S/DS: Development strategy

Showing comments and forms 31 to 60 of 243

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57104

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Julian Francis

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land off Ditton Lane at jenction with High Ditch Road, Fen Ditton (HELAA site 48148)

Additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing need to be identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

Small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages in the rural area on the edge of Cambridge including Fen Ditton, because it is accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within the village, and there is an identified need for affordable housing in the village.

Land off Ditton Lane in Fen Ditton should be allocated in emerging GCLP for residential development.

Full text:

OBJECT

Mr Francis is promoting land off Ditton Lane in Fen Ditton for residential development, and...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57113

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridge District Oddfellows

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land at Two Mill Field (HELAA site 40419) & land north of Oakington Road (HELAA site 40247)

Additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing need to be identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

Small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area, including Cottenham, because those villages are accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within those villages, and there is an identified need for affordable and community land trust housing in those villages.

Land at Two Mill Field and the land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham should be allocated in emerging GCLP for residential development.

Full text:

OBJECT

Cambridge District Oddfellows is promoting land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakingt...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57114

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridge District Oddfellows

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

It is requested that the status of Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy is not altered, and it remains as a Rural Centre.

Full text:

OBJECT

It is proposed in Policy S/SH that Cottenham should be reclassified as Minor Rural Centre. ...

OBJECT

It is proposed in Policy S/SH that Cottenham should be reclassified as Minor Rural Centre. The reason for this reclassification is because Cottenham does not have a high quality public transport in the form of a segregated transport route i.e. access to a Greater Cambridge Partnership scheme or the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway. Cambridge District Oddfellows object to the reclassification of Cottenham when the village has all of the other attributes of a Rural Centre, and the existing bus services are good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership is bringing forward a project to improve the services and connections.

Cottenham has a good range of services and facilities including a supermarket and convenience stores, post office, doctors surgeries, dentist, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, bank, primary school and secondary school, village hall and meeting spaces. Cottenham is currently connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. The Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop at Oakington is approximately 3.5km from the centre of Cottenham. The Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project proposes substantial improvements to the bus services for Cottenham, including a bus every 10 minutes to Cambridge via Histon, a more frequent service to Oakington (including the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop), and a more frequent rural service to Chatteris via Wilburton, Haddenham, Sutton and Mepal. It is acknowledged that the public transport routes from Cottenham are not segregated, but the current bus service is good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project will improve the quality of the bus services from the village including connections to the Cambridge Guided Busway at Oakington. The Making Connections project has not been taken into account in the decision to reclassify Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy. The frequency of the bus services from Cottenham to Cambridge would be equivalent to those on a segregated bus route. For all these reasons, Cottenham should remain as a Rural Centre.

Requested Change

It is requested that the status of Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy is not altered, and it remains as a Rural Centre.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57121

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: KG Moss Will Trust & Moss Family

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land off Home Road, Fulbourn (HELAA site 40522) & Land at Court Meadows, off Balsham Road, Fulbourn (HELAA site 40523)

Additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing need to be identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

Small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages in the rural area on the edge of Cambridge including Fulbourn, because it is accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within the village, and there is an identified need for affordable housing in the village.

Land off Home End and the land at Court Meadows House off Balsham Road (as amended) in Fulbourn should be released from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development.

Full text:

OBJECT

KG Moss Will Trust is promoting land off Home End and the Moss Family is promoting land at ...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57150

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Southern & Regional Developments Ltd

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land at Bannold Road Waterbeach (HELAA site 40466); Land off Kingfisher Way, Cottenham (HELAA site 40472); Land to the north of Cottenham (HELAA site 59386); Land at Boxworth End Swavesey (HELAA site 40506); and Land at Priest Lane, Willingham (HELAA site 40468)

Policy S/JH should ensure that housing is provided across the settlement hierarchies; so in larger settlements as well as smaller rural communities to ensure that the policy meets the objectives of supporting and promoting the provision of balanced and mixed communities. The current strategic approach to accommodating development is not considered to be in accordance with the principles outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Full text:

Given that the Greater Cambridge area includes vastly different spatial characteristics ranging from...

Given that the Greater Cambridge area includes vastly different spatial characteristics ranging from dense urban landscapes to rural village locations, Policy S/JH should ensure that housing is provided across the settlement hierarchies; so in larger settlements as well as smaller rural communities to ensure that the policy meets the objectives of supporting and promoting the provision of balanced and mixed communities. The current strategic approach to accommodating development is not considered to be in accordance with the principles outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework.
Concern is raised that insufficient land is being allocated to the rural area overall and too much emphasis is being placed on Cambridge City and new settlements and this focus could lead to problems associated with infrastructure and housing delivery.
Whilst it is recognised that the use of brownfield land is encouraged and this accords with the provisions of the Framework, this should not be at the expense of ensuring that the right sites are allocated in the right places. Not all brownfield land will be appropriate to allocate for development, as sites can be blighted by contamination, have complex ownership issues that affect delivery or be too small or inadequately accessed. There will be a need for greenfield development as well as consideration of Green Belt release to ensure that the demanding housing requirements for the LPA are met. Greenfield sites also offer the opportunity for good levels of affordable housing to be provided that often causes a viability issue in the development of brownfield sites. Furthermore, it is considered that a higher quantum of homes are allocated within the plan period. The current scale of growth is considered inadequate particularly within the rural area, the development strategy proposed is not effective and could threaten the long-term viability of villages.
The following sites have been promoted through previous iterations of the plan and through the Call for Sites process and should be allocated for development:
Land at Bannold Road Waterbeach (ref 40466)
Land off Kingfisher Way, Cottenham (ref 40472)
Land to the north of Cottenham (new site)
Land at Boxworth End Swavesey (ref 40506)
Land at Priest Lane, Willingham (ref 40468)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57195

