S/DS: Development strategy

Showing comments and forms 211 to 240 of 243

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60345

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: F. C. Butler Trust

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land north of Station Road West/ East of Duxford Road, Whittlesford (HELAA site 59385)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites which, on average, would take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery does not stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - FC Butler Trust (2.77 MB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - FC Butler Trust (1,020.93 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60356

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: F. C. Butler Trust

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land West of Station Road West, Whittleford (HELAA site 59391)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites which, on average, would take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery does not stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - FC Butler Trust (2.70 MB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - FC Butler Trust (983.48 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60357

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: H. J. Molton Settlement

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land to East of Whittlesford Highways Depot, Whittlesford (HELAA site 59406)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites. To ensure that the delivery of industrial space does not stall, and the supply-demand gap for employment space widens as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver commercial sites quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - HJ Molton Settlement (2.87 MB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - HJ Molton Settlement (863.92 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60369

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: The Critchley Family

Number of people: 3

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land South of Bartlow Road, Castle Camps (HELAA site 59337)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments - particularly large and complex sites which on average take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery doesn't stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short to medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments -...

Attachments:

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60383

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Stephen & Jane Graves

Number of people: 2

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land south west of St Michael's, Longstanton (HELAA site 40521)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites which, on average, would take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery does not stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (2.17 MB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (113.89 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60394

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: David Wright

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land south of Shelford Road & Cambridge Road, Fulbourn (HELAA site 48064)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites which, on average, would take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery does not stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (2.97 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60440

Received: 04/01/2022

Respondent: Westley Waterless Parish Council

Representation Summary:

LATE REPRESENTATION
Figure 4 - support the locations of proposed new housing development 2020-2041

Full text:

LATE REPRESENTATION
On behalf of Westley Waterless Parish, I would like to put on record the followi...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60442

Received: 04/01/2022

Respondent: Westley Waterless Parish Council

Representation Summary:

LATE REPRESENTATION
Policy S/DS agree with the proposed policy direction and consider that Figure 6 showing proposed sites to be included in the Plan represents a sustainable spatial response to the proposed development strategy. Support the fact that no new settlement is proposed around Six Mile Bottom and agree with the comment at page 39 that further new settlements should not be allocated

Full text:

LATE REPRESENTATION
On behalf of Westley Waterless Parish, I would like to put on record the followi...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60458

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Peter, Jean & Michael Crow

Number of people: 3

Agent: Cheffins

Representation Summary:

Land west of Fox Road, Bourn (HELAA site 59395)

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, particularly large and complex sites which, on average, would take 5-8 years for the first home to be delivered. To ensure that housing delivery does not stall, and the affordability crisis worsened as a result, a pipeline of smaller developments which can deliver homes quickly will be needed in the short-to-medium term.

Full text:

The First Proposals plan is heavily reliant on the delivery of a handful of strategic developments, ...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (2.15 MB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (424.25 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60510

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Turley

Representation Summary:

Land north of Cambridge Road, Linton (HELAA site 51721)

As part of their strategy, the Council have stated that their top priority is to reduce carbon emissions and to that end provide jobs and homes in close proximity to one another and major public transport routes. Whilst Taylor Wimpey do understand this approach by the Council, they do have some concerns in relation to how this strategy has been applied.
Firstly, many of the settlements within South Cambridgeshire are highly sustainable in their own right and benefit from excellent public transport links to Cambridge, and other destinations. Taylor Wimpey therefore consider that the Council should explore the option to deliver more housing in other sustainable settlements in order to provide a greater spread of housing distribution, provide a portfolio of types of sites to meet needs in a range of locations, ensure that there is a supply of housing that can be built out sooner within the plan period, and continue to support local services and facilities.

Full text:

The proposed development strategy for Greater Cambridge directs the vast majority of growth to the C...

The proposed development strategy for Greater Cambridge directs the vast majority of growth to the Cambridge Urban Area, the edge of Cambridge and new settlements. Only a very small level of growth is directed to the Rural Southern Cluster and the Rest of the Rural Area. Of the allocations proposed, the vast majority of these are existing commitments (adopted allocations, sites with planning permission etc.). The Council are only proposing a need for an additional 11,640 homes to be allocated through the emerging Local Plan.
As part of their strategy, the Council have stated that their top priority is to reduce carbon emissions and to that end provide jobs and homes in close proximity to one another and major public transport routes. Whilst Taylor Wimpey do understand this approach by the Council, they do have some concerns in relation to how this strategy has been applied.
Firstly, many of the settlements within South Cambridgeshire are highly sustainable in their own right and benefit from excellent public transport links to Cambridge, and other destinations. Linton is one such settlement, and further commentary on its position within the hierarchy is set out in the comments for Policy S/SH. Taylor Wimpey therefore consider that the Council should explore the option to deliver more housing in other sustainable settlements, including Linton, in order to provide a greater spread of housing distribution in the District and provide a portfolio of types of sites to meet needs in a range of locations. In doing so such housing distribution would still accord with the strategy presented by the Council, by providing housing in highly sustainable Linton.
Such housing delivery would help meet the needs of smaller settlements over the plan period, providing greater variety in the types and location of development delivered. It is important to highlight that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is clear in paragraph 69 that ‘small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area, and are often built-out relatively quickly’ and that local planning authorities should ‘promote the development of a good mix of sites’. It is considered that the Council strategy focuses on the delivery of very large sites with a much lesser number of smaller allocations. Taylor Wimpey are therefore of the view that the Council should look to deliver a greater number of smaller allocations to ensure that there is a supply of housing that can be built out sooner within the plan period. The site in Linton is one such site that could be built-out relatively quickly.
Furthermore, paragraph 79 of the NPPF is clear that in order to ‘promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services.’ By delivering more housing in settlements such as Linton, development will continue to support local services and facilities, supporting their retention and growth. This point is also recognised in the appraisal of spatial options set out within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan: First Proposals Sustainability Appraisal (October 2021).

