GP/LC: Protection and enhancement of landscape character

Support. Reference GAM3 in Gamlingay Neighbourhood Plan (r.16)

We support the policy. In particular, it is important to consider the cumulative effect of developments and incremental change. Too often this has been neglected in the past and permission for one development has set a precedent for subsequent applications. The Important Countryside Frontages previously identified are important to the settings of villages and should be continued on the same basis as in the current Local Plan.

This is difficult when large areas are going from agriculture to housing settlements.

The remaining green gaps around Oakington should be protected because of the impact of Northstowe.

This policy makes reference to the need for protecting ‘important green gaps’ but other than reference to Longstanton and Northstowe these are not defined. It is suggested that for clarity the Council should identify what is likely to make a green gap ‘important’, taking into account the scope for landscape enhancements as part of new development.

West Wickham Parish Council support the protection of the setting of villages and the protection of designated important countryside frontages.

The Trumpington Residents' Association supports the policy. We stress the importance of the River Cam and Hobson's Brook green corridors and the landscape south of CBC around White Hill.

OBJECT

The frontage of the site owned by Mr Francis on Ditton Lane and High Ditch Road in Fen Ditton is designated as an Important Countryside Frontage in the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 -see Policy NH/13. As set out in Policy NH/13, “Important Countryside Frontages are defined where land with a strong countryside character either: a. Penetrates or sweeps into the built-up area providing a significant connection between the street scene and the surrounding rural area; or b. Provides an important rural break between two nearby but detached parts of a development framework”.

It is considered that the land off Ditton Lane does not meet the definition of Important Countryside Frontage. The development framework is not detached in this location, and all of the neighbouring residential buildings on the eastern and western side of Ditton Lane fall within the framework boundary. The surrounding rural area is not visible from the site, and therefore there cannot be a ‘significant connection’ with the rural area. The trees on the eastern boundary of the site prevent views of the surrounding rural area and would be retained as part of the promoted development, and those trees located beyond the site boundary are also likely to be retained. The proposed Wing Development at Cambridge East is located to the south-east of Fen Ditton, and will further erode any relationship between the land off Ditton Lane and the surrounding countryside and rural area in this direction; the illustrative masterplan for the Wing Development is attached to show the location of built development. It is requested that the Important Countryside Frontage designation on Ditton Lane and High Ditch Road in Fen Ditton should be reviewed and deleted.

In addition, there are a variety of designations that prevent or limit the opportunity for development in Fen Ditton, including the Green Belt, the Conservation Area, Listed Buildings, and Local Green Space. The Important Countryside Frontage designation adds a further policy layer preventing the delivery of development in those villages where it applies.

It is considered that a suitably designed development located at the southern part of the land off Ditton Lane in Fen Ditton would protect and retain the character of the site frontage, protect the setting of heritage assets, and provide additional landscaping at the site boundary. This approach would allow for some small-scale growth at Fen Ditton to meet housing and identified affordable housing needs.

Requested Change

It is requested that the Important Countryside Frontage designation on Ditton Lane and High Ditch Road in Fen Ditton is reviewed because it does not meet the definition for this designation. It is considered that the Important Countryside Frontage should be deleted in this location.

OBJECT

The frontage of the site owned by KG Moss Will Trust at land off Home End in Fulbourn is designated as an Important Countryside Frontage in the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 -see Policy NH/13. As set out in Policy NH/13, “Important Countryside Frontages are defined where land with a strong countryside character either: a. Penetrates or sweeps into the built-up area providing a significant connection between the street scene and the surrounding rural area; or b. Provides an important rural break between two nearby but detached parts of a development framework”.

It is considered that the land off Home End does not meet the definition of Important Countryside Frontage. The development framework is not detached in this location, and the neighbouring buildings to the south and west fall within the framework boundary, and as such criteria (b) is not applicable. The land off Home End is surrounded by buildings and a car park. The site is surrounded by trees and hedgerows. There are sport and recreation facilities and associated car parking areas between the site and the countryside beyond. The sport and recreation facilities include a skateboard park, bowling green (surrounded by a hedge), tennis courts (with a fence), and multi-use games area (with a fence), an equipped play area, and a sports pavilion building. The surrounding rural area is not clearly visible from the site because the sports and recreation facilities intervene, and therefore there cannot be a ‘significant connection’ between the site and the rural area. The characteristics of this site have changed significantly since the Important Countryside Frontage was first designated but the designation has never been subject to review. The site does not provide a ‘significant’ connection between the street scene and surrounding rural area, and therefore the Important Countryside Frontage Designation should be deleted from the land off Home End in Fulbourn.

In addition, there are a variety of designations that prevent or limit the opportunity for development in Fulbourn including Green Belt, Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings, Protected Open Space and Protected Village Amenity Areas. It is considered that the Important Countryside Frontage designation adds a further policy layer preventing the delivery of development in those villages where it applies.

