Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 208985

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton supports Policy GP/QD and its overarching objectives, particularly creation of walkable neighbourhoods that align well with the design principles underpinning the approved Bourn Airfield masterplan. The principles set out in Policy GP/QD provide a helpful and flexible framework that complements the ongoing Reserved Matters work at Bourn Airfield. In particular, the policy allows for a context-led approach that recognises the site’s unique characteristics, masterplan vision, and locally distinctive design aspirations.

Comment

Representation ID: 208986

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Although we fully support the principle of addressing climate change through sustainable development, the policy introduces a broad and highly ambitious suite of requirements that are not sufficiently justified, lack clarity, and do not demonstrate an understanding of the practical and viability implications for major development. In its current form, CC/SD risks creating significant uncertainty for applicants and may unintentionally compromise the deliverability of strategic sites such as Bourn Airfield. A further concern is that CC/SD exceeds the expectations of national policy without adequate justification. Policy CC/SD should be redrafted to provide a clearer, more proportionate and more deliverable framework that should focus on high-level sustainability objectives.

Comment

Representation ID: 208987

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

While the overarching ambition is supported to reduce carbon emissions from new development, the policy as drafted is neither justified nor deliverable and presents serious risks to the viability and delivery of strategic sites, including Bourn Airfield. Policy CC/NZ fails multiple tests of soundness. It is not justified because the evidence base does not demonstrate that the proposed thresholds are achievable across all building types or site contexts. Policy CC/NZ must be redrafted to be evidence-based, feasible, proportionate, and compatible with national policy while still supporting the transition to low-carbon development.

Comment

Representation ID: 208988

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

While we fully support the principle of ensuring development is resilient to climate impacts, the draft policy introduces requirements that are overly prescriptive, insufficiently evidenced, and lack the flexibility necessary to account for the diverse conditions and design parameters of major development sites such as Bourn Airfield. A central concern is that the policy adopts a highly prescriptive approach (conflicting with the NPPF) to climate-resilient design, mandating specific measures relating to thermal comfort, overheating mitigation, urban cooling, air quality, wind environment, and building orientation. Policy CC/DC should be revised to provide a more flexible, evidence-based and proportionate approach to climate-resilient design.

Comment

Representation ID: 208989

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Despite supporting the principle, we object to the policy as currently drafted on the grounds that it is overly prescriptive, insufficiently evidence-based and has the potential to conflict with established design frameworks for strategic allocations. The policy attempts to impose a broad range of detailed requirements relating to multifunctionality, ecological targets, connectivity, water management, recreational access and long-term stewardship. There is also a lack of clarity around long-term governance, maintenance responsibilities and funding mechanisms for green and blue infrastructure. Policy BG/GI be revised to provide a more flexible, proportionate and deliverable approach.

Comment

Representation ID: 208990

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton supports the principle of enhancing green infrastructure, however, we object to Policy BG/TC as it is rigid, prescriptive and has untested requirements which are neither justified nor deliverable across all development contexts. The policy does not sufficiently acknowledge that strategic sites have long build-out periods and phased delivery. The policy should adopt a more flexible, outcome-based approach tailored to site-specific opportunities and constraints rather than prescribing canopy percentages or tree quantities in isolation. It should support the delivery of high-quality, well-located trees that contribute meaningfully to landscape character and biodiversity, while allowing the detailed design to be shaped through the masterplanning and Reserved Matters process.

Comment

Representation ID: 208991

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton object to Policy WS/HD because it is overly broad, prescriptive and insufficiently justified, placing significant and sometimes unrealistic burdens on developments of all scales. In its present form, the policy risks duplication with other parts of the Plan, lacks proportionality, and has not been supported by appropriate evidence or viability testing. The policy should focus on high-level principles that support healthy placemaking, while relying on topic-specific policies and site-specific assessments to secure detailed requirements. Proportionality must be embedded through clear thresholds and flexibility for non-strategic sites. The HIA requirements need to be revised to only apply to major strategic developments, with rapid assessments or no assessment required for smaller schemes. The policies expectations must be tested through whole-plan viability analysis before the next iteration of the Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 208992

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton objects to Policy H/HM. While the principle of delivering a balanced mix of homes to meet a range of local housing needs is supported, the policy is overly prescriptive, lacks sufficient flexibility and does not reflect the practical realities of delivering housing on large, phased sites such as Bourn Airfield. The policy does not adequately account for the need to maintain delivery rates on large strategic sites. The ability to vary the mix across phases is essential to respond to changing demand, absorption rates and economic conditions. A fixed, percentage-based policy requirement would hinder this responsiveness and could slow the build-out, directly contradicting national policy objectives to support and maintain housing delivery.

Comment

Representation ID: 208993

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton objects to Policy H/SS. While the delivery of high-quality, accessible homes is supported, the policy adopts an unduly rigid and prescriptive approach to both internal and external space standards, introduces requirements that are not evidenced or proportionate, and fails to demonstrate deliverability. The uniform thresholds do not reflect the diversity of development contexts across Greater Cambridge. The evidence base provides no robust justification for the 30 sqm minimum requirement, nor does it explain why the same standard should apply universally to all houses regardless of size, typology or bedroom count. The policy should be revised to introduce significantly greater flexibility, allow genuinely design-led solutions, and reflect the varied practical constraints affecting different types of residential development.

Comment

Representation ID: 208994

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Barratt Homes Northampton

Barratt Northampton objects to Policy H/CB. While supporting opportunities for self- and custom-build housing is an important objective, the policy’s requirement that all developments of more than 20 homes must provide a fixed 5% proportion of self- or custom-build plots is unduly prescriptive and does not reflect the varying suitability of different sites or the practicalities of delivering major housing schemes. In addition, Policy H/CB omits an important flexibility mechanism contained within the existing Policy H/9. Barratt Northampton therefore requests that Policy H/CB be amended to introduce greater flexibility (removing 5% requirement, allowing delivery off-site and reinstating 12-moth marketing caveat that enables developers to build out plots where no self-builder has come forward).