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals - Taylor Wimpey (955.55 KB)
Map (539.43 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60519

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridge Ahead

Representation Summary:

Comparing the Strategic Spatial Options of the Local Plan with CA’s Suggested Spatial Vision shows many welcome similarities across the need for higher density development, the five strategic sites, agglomeration supported by transport corridors, and the creation of a connected nature network.

There is an importance emphasis in the Greater Cambridge context on the duty to cooperate to ensure that there is the right dialogue between planning authorities to respond to the real-world footprint of the Cambridge economy, as measured for example through the travel to work area

Further CA work on spatial planning choices has elevated the importance of planning well for a new era of more flexible work and location choices, the need for build-to-rent as part of a diverse range of housing types in the city to meet the needs of all city residents, and of course the recommendations made by the climate commission.

Positive qualitative comments on the spatial options are important adjuncts to our key concern about the quantitively high projections of employment: recognising the pressure of future employment flows in the Plan and learning how positively to manage these pressures and to
support the quality of life in the city and beyond are key objectives of the Plan. Failing to manage these pressures will only result in escalating house occupancies, rents, expanding travel to work areas, and rising congestion levels.

RESPONSE DOCUMENT ATTACHED.

Attachments:

Representation Document (1.15 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60541

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Beechwood Homes Contracting Ltd

Representation Summary:

Land south of Chestnut Lane, Kneesworth (HELAA site 60541)

With regard to Housing Supply (Section 2.1 of the draft Plan):
The 10% buffer proposed is not sufficient and additional sites should be allocated across the Greater Cambridge area to provide sufficient flexibility. Further work will be required to identify the size of an increased buffer but we would suggest that this be at least 15% (equivalent to 6,660 homes on a housing requirement of 44,400 homes, or 7,245 homes on a housing requirement of 48,300 homes – see above).

Whilst the Councils have been nominally able to show that they will be able to demonstrate a 5YHLS on adoption of the Plan, this projection is prone to challenge and is not robust, such that there is a high potential that the Councils will fail the 5YHLS test soon after adoption of the new Plan. o With regard to the role of ‘small sites’, the draft Plan, knowingly, does not accord with national policy in paragraph 69 of the NPPF, does not provide any reason as to why it ‘cannot’ comply with the requirements of paragraph 69 of the NPPF, and should be made compliant with the requirements of paragraph 69 of the NPPF by adaptation to include additional small sites no larger than 1 hectare, predominantly within South Cambridgeshire.

With regard to the Development Strategy / Spatial Distribution (Section 2.1 of the draft Plan): The quantum of housing allocated to the rural area is ‘paltry’ and insufficient to enable existing communities to ‘thrive’ and/or ‘grow’.

The approach taken to the distribution of development, especially the ‘additional’ / ‘extra’ on the edge of Cambridge / at Northstowe and Waterbeach, is not supported by robust evidence, and is an approach that conflicts with that taken to employment growth. Two options for a solution would be to either: - increase the housing requirement by 1,900 to 4,700 homes as discussed; and/or - not include the ‘additional’ / ‘faster’ delivery of between 1,500 and 2,500 new homes on the edge of Cambridge / at new settlements, and to instead accommodate these homes on sustainable sites in sustainable locations within the rural area.

Full text:

Housing Supply (Policy S/DS: Development Strategy) The Buffer Many of the problems with the delivery...

Attachments:

Representation Document (621.92 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60547

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Thakeham Homes Ltd

Representation Summary:

Land east of Long Road, Cottenham (HELAA site 60547)

The first proposals consultation is suggesting a focus on existing commitments and expansion of existing sites to meet the suggested housing need. Where new sites are proposed these are focussed predominantly within and around the edge of Cambridge.

The background text to S/DS suggests that very limited development is proposed in rural areas due the Councils’ desire to focus growth to more readily sustainable locations. Whilst, as we have touched on above, Thakeham supports a weighted distribution of development towards the most sustainable locations and key employment hubs, we would emphasise the importance of a variety of growth locations and sizes to support housing growth. New settlements, strategic extensions and development in rural locations all form a key part in meeting varying housing needs and ensuring a consistent supply of housing delivery. In particular, growth in rural areas can contribute to improving and maintaining the vibrancy of these areas and is of great importance to ensuring these communities thrive. The important role that development in these rural areas can play should not be overlooked in the GCLP development strategy.

Full text:

Greater Cambridge Local Plan – The First Proposals Consultation
Land east of Long Road, Comberton
...

Attachments:

Representation Document (202.58 KB)
Comberton Site (11.99 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60561

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: W Garfit

Agent: Keymer Cavendish

Representation Summary:

Land East of A10, south of Church Road Hauxton (HELAA site 45674)

To date the Planners seem to have used the “dollop” theory to identify predominantly large sites. This contradicts NPPF paragraph 69. It also ignores the Plan’s stated objective to propose some development in the rural area south of Cambridge.

Land East of A10, south of Church Road Hauxton proposed.

Full text:

Policy S/DS: Development strategy directly contradicts para 69 of the NPPF July 2021

(Table of pro...

Policy S/DS: Development strategy directly contradicts para 69 of the NPPF July 2021

(Table of proposed allocations included in attached document)

NPPF July 2021 - New National Planning Policy – Para 69 Small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area, and are often built-out relatively quickly. To promote the development of a good mix of sites local planning authorities should: a) identify land to accommodate at least 10% of their housing requirement on sites no larger than one hectare; unless it can be shown, through the preparation of relevant plan policies, that there are strong reasons why this 10% target cannot be achieved; b) use tools such as area-wide design assessments and Local Development Orders to help bring small and medium sized sites forward; c) support the development of windfall sites through their policies and decisions – giving great weight to the benefits of using suitable sites within existing settlements for homes;

To date the Planners seem to have used the “dollop” theory to identify predominantly large sites. This contradicts new Planning Policy above.

