Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60718

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Wheatley Group Developments Ltd

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land to the West of Elizabeth Way, Gamlingay (HELAA site 40030)

Although much of the Greater Cambridge area has a dispersed settlement pattern, the plan does not support the 'organic' growth of smaller settlements. To ensure that local housing needs can be fulfilled and to prevent any further loss of key local services, a more flexible and tolerant approach is needed towards development in the rural area.

The sensitive development of some sites on the edge of a village would cause no significant harm. Such a pragmatic approach is often taken at appeal.

A carefully worded criteria-based policy which is supportive of organic growth adjacent to existing built-up areas would allow rural areas to thrive and is in accordance with the aims of NPPF paragraph 79.

Full text:

Although much of the Greater Cambridge area has a dispersed settlement pattern, the draft plan does not support the 'organic' growth of smaller settlements. To ensure that local housing needs can be fulfilled and prevent any further loss of key local services, a more flexible and tolerant approach is needed towards development in the rural area.

Through the application of tightly drawn settlement boundaries, development is strictly controlled on sites in the 'open countryside'. But it is not logical to treat all sites equally in policy terms. The sensitive development of some sites on the edge of a village would cause no significant harm (e.g. Land West of Elizabeth Way, Gamlingay). Such a pragmatic approach is often taken at appeal; rounding off development where there is a defensible physical boundary or allowing a high-quality development with extensive landscaping that would soften an existing harsh area of built form can be acceptable in certain locations.

Furthermore, for Minor Rural Centres such as Gamlingay the current strategy to restrict developments to an indicative maximum of 30 dwellings within settlement boundaries will not deliver the quantum of development required to meet the existing need for affordable homes as there are few opportunities for the development of sites within the existing settlement. With limited scope for development within the tightly drawn settlement boundary, it will be necessary to find suitable locations on the edge of the village. To discourage the development of less suitable sites and assist in the delivery of much-needed affordable housing, the most logical approach is to allocate further sites on the edge of sustainable villages such as Gamlingay.

Overall, a carefully worded criteria-based policy which is supportive of organic growth adjacent to existing built-up areas would allow rural areas to thrive and is in accordance with the aims of NPPF paragraph 79 which seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas by locating housing growth where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and enable villages to grow and thrive.