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: European Property Ventures (Cambridgeshire)

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land at Dry Drayton Road, Oakington (HELAA site 51617) & Land at Fen End, Willingham (HELAA site 40469)

Concern is raised that insufficient land is being allocated to the rural area overall and too much emphasis is being placed on Cambridge City and new settlements and this focus could lead to problems associated with infrastructure and housing delivery. Whilst it is recognised that the use of brownfield land is encouraged and this accords with the provisions of the Framework, this should not be at the expense of ensuring that the right sites are allocated in the right places

Full text:

Given that the Greater Cambridge area includes vastly different spatial characteristics ranging from...

Given that the Greater Cambridge area includes vastly different spatial characteristics ranging from dense urban landscapes to rural village locations, Policy S/JH should ensure that housing is provided across the settlement hierarchies; so in larger settlements as well as smaller rural communities to ensure that the policy meets the objectives of supporting and promoting the provision of balanced and mixed communities. The current strategic approach to accommodating development is not considered to be in accordance with the principles outline in the National Planning policy Framework.
Concern is raised that insufficient land is being allocated to the rural area overall and too much emphasis is being placed on Cambridge City and new settlements and this focus could lead to problems associated with infrastructure and housing delivery.
Whilst it is recognised that the use of brownfield land is encouraged and this accords with the provisions of the Framework, this should not be at the expense of ensuring that the right sites are allocated in the right places. Not all brownfield land will be appropriate to allocate for development, as sites can be blighted by contamination, have complex ownership issues that affect delivery or be too small or inadequately accessed. There will be a need for greenfield development as well as consideration of Green Belt release to ensure that the demanding housing requirements for the LPA are met. Greenfield sites also offer the opportunity for good levels of affordable housing to be provided that often causes a viability issue in the development of brownfield sites. Furthermore, it is considered that a higher quantum of homes are allocated within the plan period. The current scale of growth is considered inadequate particularly within the rural area, the development strategy proposed is not effective and could threaten the long-term viability of villages.
The following sites have been promoted in earlier iterations of the plan and through the Call For Sites process and should be allocated for development:
Land at Dry Drayton Road, Oakington (ref 51617)
Land at Fen End Willingham (ref 40469)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57202

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: MPM Properties (TH) Ltd and Thriplow Farms Ltd

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Grain Store site, off Lodge Road, Thriplow (HELAA site 47379)

Additional sites need to be identified and allocated for development, including in the rural area to ensure the development strategy is deliverable and sound. Additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing need to be identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East and to provide a balanced and deliverable strategy..

Full text:

These representations to Policy S/DS are focussed on the preferred development strategy for the rura...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57301

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ann Josephine Johnson

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford (HELAA site 45545)

Support the allocation at land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford (Site Ref. S/RSC/HW) for 100 dwellings. Rural Southern Cluster is an appropriate location for additional development because of close proximity to employment opportunities and good accessibility by sustainable modes of transport. There are exceptional circumstances to justify release of land from Green Belt, related to significant need for housing and affordable housing and need to support economic growth. Release of land from the Green Belt is consistent with national policy. Identified need for affordable housing in Great Shelford and Stapleford, and no other realistic options have been identified. HELAA identify some constraints to the development, but suitable and deliverable mitigation measures have been identified to address those constraints. Land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford scores well in Sustainability Appraisal.

Full text:

SUPPORT

Mrs Johnson owns land included within the preferred allocation at land between Hinton Way ...

SUPPORT

Mrs Johnson owns land included within the preferred allocation at land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford (Site Ref. S/RSC/HW), and the decision to identify the site as a preferred allocation for 100 dwellings is supported. In summary, the Rural Southern Cluster is an appropriate location for additional development because of the close proximity to employment opportunities and the good accessibility by sustainable modes of transport. There are exceptional circumstances to justify the release of land from the Green Belt, which are related to the significant need for housing and affordable housing in Greater Cambridge and the need to support economic growth. The decision to release the land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane from the Green Belt is consistent with national policy. There is a current identified need for affordable housing in Great Shelford and Stapleford, and no other realistic options have been identified to meet that current need within the villages other than through the release of land from the Green Belt through emerging GCLP. The assessment of the land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in the (Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) identify some constraints to the promoted development at the site, but suitable and deliverable mitigation measures have been identified to address those constraints. The land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford scores well in the Sustainability Appraisal when assessed against the identified sustainability objectives and when compared against alternative site options.

The land between Hinton Way and Mingle Lane is currently located within the Green Belt, and it is proposed in the GCLP Preferred Options that the site should be released from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development. Chapter 13 of the NPPF sets out national policy for Green Belts.