It also ignores the Plan’s stated objective to propose some development in the rural area south of Cambridge, the Rural Southern Cluster, where homes and jobs can be located close to each other and served by good quality public transport, cycling and walking links, including: New smaller sites for housing and employment in villages that have very good public transport access and are close to jobs, some through release of land from the Green Belt; and
• Development on GB is not generally acceptable, but to release a small site from the GB which in parallel secures greatly enhanced bio-diversity, and some informal rural public access, is a factor that weighs heavily in favour of the release.
• In these two latter respects dialogue will continue with National and Local Conservation Bodies focusing on the substantial area available around Hauxton Pits for enhanced bio diversity, and some informal rural public access Attached are three plans:
• Area further East for Biodiversity Enhancement – the plan shows areas of 1.75 ha and 3.83 ha (5.58 ha) plus possible further woodland enhancement and access • Hauxton plan detail
• Garfit site shown on site plan

Other Matters
• Dramatically changed accessibility of Hauxton since Bayer re-development (see attached Local Plan Examination Statement 2017 submission re Bayer)
• Good public transport and public services – see above Employment. There is employment on the Bayer site AND local interest from a Nursing Home Operator

What happens next? “After this consultation, we will consider what you have told us carefully, and develop the Plan in more detail. We hope to publish a full Draft Plan in 2022” For our part, we wish to maintain a dialogue with the planners and submit more detailed material

Attachments:

2017 Local Plan Examination Statement (3.73 MB)
Site Document (425.24 KB)
Representation Document (715.29 KB)
Hauxton site plan (293.67 KB)
site map 2 (1.90 MB)
Areas further east for biodiversity enhancement (581.64 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60563

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land north west of Balsham Road, Linton (HELAA site 40411)

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore emissions, can be minimised?

Yes, in principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in the larger more sustainable villages that are located outside of the Green Belt, such as Linton. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services. The updated NPPF (2021), also provides additional emphases on the suitability of providing significant extensions to villages, provided that they are well located and designed.

It is suggested that the provision for increasing the range of sites modestly to include smaller and medium sites in the rural area would provide significant benefits.

It is considered that additional growth within Linton would be consistent with the objective of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel.

Full text:

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This representation has been prepared by Strutt & Parker on behalf of Cou...

Attachments:

Representation Document (588.56 KB)
Helaa Document (627.25 KB)
Site Photos (2.27 MB)
Opportunities and constraints plan (775.91 KB)
Transport appraisal (3.28 MB)
Appendix D (a) (1.11 MB)
Appendix D (b) (2.34 MB)
Appendix C (9.75 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60568

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Countryside Properties - Fen Ditton site

Agent: Turley

Representation Summary:

Land East of Horningsea Road, Fen Ditton (HELAA site 47647 & Land West of Ditton Lane, Fen Ditton (HELAA site 40516)

The Council are only proposing a need for an additional 11,640 homes to be allocated through the emerging Local Plan. This further emphasises that the Plan is failing to proactively plan for sufficient homes as discussed in respect of Policy S/JH.
Countryside support the principle of the proposed development strategy and recognise that a range of sites will be required in order to deliver this strategy.
Concern however is raised regarding how the proposed strategy has been interpreted into the allocations proposed. Furthermore, in light of our discussions in relation to Policy S/JH, it is clear that additional allocations will be required in order to deliver an appropriate and effective quantum of housing to support the wider plan aspirations.

Full text:

The proposed development strategy for Greater Cambridge is stated to be to:
“direct development to w...

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1.43 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60580

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Martin Grant Homes

Agent: Barton Willmore

Representation Summary:

Land at Silverdale Close, Coton (HELAA site 40079)

The Local Plan places emphasis on sites around the edge of Cambridge, as well as increased delivery rates at Northstowe and Waterbeach. These representations have highlighted concerns as to the robustness of this process, and highlights the lack of evidence as to how Waterbeach will increase delivery. Following a report to the Joint Local Planning Advisory Group in November 2021, the Local Plan must adjust to the lower densities, increased open space and lower building heights proposed at North East Cambridge. The representations also highlight the existing delays at Bourn Airfield, which still does not benefit from a formal planning permission three years after submission.

The solution therefore would be to add further small and medium sized sites within the trajectory. This would cover off any delays in delivery.

Full text:

5.0 POLICY S/DS: DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

5.1 In line with the above, policy S/DS seeks the plan to p...

Attachments:

Representation Document (6.51 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60610

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: CALA Group Ltd

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land off Water Lane, Melbourn (HELAA site 40274)

It is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages that are located outside of the Green Belt, such as Melbourn. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the NPPF that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.

Full text:

3. QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and th...

3. QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore emissions, can be minimised?

3.1 Yes, in principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages that are located outside of the Green Belt, such as Melbourn. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the NPPF that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.

3.2 The CPIER report (2018), which is referenced as a key document within the evidence base provides a detailed analysis regarding the potential benefits of focusing growth along key transport corridors. The proposed Cambridge South Station proposes significant sustainable transport improvements between Cambridge and Meldreth Station, which is within walking distance to Melbourn.

3.3 In addition, Melbourn, benefits from being a sustainable settlement in its own right. Melbourn is a Minor Rural Centre (as defined within the adopted Local Plan) that is not situated within the Green Belt. It is also benefits from both primary and secondary education facilities and a large range of services, including shops, pubs, restaurants and community facilities.

