capacity of facilities, enabling villages not to stay the same but to grow and thrive; and • Growing the villages will take some of pressure off urban areas, and spreads the impacts of development more fairly across a given area. Clearly such an approach needs to be supported by infrastructure in the form of school places, health and community facilities, and improvements to highways and public transport. Challenges 1. Can result in increased commuting by car and travel to services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors. Although this may be the case in some settlements, Melbourn and Meldreth are highly sustainable settlements which provide for everyday needs and are well serviced by the train service at Meldreth which connects the villages to Cambridge and London. 2. Small sites are unlikely to significantly contribute to infrastructure so services capacity within or accessible to a particular village is important. This may be the case for speculative, unplanned development, but if smaller sites are allocated as part of a clear spatial strategy in the Plan, and the Infrastructure Delivery Plan clearly sets out what is required, smaller sites can contribute on a proportional and reasonable basis to local infrastructure requirements, subject to those contributions passing the obligations tests set out in paragraph 56 of the NPPF. 3. Potential impact on village character needs to be considered. ELB2216 219082 Page 6 of 7 Village character is an important consideration. However, the majority of new developments are located on edges of villages away from the historic core. My client’s sites are all located in areas where they would not have a detrimental impact on the historic character of either Melbourn or Meldreth. The site at ‘The Moor’, lies some 400m north of the Conservation Area in Melbourn and is opposite post war, 1960’s housing. In Meldreth, my client’s site lies some 800m from the historic village core. Development of each site would be read in the context of other recent development, on Chiswick End adjacent to 1980s and recent housing development. 4. Some of the larger, better served villages are surrounded by the Green Belt. This is not a reason to discount this option. The assessment of the sites around villages should be undertaken initially on a ‘policy off’ basis, to objectively assess each site, but then the Council needs to take decisions about whether in light of guidance which states that ‘all reasonable alternatives’ are explored before land is released from the Green Belt, sites adjacent to non Green Belt villages are allocated. Although some of the villages in the Green Belt may be well served by services and facilities, development adjacent to them would result in loss of land which fulfils the purposes of the Green Belt. There are many villages which lie outside the Green Belt, such as Melbourn and Meldreth, which are also well served by local shops, facilities, employment opportunities and public transport provision.

While villages may not be the entire focus for all growth, it is critical that they play a significant contribution to the overall mix of development. In particular, as locations for small and medium sized sites. 212259/Page 6 xx 24th February 2020 Our client strongly supports suitable growth within villages, particularly the villages located in the most sustainable locations. Fowlmere is one such of these villages. Moreover it is important to understand that there are several different types of villages within the Greater Cambridge area ranging from large villages with a large range of shops, services, and services, to smaller villages with fewer facilities. The level of growth being attributed to each settlement should take into account a wide range of factors and it is important that the role of new development, which is rightly identified in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan as an advantage, should not be underplayed or underestimated. Growth in villages is essential to enable them to grow and thrive and to support existing services and infrastructure such as public transport, schools, and shops. The growth is also essential to support a prosperous rural economy. The focus on growing in the villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within them and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers and diversifying the housing mix. It is important to ensure that existing businesses within the villages are able to stay open and provide services not only for the village in which they are located, but also for smaller infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within and adjacent to larger settlements. It should also be noted that some of the challenges identified within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan may not necessarily be applicable to all villages. For example, under section 5.3.3 of the Plan, it identifies that spreading homes to villages 'Can result in increased commuting by car, and travel to access…services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors'. In this instance, the land at Triangle Farm is located within close proximity to local shops and services and has a with regular bus services. The NPPF paragraph 122 states that “the availability and capacity of infrastructure and services – both existing and proposed – as well as their potential for further improvement and the scope to promote sustainable travel modes that limit future car use”. National policy clearly identifies existing settlements with infrastructure and services as prime locations for residential development, such as this site.

Question 47. What do you think about growing our villages? While villages may not be the entire focus for all growth, it is critical that they play a significant contribution to the overall mix of development. In particular as locations for small and medium sized sites. Moreover it is important to understand that there are several different types of villages within the Greater Cambridge area ranging from large villages with a large range of shops, services, and services, to smaller villages with fewer facilities. The level of growth being attributed to each settlement should take into account a wide range of factors and it is important that the role of new development, which is rightly identified in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan as an advantage, should not be underplayed or underestimated. Growth in villages is essential to enable them to grow and thrive and to support existing services and infrastrcuture such as public transport, schools, and shops. The growth is also essential to support a prosperous rural economy. It should also be noted that some of the challenges identified within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan may not necessarily be applicable to all villages. For example, under section 5.3.3 of the Plan, it identifies that spreading homes to villages 'Can result in increased commuting by car, and travel to access…services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors'. In this instance, Scott Propoerties' site to the West side of South Street, Comberton is located within close proiximity to local shops and services with regular bus services. Accordingly, we consider that the site is in a highly sustainable rural location within the South Cambridgeshire District. Summary of Comments: Support for a strategy that includes growth in villages at a level that is commensurate with their size and scale and enables sustainable growth.

Question 47. What do you think about growing our villages? While villages may not be the entire focus for all growth, it is critical that they play a significant contribution to the overall mix of development. In particular as locations for small and medium sized sites. Moreover it is important to understand that there are several different types of villages within the Greater Cambridge area ranging from large villages with a large range of shops, services, and services, to smaller villages with fewer facilities. The level of growth being attributed to each settlement should take into account a wide range of factors and it is important that the role of new development, which is rightly identified in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan as an advantage, should not be underplayed or underestimated. Growth in villages is essential to enable them to grow and thrive and to support existing services and infrastructure such as public transport, schools, and shops. The growth is also essential to support a prosperous rural economy and, is recognised in paragraph 78 of the NPPF. It should also be noted that some of the challenges identified within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan may not necessarily be applicable to all villages. For example, under section 5.3.3 of the Plan, it identifies that spreading homes to villages 'can result in increased commuting by car, and travel to access…services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors.' In this instance, Scott Properties' Site to the east of Ditton Lane, Fen Ditton, is located within close proiximity to local shops and services with regular bus services. Cambridge City boundary abuts the Site to the south and contains a full range of services, retail offers, employment opportunities and leisure and recreational facilities. It also has a mainline railway station providing regular services to London, Birmingham, Stansted Airport, Ely, Ipswich and Brighton. Newmarket Road Park and Ride is also within walking distance. Accordingly, we consider that the Site is in a highly sustainable rural location within the South Cambridgeshire District, and is an appropriate area for growth. There is a clearly defined need for specialist accommodation within Fen Ditton, as shown in the Experian report and the Specialist Accommodation Needs Assessment accompanying this submission, which supports the allocation of the Site for c.30 single storey dwellings specifically designed for those aged 55 and over as well as those with or supporting someone with a disability. In addition, and as shown in the Context & Planning Policy Plan accompanying these submissions, the Site is located within 0.5km of the doctor's surgery, and represents the only suitable site within Fen Ditton with this credential. Summary of Comments: Support for a strategy that includes growth in villages at a level that is commensurate with their size and scale and enables sustainable growth.

2.86 See response to Q42.

Please see section 8.0 of the accompanying representations document.