Paragraph 140 of the NPPF allows Green Belt boundaries to be altered through the plan-making process provided exceptional circumstances exist, and those exceptional circumstances should be based on evidence and justified. It is considered that exceptional circumstances exist to release land from the Green Belt, which are related to the significant need for housing and affordable housing in Greater Cambridge and the need to support economic growth. Stapleford and Great Shelford are very well related to Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Royal Papworth Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and other employment opportunities within and on the edge of Cambridge. Stapleford and Great Shelford contain a very good range of services and facilities and are accessible by sustainable modes of transport. There is an identified need for affordable housing in Stapleford and Great Shelford, and no other realistic options have been identified to meet that current need within the villages other than through the release of land from the Green Belt through emerging GCLP.

Paragraph 141 requires plan-making authorities to examine all other reasonable options to meet identified development needs before considering whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify changes to Green Belt boundaries i.e. make as much use of previously developed land, increase the density of development, and consider whether development needs could be accommodated in neighbouring areas. In the case of Cambridge increasing densities and reusing previously developed land is not straightforward and may be inappropriate because of heritage assets and the difficulty of finding alternative sites for existing uses. The adopted Local Plans for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire already identified previously developed land opportunities, and the emerging GCLP seeks to do them same. As such, previously developed land opportunities that are deliverable have already been identified within and on the edge of Cambridge.

Paragraph 142 requires any review of Green Belt boundaries to consider the need to promote sustainable patterns of development, and that where the release of land from the Green Belt is necessary that priority is given to previously developed land or sites that are well-served by public transport. It is acknowledged in emerging GCLP and the associated Sustainability Appraisal that the edge of Cambridge is a sustainable location because of its close proximity to employment and the opportunity to travel by non-car modes of transport. The preferred allocation at land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford is well served by public transport (bus and rail) and is well connected with existing cycle routes, and there are future public transport improvements proposed in the local area. Therefore, the release of the land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane from the Green Belt would be consistent with the approach in national policy to give priority to those Green Belt sites that are well served by public transport.

There are three other paragraphs in the NPPF that support the decision to identify land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane as a preferred allocation in emerging GCLP. Paragraph 105 seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Paragraph 79 seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas by locating housing where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and enable villages to grow and thrive. Paragraph 62 expects the size, type, and tenure of housing needs of the community to be assessed and reflected in planning policies, including for example those with an affordable housing need, students, renters, and self-builders.

Stapleford and Great Shelford contain a good range of services and facilities, reflecting their status as a Rural Centre in the settlement hierarchy. For example, they contain a variety of convenience stores, a post office, library, primary schools, health services including doctors and dentist, banks, public houses, and restaurants. The preferred allocation at land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane would support the existing services and facilities in Stapleford and Great Shelford. Shelford Station is located close to the site. There are bus routes on Hinton Way, Mingle Lane, Station Road and Cambridge Road, all of which are close to the site. There are cycle routes through Stapleford and Great Shelford into Cambridge. The route for the proposed Cambridge South East Transport project by the Greater Cambridge Partnership is located to the north west of the site, and there is a proposed stop at Hinton Way that would be within close proximity of the site. Therefore, the land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane is accessible by a range of sustainable modes of transport, and it would be consistent with national policy to direct additional development to this site.

South Cambridgeshire District Council's 'Housing Statistical Information Leaflet' (December 2019) identified a need for 28 affordable dwellings in Stapleford and 47 affordable dwellings in Great Shelford for those with a local connection to the villages - see https://www.scambs.gov.uk/media/18316/affordable-housing-housing-statistical-information-leaflet-december-2019.pdf. It is not clear how the affordable housing needs of these villages would be met, other than through the allocation of a suitable site in emerging GCLP that is capable of delivering policy compliant levels of affordable housing. It is noted that in 2016 a Stapleford and Great Shelford Neighbourhood Plan Area was designated, but limited progress has been made since to produce a draft plan that might address identified affordable housing needs through site allocations. In any event, as Rural Centre and one of the more sustainable settlements in South Cambridgeshire, Stapleford and Great Shelford should seek to accommodate district-wide affordable housing needs and not just those local needs arising in the villages. The preferred allocation at land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane would include housing and affordable housing to meet local needs of the villages. The promoted development would be subject to a policy requirement to provide 40% affordable housing on site, and it is normal for planning permissions for major residential developments in South Cambridgeshire to include a planning obligation requiring a proportion of the affordable dwellings to be offered to those with a local connection to the village.

For all these reasons, it is entirely appropriate and consistent with national policy for the development strategy in Policy S/DS to release land from the Green Belt in the Rural Southern Cluster at Stapleford/Great Shelford, and to identify land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane as a preferred allocation for residential development.

In addition, it should be noted that the key parts of the development strategy for emerging GCLP is the delivery of extensions to Cambourne, the planned new settlements at Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield, and the new communities on the edge of Cambridge at North East Cambridge and Cambridge East. These are all complex developments that also require the delivery of transport and community infrastructure. The predicted housing delivery rates at these developments are challenging. Most of these developments will provide less affordable housing than required by policy, at least in the initial phases, to reflect the amount of infrastructure that is needed. The proposed redevelopments at North East Cambridge and Cambridge East are complex and involves the relocation of the existing uses. Therefore, it is considered that the development strategy for emerging GCLP should also include small and medium allocations, such as land off Hinton Way and Mingle Lane in Great Shelford, that can be delivered easily and maintain a housing land supply and meet affordable housing needs.