3.4 One of the 19 new sites being considered for allocation in the local plan is located to the north east of Melbourn (Land to the West of Cambridge Road, 120 housing units). It is considered that Land off Water Lane is in a more sustainable location, being closer to the village centre. Furthermore, the Water Lane site is located further from any listed buildings and the Melbourn Conservation Area than the West of Cambridge Road site, reducing the chance of adverse effect on these heritage assets. Unlike at the Water Lane site, archaeological evaluation has identified significant archaeology of Roman date at the West of Cambridge Road site. This could lead to complications in delivering the site. Given the acute need for housing in the area, it is considered that making multiple allocations at Melbourn could also be a suitable approach to ensure much need housing is delivered in this sustainable settlement.

3.5 Section 3 of the Technical Note (2021) provide a transport assessment on the sustainability of the site in terms of accessibility to local services and facilities. It demonstrates that the site is well located to access the wide range of existing facilities and public transport links not just in Melbourn but also further afield without the need to use a private car.

3.6 For the above reasons, it is considered that additional growth within Melbourn would be consistent with the objectives of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel. Of the sites submitted within Melbourn as part of the Call for Sites process, Land off Water Lane, is considered to be a particularly sustainable and suitable site for development. The site would better integrate into the existing built form and relate to the housing development to the north-east.

Attachments:

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60612

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Endurance Estates - Orwell site

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land to rear of Fisher's Lane, Orwell (HELAA site 40496)

In general, we support the principle of focusing development on sites where it has the least climate impact, where active and public transport is the natural choice, where green infrastructure can be delivered, 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. In relation to minimising car travel, this needs to be considered holistically along with a number of other competing objectives.
It is also very important that due regard is given to the national policy and the three objectives of sustainable development.
It is also important that a suitable level for growth is directed to the villages within South Cambridgeshire. National policy is clear that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services. This, however, has not been reflected within the First Proposals.
It is suggested that the provision for increasing the range of sites to include smaller and medium sites in the rural area would provide significant benefits.
The Council’s over-reliance on a few major sites (and critically the complex nature of some), we believe, is flawed and likely to result in delivery challenges.

Full text:

The Council’s over-reliance on a few major sites (and critically the complex nature of some), we bel...

The Council’s over-reliance on a few major sites (and critically the complex nature of some), we believe, is flawed and likely to result in delivery challenges.
As such, we think it would be prudent for the Councils to allocate more sites in a variety of locations for a wider range of housing. Additional allocations in the villages will help in this regard, as would less complex/constrained sites closer to Cambridge.
Policy S/DS states that the proposed development strategy for Greater Cambridge is to direct development to where it will have the least climate impact and where active and public transport is the natural choice.
In general, we support the principle of focusing development on sites where it has the least climate impact, where active and public transport is the natural choice, where 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. In relation to minimising car travel, this needs to be considered holistically along with a number of other competing objectives, and provision for car travel is not the only criteria to consider when selecting the most appropriate sites to allocate. It is also very important that due regard is given to the national policy and the three objectives of sustainable development set out in the NPPF 2021 (economic, social and environmental). This means allocating land for development to ensure choice and competition for market land, along with ensuring growth to ensure vitality of villages. Growth within villages can also assist with meeting localised housing need (particularly for affordable housing), which will not be met by a small number of strategic allocations around the largest settlements. In accordance with national policy it is also important that where possible growth is directed to sites that are situated outside of the Cambridge Green Belt.
In this regard, it is also important that a suitable level for growth is directed to the villages within South Cambridgeshire. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the NPPF that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services. This, however, has not been reflected within the First Proposals within the Local Plan, with minimal allocations within the villages of South Cambridgeshire.
It is suggested that the provision for increasing the range of sites to include smaller and medium sites in the rural area would provide significant benefits. For example, they could be delivered more quickly without requiring additional infrastructure, provide choice and flexibility in the housing market and secure affordable housing more immediately and more reliably. This is a point recognised by the Inspector that examined the 2018 Local Plan for South Cambridgeshire as referenced within paragraph 31 of the report.
“In order to arrive at a sound strategy, we consider that as a primary consideration, the Council would need to allocate more small and medium sized sites that could deliver homes in the short to medium term and help to bolster the 5-year HLS, until the Garden Communities begin to deliver housing. This would have the benefit of providing flexibility and choice in the market and the earlier provision of more affordable housing” (paragraph 114).
Accounting for the clear recommendations from the Planning Inspector on the 2018 Local Plan, it is not clear why this strategy has not been followed as part of the First Proposals.
Orwell, benefits from being a sustainable settlement in its own right. Orwell is a Group Village (as defined within the adopted Local Plan) that is not situated within the Green Belt. It benefits from primary education facilities, and a range of services, including shops, a pub, and community facilities.
Orwell has a very tightly drawn Development Framework which has remained unaltered since 2003. This does not allow for any windfall development. Orwell did not receive any allocations within the 2018 Local Plan and therefore provision for additional growth as part of the Local Plan 2041 would be appropriate and assist with maintaining viability and vibrancy of the village and meeting identified affordable housing need within Orwell.
For the above reasons, it is considered that the distribution of growth needs to be revisited and that the First Proposals are unsound in their current form. Whilst, clearly allocations that seek to minimise car travel has significant benefits, this should not be the only factor that dictates the most appropriate locations for new housing and employment development. In this regard, policy S/DS is not in accordance with national policy and it is not considered to be justified or effective in its current form.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (659.13 KB)
Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (970.86 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60624

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: NIAB Trust - Girton site

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land east of Redgate Road, Girton (HELAA site 40241)

In principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. National policy is clear that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services. Also provides additional emphases on the suitability of providing significant extensions to villages, provided that they are well located and designed.
Girton is a Minor Rural Centre (as defined within the adopted Local Plan) which benefits from both Girton Glebe Primary School and Girton Nursey and Pre-School, and a large range of facilities, including shops, pubs, restaurants and community facilities.
It is considered that this limited additional growth within Girton would be consistent with the objectives of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel.

