Appendix B: Assessment of Sites included in the Greater Cambridge Housing Trajectory - Allocations on the Cambridge Fringe

Object

Representation ID: 168566

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Bidwells

Darwin Green (NIAB)

287 dwellings fall within part (a) of the definition of deliverable with 330 dwellings falling within the definition of part (b).

It is likely that both Barratt and David Wilson brands will be used on the site - two sales outlets, therefore a total build rate of 124dpa.

Barratt have indicated that they expected to achieve up to 200dpa. It seems ambitious to assume that this maximum rate could be sustained across the entire build. Two local comparables:
* 'frontage' element of Darwin Green which achieved an average build rate of 34dpa.
* Trumpington Meadows which has two sales outlets and has achieved an average of 102dpa.

These comparables, by the same housebuilder and for a similar product in the same housing market, suggest a lower than average built rate. There is certainly no clear evidence that a significantly higher build rate would be realistic. There is a realistic prospect that 620 dwellings are deliverable on this site within the five-year period.

Object

Representation ID: 168567

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Bidwells

Cambridge East - land north of Cherry Hinton

Outline planning application has yet to be determined and there is an outstanding objection by the Environment Agency. Notable that the agent for the outline planning application expected approval in Summer 2019.

Marshall recently announced that they intend to relocate which will result in the closure of the airport. This may mean that the relocation of the airport equipment and infrastructure is no longer practical given that it would only be in use for a few more years.

The Councils' suggest that "there is no evidence that housing completions will not begin on site within five years". This is the wrong test for a site that only benefits from an allocation. Instead the Councils' need to provide clear evidence that there is a realistic prospect of dwellings being deliverable within the five-year period.

Given the lack of any clear evidence, it is concluded that this site should be removed entirely from the 5YHLS.

Object

Representation ID: 168568

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Bidwells

Cambridge East - land north of Newmarket Road

The Councils' have misdirected themselves by arguing that there is no evidence that housing completions will not continue to be delivered.

Hill are expected to have only one sales outlet, unless they can achieve some market differentiation across the site. It is possible that plots could be sold to other housebuilders which would increase delivery, although there is currently no evidence of this.

The site wide phasing plan clearly indicates that the primary school would be constructed following completion of the phase one infrastructure works and completed before March 2022. However, the detailed planning application for the primary school was refused in September 2019. There is nothing to prevent continuation beyond 500 dwellings without the primary school in place, however it would not be surprising if the Councils were to delay approval of further reserved matters applications.

It is realistic to assume that the site could contribute 420 dwellings to the 5YHLS. The alternative would be the 239 dwellings with reserved matters approval.

Object

Representation ID: 168569

Received: 14/10/2019

Respondent: Bidwells

Land North of Worts' Causeway

At the time that CEG responded they considered it likely that the application would be submitted in July 2019. The Council confirmed in July 2019 that an EIA would be required. This was clearly unexpected at the time the questionnaire was completed and has resulted in a delay to the application.

The Councils' state that "a revised timetable for submission of the outline planning application is being prepared". Therefore, it is not at all clear when the outline planning application will be submitted, when it might be approved, when the site might be sold to a housebuilder, when reserved matters might be submitted or when construction might start onsite.

There is no clear evidence that this site is a realistic prospect of being deliverable within the five-year period and should therefore be entire removed from the 5YHLS.