No changes are required to Policy S/DS.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57310

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Deal Land LLP

Agent: Fisher German LLP

Representation Summary:

Support: Land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston (HELAA site 40547) & Land east of Haverhill Road, Stapleford (HELAA site 40368)

We support locating development in areas where active and public transport is a "natural choice".
We consider that the sites we have previously submitted, known as land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston Ref: 531, and land east of Haverhill Road, Stapleford Ref: 530, are both capable of accommodating housing developments which would accord with the aims of Policy S/DS.
As well as supporting the allocation of sites in villages with very good public transport, this policy should also highlight the merits of planned public transport which improves the sustainability of villages especially though linking them to strategic employment sites.

Full text:

The proposed development strategy, in line with the Plan’s vision and aims, is to direct development...

The proposed development strategy, in line with the Plan’s vision and aims, is to direct development to where it will have the least climate impact.
Alongside this, there is an aim to ensure that development is directed to areas where active and public transport is a “natural choice” and where new green infrastructure can be delivered alongside new development and where jobs, services and facilities can be located near to where people live, whilst ensuring all necessary utilities can be provided in a sustainable way. This proposed policy direction is supported and we consider that the sites we have previously submitted to the Council (land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston Ref: 531, and land east of Haverhill Road, Stapleford Ref: 530) are both capable of accommodating housing developments which would accord with the aims of Policy S/DS.
In terms of the rural area south of Cambridge, which Stapleford (with Shelford) and Sawston are a part, it is proposed that “some” development will occur within the area, where homes and jobs can be located close to each other and served by good quality public transport, cycling and walking links.
The proposed policy direction proposes that there will be “new smaller sites for housing and employment in villages that have very good public transport access and are close to jobs, some of which are through the release of land from the Green Belt”. In addition to this, allocations will be continued for existing sites allocated in previous plans.
We support the allocation of sites in villages with very good public transport access. This is particularly the case for Sawston and Stapleford. However, we consider the policy should also reflect on the merits of planned public transport provision also, as this further strengthens the sustainability of villages.
In the case of Stapleford and Sawston, both villages are proposed to be linked by Phase 2 of the Cambridge South East Transport project (which will run from Cambridge Biomedical Campus to a new travel hub near the A11, close to both Babraham Research Campus and Granta Park). This route will connect the villages with three existing strategic employment areas which are highly likely to continue growing and providing jobs throughout the plan period. We therefore believe the connections the Transport Project will provide to these villages, further emphasises why they should be considered appropriate locations of housing growth.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57316

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Huntingdonshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Huntingdonshire District Council support Greater Cambridge’s intention to continue development at existing strategic sites and the approach to providing 10% of development on sites no larger than 1 ha.

There is concern regarding the uncertainty of delivery in combination with large infrastructure delivery, water supply and the relocation of Marshall's airport.

A stepped trajectory and phased delivery of development would be the best approach to delivering the strategy.

Support focus on employment growth relating to Life Sciences.

Full text:

Huntingdonshire District Council support Greater Cambridge’s intention to continue development at ex...

Huntingdonshire District Council support Greater Cambridge’s intention to continue development at existing strategic sites as allocated in previous plans, for example Darwin Green, North West Cambridge, Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne, Bourn and The Genome Campus. These strategic developments will deliver housing and employment over an extended time period providing long-term certainty of delivery. The addition of a 10% buffer also provides security in the event of stalled or slowed delivery as a result of unexpected market fluctuations.

National planning policy says at least 10% of an Authority’s housing requirement should be accommodated on sites no larger than 1 hectare, unless it can be shown that there are strong reasons why this cannot be achieved. Greater Cambridge notes that “The site commitments we have and new proposals suggested in this consultation, together with windfall sites expected to come forward would mean we exceed this requirement by some margin.” Huntingdonshire District Council supports this statement as long as delivery on development sites for the plan period can be achieved.

There appears to be some uncertainty regarding the delivery of the strategy set out in the First Proposals Document. Two key examples included in the document are identified on:
• page 44, where it is stated that the proposed strategy is “heavily informed by the location of existing and committed public transport schemes. For example, locating growth at Cambourne takes advantage of the proposed East West Rail station and Cambourne to Cambridge Public Transport Scheme; equally, North East Cambridge is made more sustainable by the presence of Cambridge North Station, the proposed Waterbeach to Cambridge North Public Transport Scheme, and Waterbeach Greenway. Beyond this, we have undertaken transport modelling to understand whether additional infrastructure and policies, beyond these proposals, would be required to address the transport impacts of the preferred development strategy. Transport infrastructure and policy requirements associated with specific proposed allocations are set out in each allocation policy within this chapter.”;
• Page 42 which notes that “The Councils have been, and continue to, engage with the relevant bodies responsible for water supply planning, including Water Resources East, the Water Companies and the Environment Agency to ensure they understand the significance of the issue. We are taking every opportunity to raise this at the most senior level with all key parties, including government through its focus on the Oxford-Cambridge Spatial Framework, that will also have to address this issue. If it is concluded that it is not possible to demonstrate an adequate supply of water without unacceptable environmental harm to support development ahead of strategic water infrastructure being in place, there may be a need for the plan to include policies to phase delivery of development; and
• Relocation of Marshall Airport to fully deliver Cambridge East (Policy S/CE)

Taking these key delivery issues into consideration it is suggested that a stepped trajectory and phased delivery of development would be the best approach to delivering the strategy for Greater Cambridge and the surrounding areas. This is especially so in relation to the issue regarding water supply, this is not solely a Greater Cambridge issue and will be likely to affect all surrounding districts to varying degrees, therefore it would be difficult to justify that level or speed of delivery in or around the Greater Cambridge area, if the issue is not resolved.