Full text:

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and there...

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore emissions, can be minimised?
Yes, in principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services. The updated NPPF (2021), also provides additional emphases on the suitability of providing significant extensions to villages, provided that they are well located and designed.
The CPIER report (2018), which is referenced as a key document within the evidence base provides a detailed analysis regarding the potential benefits of focusing growth along key transport corridors. The proposed Cambridge South Station proposes significant sustainable transport improvements between Cambridge and Meldreth Station, which is within walking distance to Melbourn.
The site at Redgate Road is located in a sustainable area, with the development not overly reliant on car travel, with many public transport options easily accessible. Girton is a Minor Rural Centre (as defined within the adopted Local Plan) which benefits from both Girton Glebe Primary School and Girton Nursey and Pre-School, and a large range of facilities, including shops, pubs, restaurants and community facilities.
The release of the site from the Green Belt would facilitate the creation of a cycleway/footway that could link into the Darwin Green development to the south, on the opposite side of the A14. It is proposed that as part of any development of the site, of any size, a cycleway/footway route connecting Girton to Cambridge to the south would be incorporated and provide an improved linkage over the A14 and directly to the existing cycle and pedestrian links within Cambridge. This would further encourage a shift away from car use and towards more sustainable modes of transport.
It is considered that this limited additional growth within Girton would be consistent with the objectives of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel. The site would easily integrate into the existing built form of the settlement and relate to the housing development to the west.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1,015.90 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60625

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: NIAB Trust - Girton site

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land east of Redgate Road, Girton (HELAA site 40241)

Concern is also expressed in relation to the types of sites which have been allocated. Recently the St Albans Local Plan was withdrawn following a number of serious concerns raised by the Inspectors which included an overreliance on a small number of large strategic allocations. The findings of the Inspector in the examination of the Uttlesford Local Plan were very similar and also resulted in their Local Plan being withdrawn.
The current GCSPS housing growth strategy is reliant on a handful of very large allocations to deliver the proposed proportion of the growth in predominantly urban areas. It is considered that it would be more sustainable to distribute a wider range of housing growth/allocations across the Greater Cambridge area. National planning policies recognises that rural communities need to be able to grow and thrive to avoid decline. The inclusion of smaller sites will also aid delivery and more competition in the housing market.

Full text:

QUESTION: Do you agree that we should plan for an extra 550 homes per year, so that housing keeps up...

QUESTION: Do you agree that we should plan for an extra 550 homes per year, so that housing keeps up pressure with increased jobs in our area?
We agree that it is very important that housing delivery keeps up for demand for increased jobs within the area.
As part of the preparation of the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan, the Shared Planning Service has identified a need for 2,321 dwellings to be built per year. A significant proportion of this growth is made up of existing allocations within the Local Plan.
The initial evidence base and spatial options assessment for the emerging Local Plan, set three growth options; ‘minimum’ (40,300 dwellings - based upon standard methodology); ‘medium’ (46,200 dwellings- based upon economic forecast based upon long term historic employment) and ‘maximum’ (67,700 dwellings – based upon fast economic growth in the recent past). In view of this, the housing delivery target of 44,400 new homes over the plan period alongside 58,500 new jobs would fall between the ‘minimum ‘and ‘medium’ growth scenarios previously suggested.
The Development Strategy Topic Paper that accompanies this consultation acknowledges that the Greater Cambridge economy is dynamic and does not readily align with national or regional forecasts for job growth. In particular, it has a world-renowned life sciences cluster which has the potential to drive growth beyond typical regional or national rates. It is also acknowledged that in the recent past employment growth within the region has been significantly higher than predicted.
Accounting for the evidence set out within the Development Strategy Topic Paper, it is not clearly justified why only 44,400 new homes and 58,500 new jobs are proposed over the plan period. It is considered that this approach should be re-visited to increase both housing and employment allocations within the Local Plan. It is considered that the delivery of housing should be significantly increased, in line with the ‘maximum’ growth forecast, to align with economic growth within the recent past. The case for maximum growth forecast is further supported by significant transport investment within the area over the plan period. This includes schemes such as East-West Rail, Cambridge South Station and the delivery of a number of Rapid Transit Routes proposed by the Greater Cambridge Partnership.
The provision for lower growth scenarios does also not appear to be consistent with the Government’s objectives for the Ox-Cam Arc as a focus for housing and employment growth with associated infrastructure.
Concern is also expressed in relation to the types of sites which have been allocated. Recently the St Albans Local Plan was withdrawn in November 2020 following a number of serious concerns raised by the Inspectors which included an overreliance on a small number of large strategic allocations (500 dwellings or more, or over 14 ha) at the expense of smaller scale subareas. The Inspectors noted that such sites, provide choice and flexibility in the housing market and secure affordable housing more immediately as advocated in national planning policy. The findings of the Inspector in 2020, in respect of the examination of the Uttlesford Local Plan were very similar and also resulted in their Local Plan being withdrawn.
The current GCSPS housing growth strategy is reliant on a handful of very large allocations to deliver the proposed proportion of the growth in predominantly urban areas. It is considered that it would be more sustainable to distribute a wider range of housing growth/allocations across the Greater Cambridge area, as this will provide sustainable benefits for the existing settlements and communities in terms of existing businesses, facilities, and give people greater choice over where to live. National planning policies recognises that rural communities need to be able to grow and thrive to avoid decline. The inclusion of smaller sites will also aid delivery and more competition in the housing market.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1,015.90 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60629

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: NIAB Trust

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land north east of Villa Road, Impington (HELAA site 40236)

In principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages that have existing employment areas and have good access to local services and public transport links. National policy is clear that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.
The main factor holding back the unleashing the economic potential for Greater Cambridge is housing supply. Therefore, it is essential that the Greater Cambridge Local Plan puts forward an ambitious growth strategy so that it can attract and maintain the work force required to enable companies to grow.
Providing jobs near to residents to reduce the need to travel is a key issue. It is important that jobs are created in existing employment locations close to existing settlements in order to reduce car travel.

