Pigeon supports the use of a Settlement Hierarchy as part of the spatial strategy, and broadly supports the suggested tiers within it.

Pigeon does not, however, support the review of the Settlement Hierarchy in respect of Hardwick. Whilst the review acknowledges that the village is located on the planned Greater Cambridge Partnership route between Cambourne and Cambridge, only one additional point is awarded for this in the scoring calculation. This assessment fails to acknowledge the impact of the planned transport improvements along this corridor, which include the introduction of Scotland Farm Park and Ride directly opposite Hardwick, enhanced cycling connections to Cambridge and Cambourne, and the construction of a new East-West railway station at Cambourne.

Pigeon suggests that during the next stage of the Local Plan process, the Council reviews the scoring system and allocates additional points to settlements which will be significantly more sustainable, with greater access to jobs, education, health, retail and leisure and recreation facilities.

By increasing the score of Hardwick by a single point from 8 to 9 would elevate the village above or on par with many villages identified in the higher tier category of a Minor Rural Centre. These include Girton 7, Gamlingay 7, Papworth Everard 6, Willingham Everard 9.

Pigeon consider Hardwick should be elevated from a Group Village to a Minor Rural Centre, with it capable of accommodating a level of growth far above the indicative maximum housing number

Further support to this argument is offered in the role Cambourne is proposed to serve, where draft policy SC/8 seeks to increase day to day services, bring forward new employment, as well as provide improved connections to surrounding villages. A closer functional relationship between Hardwick and an expanded and better served Cambourne will improve the sustainable credentials of Hardwick.

Turning to the limit of the size of schemes within minor rural centres, group villages and infill villages, setting an indicative maximum number fails to take into account individual site circumstances, and a site-specific approach should be adopted.