Additionally, any unresolved issues regarding the transport impacts of the preferred development strategy, would also provide similar issues in neighbouring authorities.

Huntingdonshire District Council supports Greater Cambridge’s focus on employment uses such as Life Sciences (including healthcare, biotechnology and biomedical activities) associated research and development laboratory space and life science related advanced manufacturing.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57340

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

We disagree with the current amount and distribution of development within the Development Strategy, we believe it does not allow for enough growth and is disproportionate. More growth should be considered and other sustainable corridors such as the South West railway corridor.
The Development Strategy is at odds with the NPPF paragraph 69 a). We understand that the First Proposals document states that existing commitments and windfall developments within the area already result in this figure being achieved, but the NPPF is clear that these sites should be ‘identified’ within the Local Plan. This has not been currently demonstrated.

Full text:

We disagree with the current amount and distribution of development within the Development Strategy,...

We disagree with the current amount and distribution of development within the Development Strategy, we believe it does not allow for enough growth and is disproportionate. More growth should be considered and other sustainable corridors such as the South West railway corridor and this should be reviewed in much the same way as the Rural Southern Cluster approach. The area between Melbourn and Cambridge not only benefits from the railway but also is an area which will also take advantage of the GCP Melbourn Greenway project which will help Active Travel choices between settlements and to the nearby railway stations. The amount of development which has been considered appropriate in this location seems inconsistent with the vision and aims set out for the area.
The Development Strategy also does not accord with the NPPF paragraph 69 a) which requests that all Local Plans have at least 10% of their overall housing target ‘identified’ on sites of less than 1 ha. We understand that the First Proposals document states that existing commitments and windfall developments within the area already result in this figure being achieved, but the NPPF is clear that these sites should be ‘identified’ within the Local Plan. This appears not to have been demonstrated within this document and within the Strategy Topic Paper. Within this evidence base document, the figure quoted at page 45 has included windfall sites as well as sites with planning permission which were not identified as allocations. We believe there are sites included within this figure where planning permission was achieved through a lack of 5-year housing supply at the time and not through allocation in previous plans. We believe Greater Cambridge should identify at least 4,440 homes on allocated smaller sites of less than 1ha and, as a result, more smaller sites need to be identified through this plan making process. We would like to see a further breakdown of the smaller sites and an indication as to whether these are, in fact, identified as allocations in previous plans.
Further Clarification Needed:
The table of proposed housing allocations on page 32 of the First Proposals paper seems unclear as to which sites are proposed allocations and what are existing commitments. For example Cambourne is included within this table but within the commentary for this policy (S/CB) it would appear that these 1,950 homes already have planning permission within the West Cambourne proposal and surely this is therefore an existing commitment?
The proposed allocations within the Rural Southern Cluster are not clear as Duxford (S/RSC MF) and Great Shelford (S/RSC site HW) are included in the table at page 32 but Comfort Café (S/RSC/CC) is excluded. More clarification is required on what actual new allocations are proposed.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57346

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Clarendon Land

Agent: Pegasus Group

Representation Summary:

The strategy is flawed as it concentrates significant development in new settlements and large edge of Cambridge sites and will allow sustainable rural villages to stagnate which is not in compliance with the Framework. The 10% target set out in the Framework is not met in relation to providing smaller sites. This will have an impact on:

• Housing Delivery
• Affordability
• Vibrancy and vitality of these rural settlements
• Future sustainable working/living patterns

The site selection rationale is questionable. There is no justification as to the selection of the allocations in group villages over other similar available sites.

Full text:

These representations are submitted by Pegasus Group on behalf of Clarendon Land and Development Ltd...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57348

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes Eastern

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land east of Ridgeway and Old Pinewood Way, Papworth Everard (HELAA site 40439)

Small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area, because those villages are accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within those villages, and there is an identified need for affordable housing in those villages which would not be met via other means.

Full text:

OBJECT

Bloor Homes Eastern is promoting land east of Ridgeway and Old Pinewood Way, Papworth Evera...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57374

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Colegrove Estates

Agent: PJB Planning

Representation Summary:

The proposed Development Strategy will create a very restrictive policy to the edge of village developments that would otherwise bring significant benefits to a local community.

More flexibility should be created within the Strategy to allow village development that would deliver private, affordable, and self-build dwellings, which would meet the local need and that is highlighted within an up-to-date Village Housing Needs Survey.

Full text:

The proposed Development Strategy will create a very restrictive policy to the edge of village devel...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57376

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Deal Land LLP

Agent: Fisher German LLP

Representation Summary:

Summary: Land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston (HELAA site 40547)

Development on land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston (Ref: 531) would achieve new development in close to jobs, either accessible via the new transport route, or within the village (the site adjoins an existing commercial unit and is within a 20-minute walk of the South Cambridge Business Park).
The release of Green Belt land in Sawston is supported.Green Belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified. We consider that the need to deliver new homes in sustainable locations, close to public transport routes and employment opportunities comprises an appropriate justification for Green Belt release.