Full text:

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and there...

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore carbon emissions, can be minimise?
Yes, in principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages that have existing employment areas and have good access to local services and public transport links. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the NPPF that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.
The growth strategy is to create nearly 60,000 (58,500) new jobs across within the plan period to support the economic growth of Greater Cambridge. This growth scenario is at the medium level which aligns with the medium scenario for the housing growth strategy. This strategy requires 2,786 new jobs to be created per year. Greater Cambridge is in a unique position outside London that it has a strong growing economy. The main factor holding back the unleashing the economic potential for Greater Cambridge is housing supply. Therefore, it is essential that the Greater Cambridge Local Plan puts forward an ambitious growth strategy so that it can attract and maintain the work force required to enable companies to grow.
The aim of the jobs policies in the First Proposals is to encourage a flourishing and mixed economy in Greater Cambridge with a wide range of jobs. Sensitive small-scale employment development can help sustain rural economies, and provide a wider range of employment opportunities for local residents. Providing jobs near to residents to reduce the need to travel is a key issue. Therefore, it is important that jobs are created in existing employment locations close to existing settlements in order to reduce car travel.
The CPIER report (2018), which is referenced as a key document within the evidence base provides a detailed analysis regarding the potential benefits of focusing growth along key transport corridors. Histon & Impington is a highly sustainable location with excellent transport links including the Guided Busway and other bus services. It also has a strong employment area which is located alongside the Guided Busway. In the settlement hierarchy, Histon & Impington is identified as a ‘Rural Centre’ which has no limitation on the size of individual schemes.
It is therefore essential that the existing employment areas which are located adjacent to the existing settlement are enabled to grow, particularly in such a sustainable and attractive location as the Villa Road site. The allocation of the Villa Road site for employment use (B2 and E use classes) would attract companies to an establish employment area which has excellent links to a range of existing facilities which can be accessed without the need for car travel.
The Villa Road site is located within close proximity to the NIAB Agricultural Research facility which lies to the north along Villa Road which would complement the employment allocation of the site.
The Villa Road site is enclosed on three sides by an electricity terminal site to northwest, the Guided Busway to the north with large warehouses beyond, and housing to the south-east in Primrose Lane. No sites have been allocated for employment in Histon & Impington. The site represents an ideal and suitable site for employment due to having excellent transport links, being highly accessible by sustainable modes of transport and would not have a detrimental impact on the wider landscape context.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1.23 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60632

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: NIAB Trust

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land west of South Road, Impington (HELAA site 40232)

Concern is expressed in relation to the types of sites which have been allocated. Recently the St Albans Local Plan was withdrawn following a number of serious concerns raised by the Inspectors which included an overreliance on a small number of large strategic allocations. The findings of the Inspector in the examination of the Uttlesford Local Plan were very similar and also resulted in their Local Plan being withdrawn.
The current GCSPS housing growth strategy is reliant on a handful of very large allocations to deliver the proposed proportion of the growth in predominantly urban areas. It is considered that it would be more sustainable to distribute a wider range of housing growth/allocations across the Greater Cambridge area, as this will provide sustainable benefits for the existing settlements and communities in terms of existing businesses, facilities, and give people greater choice over where to live. National planning policies recognises that rural communities need to be able to grow and thrive to avoid decline. The inclusion of smaller sites will also aid delivery and more competition in the housing market.

Full text:

QUESTION: Do you agree that we should plan for an extra 550 homes per year, so that housing keeps up...

QUESTION: Do you agree that we should plan for an extra 550 homes per year, so that housing keeps up pressure with increased jobs in our area?
We agree that it is very important that housing delivery keeps up with demand for increased jobs within the Greater Cambridge area.
As part of the preparation of the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan, the Shared Planning Service has identified a need for 2,321 dwellings to be built per year. However, a significant proportion of this growth is made up of existing allocations within the current Local Plans.
The initial evidence base and spatial options assessment for the emerging Local Plan, set three growth options; ‘minimum’ (40,300 dwellings - based upon standard methodology); ‘medium’ (46,200 dwellings- based upon economic forecast based upon long term historic employment) and ‘maximum’ (67,700 dwellings – based upon fast economic growth in the recent past). In view of this, the housing delivery target of 44,400 new homes over the plan period alongside 58,500 new jobs would fall between the ‘minimum ‘and ‘medium’ growth scenarios previously suggested.
The Development Strategy Topic Paper that accompanies this consultation acknowledges that the Greater Cambridge economy is dynamic and does not readily align with national or regional forecasts for job growth; it generally exceeds it. This is in particular due to a world renowned life sciences cluster which has the potential to drive growth beyond typical regional or national rates. It is also acknowledged that in the recent past employment growth within the region has been significantly higher than predicted. Therefore, a more ambitious growth strategy should be prepared.
Accounting for the evidence set out within the Development Strategy Topic Paper, it is not clearly justified why only 44,400 new homes and 58,500 new jobs are proposed over the plan period. It is considered that this approach should be re-visited to increase both housing and employment allocations within the Local Plan. It is considered that the delivery of housing should be significantly increased, in line with the ‘maximum’ growth forecast, to align with economic growth within the recent past. The case for maximum growth forecast is further supported by significant transport investment within the area over the plan period. This includes schemes such as East- West Rail, Cambridge South Station and the delivery of a number of Rapid Transit Routes proposed by the Greater Cambridge Partnership.
The provision for lower growth scenarios does also not appear to be consistent with the government’s objectives for the Ox-Cam Arc as a centre for housing and employment growth.
Concern is also expressed in relation to the types of sites which have been allocated. Recently the St Albans Local Plan was withdrawn in November 2020 following a number of serious concerns raised by the Inspectors which included an overreliance on a small number of large strategic allocations (500 dwellings or more, or over 14 ha) at the expense of smaller scale subareas. The Inspectors noted that such sites, provide choice and flexibility in the housing market and secure affordable housing more immediately as advocated in national planning policy. The findings of the Inspector in 2020, in respect of the examination of the Uttlesford Local Plan were very similar and also resulted in their Local Plan being withdrawn.
The current GCSPS housing growth strategy is reliant on a handful of very large allocations to deliver the proposed proportion of the growth in predominantly urban areas. It is considered that it would be more sustainable to distribute a wider range of housing growth/allocations across the Greater Cambridge area, as this will provide sustainable benefits for the existing settlements and communities in terms of existing businesses, facilities, and give people greater choice over where to live. National planning policies recognises that rural communities need to be able to grow and thrive to avoid decline. The inclusion of smaller sites will also aid delivery and more competition in the housing market.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1.47 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60633

