Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Object

Representation ID: 208153

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy should be deleted from the Plan. An alternative strategy (prioritising brownfield/intensification and sites with demonstrably adequate infrastructure and water capacity) should be pursued. GAPC objects to allocation S/GF (Grange Farm) on the basis that it conflicts with national policy and fails the tests of soundness (positively prepared, justified, effective, and consistent with national policy).

Object

Representation ID: 208154

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The site comprises high-quality agricultural land in a county where productive chalklands make a nationally significant contribution. National policy expects plans to prefer poorer-quality land where significant development of agricultural land is necessary; the Plan and evidence base do not demonstrate that reasonable alternatives have been exhausted. Allocation S/GF is not justified given national policy’s strong preference to avoid BMV loss where alternatives exist.

Object

Representation ID: 208155

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The proposal would urbanise an open chalkland ridge landscape, with densities likely requiring mid-rise blocks that would be prominent on rising ground—contrary to the area’s East Anglian Chalk character of expansive views and simple rolling topography. In landscape terms, S/GF is not consistent with national policy on well-designed places and conserving and enhancing the natural environment, and is not justified given the character sensitivity of the chalk ridge.

Object

Representation ID: 208156

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

No access is proposed to the A11 due to trunk-road junction spacing constraints; the proposal relies on the Cambridge South East Transport (CSET) scheme (TWAO), which is not yet consented and has a public inquiry timetabled for 2026 at the earliest—creating significant delivery dependency and uncertainty. The allocation is not effective nor deliverable within the plan period without speculative assumptions about CSET consent, funding and build-out.

Object

Representation ID: 208157

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The allocation sits above the River Granta chalk-stream catchment where ecological status is not good, and where regional plans recognise water scarcity and the need to avoid increases in abstraction until new strategic resources come on line. Large-scale development here risks run-off and water-quantity impacts on a nationally rare habitat. Given current water constraints and the sensitivity of the Granta, S/GF is not consistent with national policy for environmental protection and not effective unless tied to the commissioning of strategic water infrastructure—beyond the likely plan period.

Object

Representation ID: 208158

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Experience at comparable new settlements (e.g., Northstowe) shows slow build-out and delayed town-centre services; with Grange Farm’s dependency on unconsented transport infrastructure, risks to timely delivery of a self-sustaining community are material. With a comparable reliance on strategic transport (CSET) and constrained early-phase facilities, Grange Farm risks replicating “commuter-dormitory” dynamics rather than a balanced settlement—contrary to Plan objectives.

Object

Representation ID: 208159

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Delete S/GF. Re-allocate growth through (i) urban intensification and brownfield first, (ii) settlements with consented strategic transport and proven water capacity, and (iii) a phasing approach contingent on the commissioning of regional water schemes. This approach aligns with the NPPF (Dec 2024) plan-making tests and with the natural environment and making-effective-use-of-land chapters.

Object

Representation ID: 210963

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Without prejudice to the Plan’s overall housing requirement, GAPC supports the following strategic shifts, consistent with national policy: Brownfield and urban intensification first, including estate renewal, airspace and town-centre living, with design-led density near rail and rapid bus—minimising greenfield/BMV take. Contingent phasing tied to commissioning of strategic water infrastructure (e.g., Fens Reservoir; regional transfers) and measurable demand reduction—avoiding reliance on increased abstraction from chalk aquifers. Focus on locations with consented or funded mass-transit and road access solutions, to ensure early delivery of centres and services.

Object

Representation ID: 210964

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Abington Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Strengthen Plan-wide policy text on BMV safeguarding and chalk-stream protection (explicit preference hierarchy for land quality; runoff and aquifer protection standards above baseline).