Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Search representations

Results for HD Planning Ltd search

New search New search

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/RRA: Allocations in the rest of the rural area

Representation ID: 57330

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

Meldreth HELAA site 40461

We believe there should be more allocations proposed within this area including the allocation of a number of small sites under 1 ha to allow the plan to be in accordance with NPPF paragraph 69.

We question some of the findings of the HELAA assessment process in particular the landscape assessment of site 40461.
The site is not a paddock and is not visible from the surrounding landscape nor from any public vantage point. There is adequate landscape buffer between the two settlements between the A10 and the Railway Line.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Rest of the rural area

Representation ID: 57331

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

The amount of development allocated within the First Proposals document for the rural area seems disproportionate and extremely low growth amount given the sustainable nodes of transport surrounding some of the rural villages. We believe the south west railway corridor area between Melbourn and Cambridge needs additional consideration as its own cluster. With the improvements within the Melbourn Greenway and also new proposed Travel Hubs at Foxton and the proposed Cambridge South West Travel Hub and new railway station for Addenbrookes we do not believe this option has been explored adequately.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/RSC: Village allocations in the rural southern cluster

Representation ID: 57332

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

It is unclear as to whether these allocations are existing commitments or proposed allocations. There seems to be discrepancy within the wording and mapping along with inclusion within the main development strategy and the table included at page 32.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

The rural southern cluster

Representation ID: 57333

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

We question the development strategy approach to elevate this area to its own policy section context over and above other rural public transport and employment clusters such as the area surrounding Melbourn – Cambridge. We believe this south western area should be explored in equal depth as an opportunity area to support existing communities with strong existing public transport connections and employment opportunities.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/CB: Cambourne

Representation ID: 57334

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

We agree that no further growth in Cambourne or the surrounding area should not be considered appropriate by the Councils’ until there is certainty that the Oxford-Cambridge route will be going ahead and will include a station at Cambourne. The First Proposals document states that 1,950 additional homes are being accounted for within the plan period and we assume these are based on the West Cambourne planning permission and therefore should be considered as an existing commitment rather than a new allocation and this requires amending within the document.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/CE: Cambridge east

Representation ID: 57336

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

This allocation is heavily reliant on major infrastructure either being relocated (the airport itself) or implemented such as the GCP Cambridge Eastern Access scheme. This allocation could leave the plan vulnerable at Examination stage due to deliverability and viability development risks.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/NEC: North east Cambridge

Representation ID: 57337

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

We question the deliverability and viability of 4,000 homes being delivered from this allocation within the plan period given the reliance on the relocation of the sewage treatment works and also the remediation which will be required as part of any development proposal. This allocation may cause the plan to be vulnerable to challenge at Examination stage.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/SB: Settlement boundaries

Representation ID: 57338

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

We believe that development boundaries should be removed and replaced with a criterion-based assessment. This will add flexibility to the policy and allow for individual sites to be judged on their own merits. It would also still prevent inappropriate development in the open countryside but allow for additional development on small sites in sustainable locations. The NPPF seeks to prevent development on ‘isolated’ sites but Local Plans should include a flexible approach to allow for the sustainable credentials of each site to be evaluated rather than preventing development completely just because a site falls outside of a boundary line.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/SH: Settlement hierarchy

Representation ID: 57339

Received: 10/12/2021

Respondent: HD Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

The settlement hierarchy review within the strategy topic paper appears to assess each settlement in terms of the services located within Parish boundaries rather than considering how different settlements interact and support each other (in line with paragraph 79 of the NPPF). When assessing each settlement perhaps the distance to the nearest service should be the criteria (such as was used within the HELAA site assessments) rather than just whether the service is available or not in the Parish. For example, the village of Meldreth is closely supported by the facilities of Melbourn.

Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

S/DS: Development strategy

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.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.