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: NIAB Trust

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Representation Summary:

Land west of South Road, Impington (HELAA site 40232)

In principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages. National policy is clear that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.
The encouragement of the use of public transport, cycling and walking in and around the South Cambridgeshire District and City of Cambridge would assist in addressing a key and fundamental issue, congestion. New development should aim to address this problem which would also be compliant with the key issue of Climate Change, a big theme underlying the new Local Plan.
it is considered that additional growth within Impington would be consistent with the objectives of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel.

Full text:

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and there...

QUESTION: Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore emissions, can be minimised?
Yes, in principle the proposal to focus development on sites where car travel can be minimised is supported. Consistent with this strategy, it is considered to be very important that some growth is delivered in villages. National policy is clear within paragraph 79 of the NPPF that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where they will support local services.
The CPIER report (2018), which is referenced as a key document within the evidence base provides a detailed analysis regarding the potential benefits of focusing growth along key transport corridors. Histon and Impington is on the Cambridge Busway and as such is located along a key public transport link into Cambridge, and also nearby towns of St Ives and Huntingdon within Huntingdonshire District. The Busway provides a service every 7 minutes, providing residents and employees with a reliable and sustainable option for travel. A potential new stop on the busway is currently being considered within Histon and Impington, within close proximity to land owned by our client, this is supported by the Histon and Impington Neighbourhood Plan and would further encourage a shift away from car use, towards more sustainable modes of transport for both existing and future employees and residents.
The release of Land West of South Road, Impington from the Green Belt would facilitate the creation of a cycleway/footway that could link into the Darwin Green development to the south, on the opposite side of the A14. It is proposed that as part of any development of the site, of any size, a cycleway/footway route connecting Histon and Impington to Cambridge to the south would be incorporated and provide an improved linkage over the A14 and directly to the existing cycle and pedestrian links within Cambridge. This would further encourage a shift away from car use and towards more sustainable modes of transport.
The encouragement of the use of public transport, cycling and walking in and around the South Cambridgeshire District and City of Cambridge would assist in addressing a key and fundamental issue, congestion. New development should aim to address this problem which would also be compliant with the key issue of Climate Change, a big theme underlying the new Local Plan. This new link has the potential to reduce pressure on the Strategic Road Network which currently does not have capacity to accommodate any new growth in the area.
In addition, Impington (and Histon), benefit from being sustainable settlements in their own right. Histon and Impington are identified in the current South Cambridgeshire Local Plan as a Rural Centre (Policy S/8) and are described as ‘the largest, most sustainable villages of the District.’ Due to this, there is no strategic constraint on the amount of development land for housing within their development frameworks. They benefit from both primary and secondary education facilities and a large range of services, including shops, pubs, restaurants and community facilities.
For the above reasons, it is considered that additional growth within Impington would be consistent with the objectives of the Local Plan, which seeks to minimise car travel.

Attachments:

Representations to the GCLP First Proposals (1.47 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60640

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: TTP Campus Limited

Agent: Savills

Representation Summary:

It is important that any development strategy being adopted by the planning authorities exploits and takes up the opportunities to use brownfield land (previously developed land) to ensure ,where appropriate, the protection of other more sensitive locations in the countryside. In the context of Melbourn, submissions have been made to amend the village framework to acknowledge the change in character of the landscape having regard to the granting of the planning permission for the new TTP headquarters north of Melbourn Science Park. Placing the new buildings within the settlement envelope is the logical approach and acknowledges the policy context where potential expansion could occur on that site having regard to its location within the development envelope. Clearly, the normal development management policies would apply of design, materials, privacy and amenity but importantly the principle of development in that location should not be one that is an issue.

Full text:

Representations to Greater Cambridge Local Plan – First Proposals
On behalf of TTP Campus Ltd

Sav...