Full text:

Development on land east of Cambridge Road, Sawston (Ref: 531) would achieve new development in clos...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57427

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mission Street Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Representation Summary:

Given the need for high skilled jobs and the express high level of high skilled jobs provision within Cambridge, combined with the need to balance such employment opportunities more widely across the Greater Cambridge area, we suggest that a high priority and degree of support should be given to Research and Development related proposals. The following text is suggested to be included within Policy S/DS as a strategy proposal:

"Supporting proposals for Research and Development employment-related schemes, particularly within sustainable settlements across South Cambridgeshire District."

Full text:

Given the need for high skilled jobs and the express high level of high skilled jobs provision withi...

Attachments:

33024_211210_BurlingtonPark_GCLPFP_F.pdf (177.44 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57477

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: ESFA (Department for Education)

Representation Summary:

Please see attached letter.

Full text:

Please see attached letter.

Attachments:

Maths School Cambridge Uni letter of support.docx (72.30 KB)
Greater Cambridge First Proposals Reg 18 DfE Dec 2021_Redacted (1.14 MB)
211207 HB to Ryan K re Cambridge Maths School_Redacted (208.93 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57494

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: ESFA (Department for Education)

Representation Summary:

Support approach, and emphasise importance of proactive planning of educational facilities when sites are actively being sought. Plan provides opportunity to plan strategically for education uses that maximise sustainable transport choices and create an employment pipeline.

CMS is an approved specialist maths school for up to 200 16-19 year olds. Government committed to having a maths school in every region. University of Cambridge, Isaac Physics and Cambridge Mathematics are strategic partners to CMS. Attached letters of support.

Department secured temporary site at 119 Mill Road, with intention of opening at reduced capacity until a permanent site can be delivered. Demonstrate our commitment to opening CMS, and request work with us to deliver permanent school building in best available location. Department makes use of permitted development rights where appropriate, but wishes to explore options for strategic site allocations with best public transport connectivity, as outlined in our response to the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan consultation.

Full text:

We note that the proposed policy direction is to direct development to locations that have the least...

We note that the proposed policy direction is to direct development to locations that have the least climate impact, where active and public transport is the natural choice, and where green infrastructure can be delivered alongside new development.

The department supports this approach, and would like to emphasise the importance of proactive planning of educational facilities when sites are actively being sought. The Local Plan provides an opportunity to plan strategically for education uses that maximise sustainable transport choices and create an employment pipeline for the Greater Cambridge area.

CMS is an approved specialist maths school for up to 200 16-19 year olds. The government has committed to having a maths school in every region, building upon the success of Exeter, King’s and the University of Liverpool Maths Schools, which have already opened in partnership with their local universities. The University of Cambridge, Isaac Physics and Cambridge Mathematics are strategic partners to CMS. Please see the attached letters of support from the University of Cambridge and Cambridgeshire County Council.

The department has secured a temporary site for CMS at 119 Mill Road, with the intention of opening at reduced capacity until a permanent site can be delivered. This should demonstrate our commitment to opening CMS, and we request that the councils work with us to deliver the permanent school building in the best available location and with minimal delay. The department makes use of permitted development rights where appropriate, but also wishes to explore options for strategic site allocations with the best public transport connectivity, as outlined in our response to the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan consultation. We believe it is in everyone’s best interests to deliver CMS in the most sustainable location.

If CMS is delivered as a freestanding new build, it will require a site of 0.5 acres (minimum 0.2 acres). Ideally there would be an area of external space but as a sixth form college CMS will not need sports provision/playing fields. If the school is delivered in an existing building, there is a space requirement of 2,450 square metres GIFA.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57502

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council (as landowner)

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Summary: Hawthorn Community Centre, Haviland Way, Cambridge (HELAA site 40166); Bellersby College, Arbury Road, Cambridge (HELAA site 40172); Cambridge Professional Development Centre (New site); Horizon Resource Centre (New site); Land at Chandos Farm adjacent to Babraham Park & Ride (HELAA site 40141); Newbury Farm, Worts Causeway, Cambridge (HELAA site 40139); Mansel Farm, Oakington (HELAA site 40455); Land at Gebe and Fen Farm, Twenty Pence Road, Cottenham (HELAA site 40176); Land west of Cottenham Road, Histon (HELAA site 40193); Land east of Glebe Way, Histon (HELAA site 40192); Land at Robinson Far, Cambridge Road, Sawston (HELAA site 40146); Land to north of Cardyke Road, Waterbeach (HELAA site 40183); Land at Belsar Farm, Sponge Drove, Willingham (HELAA site 40179); Land at Tostock Farm, Cambridge Road, Melbourn (HELAA site 40199); and, Land at Herods Farm, High Street, Foxton (HELAA site 40148)

Request: assumptions about faster housing delivery rates for Northstowe and Waterbeach are deleted from the development strategy.

Request: realistic assumptions about delivery are applied for North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

Request: additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing are identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from larger allocations.

Request: that small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area.

Full text:

Cambridgeshire County Council as landowner has interests in land across the GCLP area and has promot...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57516

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: R2 Developments Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group

Representation Summary:

A more flexible and varied housing supply is required to boost sustainable rural communities and small and medium sized house builders; and to ensure a robust supply of housing is maintained in Greater Cambridge.

Full text:

1 The GCLP Development Strategy Topic Paper (October 2021) outlines that a strategy "focused on vill...

1 The GCLP Development Strategy Topic Paper (October 2021) outlines that a strategy "focused on village development would be unsustainable, in particular regarding transport and associated carbon emissions, but also for supporting delivery of required infrastructure." Consequently, villages are not the primary focus for growth within the development strategy.

2 The First Proposal identifies that 11,640 additional dwellings are needed to meet the housing need target within the plan period, after considering the committed housing supply. The proposed development strategy identifies four new sites in rural Greater Cambridgeshire to accommodate the additional housing need, which includes two sites in the "Group Villages” of Caldecote and Oakington. In total, the four sites can deliver 224 dwellings, which equates to only 1.9% of the new housing supply being met within rural areas. In contrast, 62% of the total supply is focused on the delivery of new settlements and strategic sites.

3 During the current plan period there has been significant scrutiny and pressure on the five-year housing land supply of the Greater Cambridge authorities. This is in part due to the current over reliance on new settlements and strategic sites to deliver housing numbers and the failure to allocate proportionate growth at sites on the edge of established rural settlements which have fewer delivery constraints. Delivering new settlements and large strategic sites often requires investment in significant up-front infrastructure. The funding and delivery of such infrastructure can significantly increase lead in times before dwellings are delivered and occupied. A Local Plan which establishes a balanced approach to the distribution and allocation of new housing sites will safeguard against the potential for shortfalls in five-year land supply upon the Plan’s adoption and during the plan period. Like the current adopted Local Plans, the GCLP will again deliver an imbalanced and ridged housing supply which exposes the Greater Cambridge authorities and their residents to considerable risk in terms of potentially facilitating the opportunity for speculative planning applications for housing development to come forward as and when there is a shortfall in supply. A more flexible and varied supply is required to boost sustainable rural communities and small and medium sized house builders; and to ensure a robust supply of housing is maintained in Greater Cambridge.

4 The Council’s development strategy approach for rural areas appears to be one which largely restricts development, and where allocations are proposed, the process of making allocations has been site-led rather than being led by an objective process which compares the sustainability credentials of sustainable rural settlements. To provide a more flexible and balanced housing supply, and to deliver the variety of sites the market demands the Councils should identify additional available and deliverable small and medium sized sites from a range of locations capable of accommodating housing growth within the plan period. The content of the Housing Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) demonstrates that there are a number of suitable and available sites, located at sustainable settlements such as Group Villages, capable of being allocated for residential and mixed use development. This includes the Village of Foxton, which is a highly accessible location with its connectivity to the national rail network. Thereby the village is potentially more sustainable than some of the other rural area locations on the proposed Settlement Hierarchy.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57527

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Henry d'Abo

Agent: Pegasus Group

Representation Summary:

Allocating proportionate housing growth at established rural settlements through the GCLP or a future Local Plan document will assist in safeguarding the vitality and viability of existing rural services and can stimulate new businesses to come forward and support communities. Moving forward the GCLP should be amended to provide a balanced and more deliverable housing supply which can support established rural communities. This will ensure that rural communities thrive over the plan-period.

Full text:

In respect of providing new housing the proposed distribution of growth is too heavily focused on th...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57551

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Save Honey Hill Group

Representation Summary:

The development strategy of Densification is not supported. This strategy puts the Aims & Objectives of the Local Plan at risk. : ‘Wellbeing & Social inclusion’ and ‘Great Places’ are of particular relevance here for both existing and growth populations here. As stated in the CPIER report (2018) if Cambridge does not remain an attractive place to live , the high levels of economic growth aspired to may fail.Sustainable transport initiatives are needed in the Greater Cambridge Area to assist commuting both in and out of Cambridge with its high level of job mobility.

Full text:

The development strategy of Densification is not supported. This strategy puts the Aims & Object...

The development strategy of Densification is not supported. This strategy puts the Aims & Objectives of the Local Plan at risk. : ‘Wellbeing & Social inclusion’ and ‘Great Places’ are of particular relevance here for both existing and growth populations here. As stated in the CPIER report (2018) if Cambridge does not remain an attractive place to live , the high levels of economic growth aspired to may fail.

A greater focus on bringing sustainable transport initiatives to the fore from outside the Greater Cambridge Area within the plan period, for example in addition to East West rail, improved rail links eg Newmarket /Ipswich line are recommended and good services to the Market Towns in the Region. The latter will assist both existing employees/commuters and new, reducing CO2 emissions (key aim of densification strategy) . Increase in home working will benefit local communities (levelling out) far from ‘dormitory towns’, with good transport networks for the odd commute day and more affordable housing, the wider region could benefit from Cambridge’s economic growth with working populations employed in Greater Cambridge but in the main remaining ‘local’.

The CPIER (2018) report which informed the Densification strategy advises young people will still wish to be in a centre where they can physically group together, this may be so for those in their first 5 years of work but, beyond this high density living, with restricted car use, a home working opportunities and affordable housing in the wider region means living in high density housing is unlikely to remain attractive for those in stable relationships and seeking family accommodation.

The impact of large population increases in Greater Cambridge as a result of an unprecedented amount of new homes already in the pipeline, 30,000 + amounting to a 37% increase of existing homes in 2020, are yet to be known/tested and will not be known until mid-plan period and beyond. This high growth strategy may fail if sustainable solutions do not come to the fore in a timely way and the attractiveness of Cambridge for homes and business is eroded (CPIER 2018). The impact of this unprecedented high growth strategy already in progress and committed to needs to be evaluated before it is added to further, in the case of North East Cambridge, with’ high densification housing at unprecedented levels for Cambridge’. The Aims of the Local Plan : ‘Wellbeing & Social inclusion’ and ‘Great Places’ are of particular relevance and at risk here.

The housing development at North East Cambridge is not supported, a focus on employment growth in the area, services to support commuters and improved sustainable public transport from within Cambridge City, Greater Cambridge and the wider region to bring employees in is recommended as an alternative.

Pursuing housing development at North East Cambridge as a result of the relocation site selected by Anglian Water in the Green Belt and within close proximity to Conservation Areas etc. is contrary to Policies: listed under ‘Bio-diversity & Green Spaces’; Great Places to Live’; Wellbeing & Inclusion.’ And is a high risk strategy. See comments under S/NEC.

The case has been made for an alternative Minimum or Medium Growth Option in section S/JH. If adopted it is recommended the additional homes (Min 3000; Medium 8,000) required in the Plan Period could be · accommodated by Cambridge Airport with forward planning and mixed development to assist build out rates (4000) and the Bio-Medical Campus (up to 4000) without the need for housing at North East Cambridge. In addition, areas identified for Major change within the City boundary S/AMC may also bring opportunities for housing within the plan period and beyond assisting with requirements of a 5 year land supply. Cambridge airport with an allocation of 7000 to full build out will also be able to offer homes beyond the plan period. The Bio-Medical Campus has been identified for growth but has not had housing no’s. allocated ; housing development could be achieved here within the plan period with a mixed development and forward planning(S/CBC).

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57557

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Cheveley Park Farms Limited

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Land adjacent to Babraham (HELAA site 40297)

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boundary has not changed. Please see document attached S/DS Comments (1of 4 submissions due to high level of documents).

Full text:

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boun...

Attachments:

S DS Reps Babraham 2021.pdf (66.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Planning site representation document.pdf (176.51 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Socio-economic assessment.pdf (1.21 MB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Covering letter_Redacted (193.82 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57558

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Cheveley Park Farms Limited

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Land adjacent to Babraham (HELAA site 40297)

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boundary has not changed. Please see document attached S/DS Comments (1of 4 submissions due to high level of documents).

Full text:

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boun...

Attachments:

S DS Reps Babraham 2021.pdf (66.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Covering letter_Redacted (193.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Initial heritage appraisal_Redacted (1.99 MB)
211210 Land at Babraham-Utilities technical note_Redacted (2.37 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57559

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Cheveley Park Farms Limited

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Land adjacent to Babraham (HELAA site 40297)

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boundary has not changed. Please see document attached S/DS Comments (1of 4 submissions due to high level of documents).

Full text:

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boun...

Attachments:

S DS Reps Babraham 2021.pdf (66.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Preliminary Ecological Assessment and BNG Assessment.pdf (6.84 MB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Covering letter_Redacted (193.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Vision document and masterplan LR_Redacted (8.22 MB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Flood Risk Scoping Report_Redacted (9.52 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57565

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Cheveley Park Farms Limited

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Land adjacent to Babraham (HELAA site 40297)

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boundary has not changed. Please see document attached S/DS Comments (1of 4 submissions due to high level of documents).

Full text:

The reference is 40297 (Land adjacent to Babraham, CB22 3AF, CB22 3AP, CB22 3AG, CB22 3AZ). The boun...

Attachments:

S DS Reps Babraham 2021.pdf (66.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Covering letter_Redacted (193.82 KB)
211210-Land at Babraham-Landscape and Visual Assessment and Green Belt Assessment_Redacted (21.01 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57592

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Jump

Representation Summary:

Growth assumptions appears unimaginative, more of the same. At no point do you consider alternative growth rates that may be appropriate for future changes, or the hopes of current residents, orbthe existing housing deficit, with its associated high prices.
If the model of growth adopted in The Plan is used for the next 100 years, 40% growth becomes 440%. This is around 700,000 homes. You cannot just assume inexorable growth, like Stalinist planners. What about the external effect eg of Covid on growth?
It is not unreasonable to ask: “At what point might the current model be forced to change?”

Full text:

Growth assumptions appears unimaginative, more of the same. At no point do you consider alternative ...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57636

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Dudley Developments

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Land north of Cherry Hinton Caravan & Motorhome Club off Limekiln Road, Cambridge (HELAA site 40528)

Additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing need to be identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

Small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable locations on the edge of Cambridge including land off Limekiln Road in Cambridge which is close to Cherry Hinton, because it is accessible by sustainable modes of transport, it could support the existing services and facilities, and it would deliver affordable housing to meet identified needs in Cambridge.

Full text:

OBJECT

Dudley Developments is promoting land north of Cherry Hinton Caravan & Motorhome Club o...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57638

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Conroy

Representation Summary:

The development strategy of Densification is not supported. This strategy puts the Aims & Objectives of the Local Plan at risk. : ‘Wellbeing & Social inclusion’ and ‘Great Places’ are of particular relevance here for both existing and growth populations here. As stated in the CPIER report (2018) if Cambridge does not remain an attractive place to live , the high levels of economic growth aspired to may fail.

Full text:

The development strategy of Densification is not supported. This strategy puts the Aims & Object...

Attachments:

SDS-Development strategy.docx (14.49 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57645

Received: 11/12/2021

Respondent: Histon & Impington Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Make sure quality Broadband, retail, Public Transport in place first.

Full text:

The Plan refers heavily to one aspect of required infrastructure, namely potable water supplies, but...