It is considered that a suitably designed development could be delivered at land off Home End in Fulbourn to retain the character of the site frontage, protect the setting of heritage assets, and provide additional landscaping at the site boundary. This approach would allow for some small-scale growth at Fulbourn to meet housing and identified affordable housing needs.

Requested Change

It is requested that the Important Countryside Frontage designation at land off Home End in Fulbourn is deleted because the characteristics of the site means it does not meet the definition for such a designation.

• HEDGES
• Protect and enhance all existing hedges as boundary treatments.
• Replacement of hedges with wooden fencing or wire is unacceptable in Conservation Areas.
• Hedges on the older Urban fringes are an essential part of the green wildlife matrix into cities. Pressure for space by colleges home owners are removing them to make space for bins, cycle parking and car parking. This should not be allowed.
• New developments must aspire for living hedges of at least 2 metres for each house boundary markers and site boundaries.
• Plastic hedging is not acceptable.

Huntingdonshire District Council support the policy to protect and enhance the landscape character. It is considered that reference to the River Great Ouse corridor is also included in this policy. It is agreed that any development must “ Fully consider cumulative effects of development and incremental change on landscape character.”

CWWTPR contravenes policy. Development at this site has been identified as being of 'very high harm' (First Proposals Green Belt Study, 2021). Damages the setting of important conservation areas. Industrial scale development absolutely out of place in the local landscape which is open and flat. No amount of planting will hide the industrial plant.

The intent of Policy GP/LC is supported in general. However, this does not appear to be reflected throughout the draft Local Plan due to the failure to consider the consequential impact of the North East Cambridge Development on the Green Belt and corresponding Landscape Character Areas as a result of relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP).
The policy direction proposes to ‘Respect, retain or enhance local landscape character (as set out in the Greater Cambridge Landscape Character Assessment)’.https://consultations.greatercambridgeplanning.org/sites/gcp/files/2021-08/LandscapeCharacterAssessment_GCLP_210831_Part_A.pdf

The policy is understood to be required as ‘The Local Plan needs to ensure the varied character of different parts of the area is properly considered in planning decisions. Developments should respond to the local landscape character and take opportunities for enhancement.’
Responses to the First Conversation highlighted we should require developments to be in keeping with the landscape, informed by Landscape Character Assessments. We should include policies which seek to protect sensitive and valued landscapes.
Policy NH/2 of the Adopted 2018 South Cambridgeshire Local Plan states that: ‘Development will only be permitted where it respects and retains, or enhances the local character and distinctiveness of the local landscape and of the individual National Character Area in which is it located.’
The supporting Landscape character Assessment chapter 6A covering the Fen Ditton Fen Edge Chalklands Landscape character Area includes within its Specific Landscape Guidelines to ‘Ensure development is in keeping with the open, rural character’.
The proposed WWTP relocation would result in a major industrial plant located in Landscape Character Area 6A, including towers currently planned to be up to 26m high surrounded by a circular bund and fencing on top with a combined height of circa 11 m, in an area classified as Fen Edge Chalklands. This is clearly in breach of Policy NH/2 of the 2018 South Cambridgeshire Adopted Local Plan and presumably its proposed successor, Policy GP/LC.

If the current emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan is to retain an appropriate level of credibility, the consequential effects of the proposed North East Cambridge development and corresponding WWTP relocation should be considered within the Local Plan to fully assess the impacts under policy GP/LC and be included in the Greater Cambridge Strategic Heritage Impact Assessment (2021) under Policy GP/HA.

See doct

Supported : Note- Fulfilment of S/NEC Policy through relocation of CWWTP to Honey Hill is contrary to this Policy

We support this policy. Protection for Important Countryside Frontages should be maintained and south-facing sections of The Causeway, Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth with views over open fields towards Therfield Heath SSSI should be considered for designation as ICFs.

Ickleton PC strongly supports this policy in all respects.
Preservation of landscape character is vital if fostering a sense of living in a great place is desired.
We agree the setting of villages in South Cambs should be protected and enhanced. We also specifically support the continued protection of identified Important Countryside Frontages.

Fully support the proposed policy direction. Para 5.3. of Topic paper also correctly identified the importance of keeping green corridors linking the city with the country. Particularly important in West Cambridge where the historic centre is linked to the countryside through a network of green spaces, natural, seminatural, college playing fields and large gardens are important to the visual amenity , character and setting of the city and policy should ensure its protection. Landscape Character Assessment also confirms that local open spaces such as college playing fields are supporting character of Cambridge, also the important views

The general principles of policy GP/LC are supported. However, the context and application appears unclear. The relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Works under proposed Policy S/NEC to a Green Belt location characterised within the Greater Cambridge Landscape Character Assessment, would appear to be in breach of both proposed Policy GP/LC and its predecessor SCDC Adopted 2018 Local Plan Policy NH/2, yet doesn’t appear to be referenced to form a balanced view on land use.

Agree with this policy fully. However, I feel it is currently incompatible with some other policies in the Local Plan currently, notably the development of housing H1/b (148 houses built using unsuitable materials that have created an eyesore for South Cambridgeshire villages of Sawston and Babraham) and H1/c (planned additional 418 houses, which is far too high a density and will create a greater negative visual impact). This needs to be made consistent, otherwise there will be a conflict of policies.

strong support

We acknowledge the need to fully consider the effects of development and change in the landscape character. Policy should not seek to pre-judge development proposals however and instead ensure it allows for the consideration of a proposal on its respective merits. Equally it is important that policy should not focus solely on impacts and equally recognise benefits development can bring. To this end we support acknowledgement that new development can provide opportunities to enhance the landscape, such as by improving the edge of settlements.

Policy should continue to allow for the consideration of development on its own merits, alongside any potential impacts recognising that development can bring benefits in the context of landscape character.

TMLC supports the requirement that new developments should respect, retain, and enhance the local landscape character, this is an important part of a sustainable development. As mentioned in the Greater Cambridge Landscape Character Assessment (2021), Trumpington already benefits from the Trumpington Meadows Country Park, which is a nature reserve and provides pockets of tranquillity with a network of walking trails open to the public.

The First Proposals suggests that Greater Cambridge Local Plan will require developments to:

• Respect, retain or enhance local landscape character (as set out in the Greater Cambridge Landscape Character Assessment).
• Fully consider cumulative effects of development and incremental change on landscape character.
• Retain and enhance landscape features within new developments
• Protect and enhance the setting of Cambridge, including the green corridors extending into the city and along the River Cam corridor, and strengthen or recreate the well-defined and vegetated edge of Cambridge, improve visual amenity and enhance biodiversity.
• Protect and enhance the setting of the villages in South Cambridgeshire and continue to protect identified Important Countryside Frontages.
• Protect important green gaps such as between Longstanton and Northstowe.

Policy GP/LC goes on to state that the Important Countryside Frontages, identified in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018, are part of village character, and warrant continued protection.

As demonstrated in the accompanying Vision Document, Land West of London Road and the proposed development responds positively to the Important Countryside Frontage designated along London Road. The development of the Site provides an opportunity to create a gateway into the settlement, providing a transition between the wider settlement and the village. The delivery of a village park will reinstate the countryside frontage, framing the edge of the settlement and aligns with the principle of the designation.

The First Proposals document is also supported by a Landscape Character Assessment, prepared by Chris Blandford Associates (2021).

The Assessment identifies Fowlmere as having retained its small scale character and that it can be glimpsed from the wider landscape, benefitting from soft edges comprising mature hedges and hedgerow trees, shelterbelts, small fields and paddocks provide a transition between villages and the wider chalk landscape. The assessment goes on to state that “occasional lines of poplars and telegraph poles are occasional features which interrupt the skyline”.

Whilst we do not disagree with the Important Countryside Frontage designation, it should be noted that Land to the West of London Road, however, is bound by a mature hedgerow belt which dissects the Site from the wider countryside. The Site does not have long distant views to the countryside.

I wish to comment on 3 submissions following a call for sites within the Parish of Babraham: a “small“ one of 70 further houses as an extension of the next phase build adjacent to Sawston on the opposite side of the road to the current build; a submission to remove all of Babraham Institute land from the Green Belt, and the submission from Cheveley Farms for 3,500 houses. If adopted, this would appear to fly in the face of your policy. For a full comment, please refer to the submission by Patrick Axon, to which I am a signatory.

We strongly support this.

One of the challenges is that trees are needed to screen developments and maintain the green edge to Cambridge and its villages. It will typically take at least 30 years for them to grow large enough to achieve any meaningful screening. As Cambridge is growing rapidly there is a risk of significant cumulative impacts. For example, the developments at Trumpington, Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Wort’s Causeway mean that nearly the entire south eastern fringe of the city will lose its screening for 30 years. Add to this Cambridge East and the developments at west and northwest Cambridge and the impact is clearly significant. We would argue that previous policy has not been effective at protecting the setting of Cambridge from the cumulative impacts of development. As a minimum we would like the policy to require the planting of large trees so that the time taken for them to provide screening is reduced. As a good example we would highlight the trees planted in the courtyard at the new Astra Zeneca head quarters.

We support the general thrust of the policy direction. However, and consistent with comments made to other policy directions, it is considered that the policy direction will require the protection of trees of value and/or where the overriding planning balance of any development proposals outweighs their (trees) protection.

We support the general thrust of the policy direction. However, and consistent with comments made to other policy directions, it is considered that the policy direction will require the protection of trees of value and/or where the overriding planning balance of any development proposals outweighs their (trees) protection.

This policy makes reference to the need for protecting ‘important green gaps’ but other than mention to Longstanton and Northstowe these are not defined. It is suggested that for clarity the Council should identify what is likely to make a green gap ‘important’, taking into account the scope for landscape enhancements as part of new development.

Cambourne Town Council requests that there should be protection of Cambourne Country parks written into the policy. This should offer greater protection to the essential open spaces that gives Cambourne its character and landscape setting within the countryside.