Attachments:

APPROVED SITE PLAN.pdf (2.43 MB)
Planning permission boundary.pdf (889.32 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60641

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Bruntwood SciTech

Agent: Savills

Representation Summary:

Land to the west of Cambridge Road, Melbourn (HELAA site 40489)

The development strategy needs to continue to tackle significant commuting patterns that have been established over many years between the outlying villages and Cambridge City. The presence of a tightly drawn Green Belt around the edge of the City and then tightly around the necklace villages and beyond means that the opportunities for expansion on the edge of Cambridge and on the surrounding villages is extremely limited. Consequently, this strategy places great reliance on those areas outside of the Cambridge Green Belt to develop and consolidate their employment sector to provide attractive locations for new investment and jobs. Melbourn Science Park provides such a significant opportunity and the new owners will continue to work with the local planning authorities in order to introduce new investment into the Park whilst ensuring that the very qualities and legacy that has been established over many years continues to thrive and prosper.

Full text:

Bruntwood SciTech are the recent new freehold owners of Melbourn Science Park and as landowners, see...

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60668

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Mill Stream Developments

Agent: Smith Jenkins

Representation Summary:

Whaddon Road, Meldreth (west of The Burtons) (HELAA site 55082)

In addressing housing delivery it contends that Policies S/JH and D/DS would not be sound on the basis because they would not be justified or effective. The view is that for a housing delivery strategy to be effective, it will be required to take into account all reasonable alternatives to deliver the right amount of housing in the right place, including further small and medium sized additional housing sites.
Rural housing need: for the housing delivery strategy to be effective, requires to take into account all reasonable alternatives to deliver the right amount of rural housing, the right type of rural housing and in the right place to meet local needs for this part of Greater Cambridge, including much-needed affordable homes. The absence of additional housing allocations within the rural southwestern part of South Cambridgeshire other than the two sites at Melbourn, means that Plan is unlikely to meet the specific housing needs of this part of Greater Cambridge.
Additional growth arising from Oxford-Cambridge Arc: view is that the development strategy proposed by Greater Cambridge is unlikely to be sound in terms of providing an effective housing strategy given the limited number of additional housing sites would be likely to be
incapable of providing a sufficient level of flexibility to deliver additional growth which will come through
the Oxford-Cambridge Arc.

Full text:

General Comments
Our client is generally supportive of the Plan’s vision and overall aims as set out...

Attachments:

PO_Site55082_Rep_Letter_Redacted.pdf (1.29 MB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60673

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Anonymous First Proposals Consultation

Representation Summary:

You are moving forward with extra housing without a clear idea of how this will impact the rest of the city/wider area. You can't tell us how these developments will affect us, but you want us to tell you what we think. Until further information is available, then we should proceed slowly and certainly not seek to accelerate already approved projects.
I agree that the most important factors when considering a new development should be its environmental impact and its impact on local traffic. Building near workplaces and in a way to encourage green travel makes sense, but it will only mitigate the extra travel. I agree that encouraging use of public transport is a good thing, but with the scale of the developments proposed the strain on existing public transport infrastructure would be unbearable.
In summary, if you don't provide fuller, better information on the impacts of developments then my response will be "NO" to them all.

Full text:

I am writing to give feedback on the local plan after recently visiting an exhibition.

My view is ...

I am writing to give feedback on the local plan after recently visiting an exhibition.

My view is that you are moving forward with extra housing without a clear idea of how this will impact the rest of the city/wider area. You can't tell us how these developments will affect us, but you want us to tell you what we think - I think you need to do the work and publish clear models showing the impact on traffic and public transport usage and then on the basis of those models ask us what we think. Until that information is available, then I think we should proceed as slowly as central government allows and certainly not seek to accelerate already approved projects.
I agree that the most important factors when considering a new development should be its environmental impact and its impact on local traffic. Building near workplaces and in a way to encourage green travel makes sense, but it will only mitigate the extra travel - you need to tell us how many potential journeys you think these mitigating factors will save and how many journeys you think will still be made. I also agree that encouraging use of public transport is a good thing, but with the scale of the developments proposed the strain on existing public transport infrastructure would be unbearable - again before we can say if we approve of the developments you have to have a plan as to how the public transport system will be transformed to cope with all those extra journeys, and you have to tell us that plan in a clear and easily understood fashion. If the plan is: "build the houses and then see what we need" then the new occupants of the new houses will establish habits around car travel, habits that will be hard to break and the impact on congestion will be severe.
In summary, if you don't provide fuller, better information on the impacts of developments then my response will be "NO" to them all.

Can I also say how extraordinary your webpage on providing feedback is - these two sentences stand out on a page that seems entirely designed to discourage feedback while at the same time saying it welcomes it:
" We would be grateful if you avoided emailing us comments or documents, as we will have to manually enter them into the consultation system and ascribe them to policies or sites."
" If you want to know more about how to comment and how we take comments into account, please join our webinar about the comment process."
Obviously I have ignored the first of these, not out of spite but simply because I could see no other way of providing feedback that wasn't the quick questionnaire.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60677

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Green Parties

Representation Summary:

We broadly support the proposed policy direction in terms of where development should be focused (where it has the least climate impact etc). Our main concern, as detailed in previous sections, is the amount of development proposed.
We do however wish to raise concern over the amount of Green Belt that is likely to be destroyed through these plans. In particular, the NE Cambridge development is referred to as being on brownfield land, but this is only made possible by displacing Cambridge Wastewater Treatment works to Honey Hill, which is in the Green Belt.

Full text:

We broadly support the proposed policy direction in terms of where development should be focused (wh...

Attachments:

PO - Local Plan 1st Proposals Green Party response_Redacted.pdf (308.69 KB)

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 60685

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Trinity College

Agent: Sphere25

Representation Summary:

Cambridge Science Park North (HELAA site 40096)

Overall, we believe there is a significant chance that the forecast within the ELEDES underestimates the demand for commercial floorspace across Greater Cambridge, and particularly demand for the mid-tech floorspace supported at Cambridge Science Park North.

Full text:

SUMMARY BELOW, REPRESENTATION DOCUMENT ATTACHED

ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO HELAA SITE 40096...

Attachments: