Histon & Impington Neighbourhood Plan - Submission consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 168083

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM10 Bypass Farm

a)Safeguarding element is a repeat the policy in Local Plan Could be deleted.

b)Number of criteria included relate to facility with % figures attached to them -how were these figures were decided upon. Reasonable? Evidence to support and justify them?

c)Final criterion looks to provide a safe and direct off-road access - is this achievable.

d)Would help user of Plan if Map 14 indicated where a sports hall could be located and car parking. It could also illustrate where a safe cycle link could be from the village. Would enhance policy providing certainty for local residents that might be impacted by proposals.

e)Design brief outlining the spatial parameters could help explain policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 168087

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM11 School Hill Garden

a)SCDC welcomes this policy but suggests it could be more clearly worded if the following wording had been used ... 'In accordance with Policy NH/11 in the adopted Local Plan this site is designated as a PVAA ....'

b)It may have been simpler if Map 15 had showed only the new PVAA rather than all those within the villages.

Comment

Representation ID: 168088

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM12 Local Green Space

SCDC welcomes this policy but suggests it could be more clearly worded if the following wording had been used...... 'In accordance with Policy NH/12 in the adopted Local Plan these sites are designated as LGS ....' The sites could then be listed within the policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 168089

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM12 Local Green Space -
V4 north Buxhall Farm

This site is adjacent to the area that is to be developed for a new primary school. SCDC had asked the parish council to liaise with the County Council to ensure that the requirement for the development of the school had been allowed for in designating this LGS. Once a LGS is included in a made neighbourhood plan it does not allow for flexibility of its boundary and can only be reviewed as part of the review of a neighbourhood plan or local plan. SCDC in designating LGS in the Local Plan had a principle whereby it did not identify school playing fields as this could cause problems in the future if a school wished to expand. Should this have been proposed as a PVAA to allow for flexibility?

Comment

Representation ID: 168090

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM12 Local Green Space
V14 Infant school field

SCDC has similar concerns to those for V4 north Buxhall Farm regarding designating this as a LGS if it impacts on the future development of the school. Should this have been proposed as a PVAA to allow for flexibility?

Comment

Representation ID: 168092

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM12 Local Green Space
V33 Cawcutt's Lake and adjacent land

Unclear from Table 4 the boundaries of this site. It would appear to have a number of separate areas which are not contiguous. Map 16 needs to clearly show a precise boundary line for this LGS. As shown currently it would appear that this site comprises of a number of parcels of land. Do they all have the same character? Would this LGS benefit from being considered as more than one area and would all meet the tests for LGS? Concerns that boundaries of these areas may overlap with red line boundary of DCO for A14 upgrading scheme being carried out by Highways England. Once within a made neighbourhood plan a LGS designation would have an impact on any future development works alongside A14.

Comment

Representation ID: 168093

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM13 Important Natural Habitats

Table 6 sets out a schedule of all the important natural habitats. SCDC welcomes the evidence of this detailed assessment but considers that it would be better placed in an evidence document rather than within the Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 168094

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM13 Important Natural Habitats
V33 Calcutt's Lake and adjacent land

It is not clear why it has been necessary to include this area within the protection of this policy as it already is within the Green Belt and is proposed as LGS.

Comment

Representation ID: 168097

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM13 Important Natural Habitats
V33 & V34

Concerns that it is not clear on Map 18 which parcels of land belong to which of these two sites. Appear that some parts of the sites are within the red line boundary of the DCO of the A14 upgrading scheme Although this is stated in Table 4 for V34ii) SCDC is confused by the boundaries. Map 18 needs to have clear boundary lines so there is no doubt to the user of the Plan as to the exact extent of each site. Having separate parcels of land is very confusing.

Comment

Representation ID: 168098

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Policy HIM14 Maximising Recreational Space

a)Management initiative set out in the second paragraph of this policy is beyond the scope of policy planning and could be deleted;

b)Not clear how a green linkage will be established as no explanation in supporting text to policy. Would help user of Plan if it were illustrated on Map 19.

c)Policy does not need to include the final section as the Local Plan has policies to consider this (Policy SC/8 and Policy NH/8). If this section is retained SCDC suggests that it be reworded. ' .. schemes that encroach on the playing field will be assessed in respect of the level of harm to the playing field'.