Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Search representations
Results for Mac Mic Land search
New searchComment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/AH: Affordable housing
Representation ID: 205460
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Broadly supports but considers greater flexibility is required against the prescribed tenure mix for clearer recognition of viability considerations.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Rest of the Rural Area
Representation ID: 205464
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
This submission is for Land at Crow’s Nest Farm (HELAA Site Ref: 48096 and HELAA Site Ref: 208867). Previous submissions have been made under the Call for Sites, Issues and Options Consultation (January 2020), and ‘First Proposals’ (December 2021). The scheme has evolved in response to Officer feedback and now focuses on delivering housing as part of a Papworth town extension, while maintaining a strategic gap to the proposed Cambourne North extension and ensuring a sustainable development that can integrate with wider redevelopment opportunities. Land at Crow’s Nest Farm continues to represent a viable and deliverable opportunity to support wider growth, benefiting from its strategic location near Cambourne and its strong connectivity with the proposed EWR Oxford–Cambridge link.
Request for allocation of Papworth South.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/SH: Settlement hierarchy
Representation ID: 207022
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
The settlement hierarchy recognises the development potential of rural centres in accommodating growth beyond the main settlements. Given that the development strategy is dependent on the delivery of major urban extensions and development akin to new towns principles, we consider that in the short term, the sustainable growth of established settlements will offer an important source of new homes and other development. In the context of minor rural centres, we would suggest that an indicative maximum scheme size is not prescribed because this will be influenced by local contextual factors such that it is inappropriate to ascribe an arbitrary upper limit on development.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/CBN: Cambourne North
Representation ID: 207024
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Mic Mac Land object to the extent of the Strategic Enhancement Area which extends over a significant portion of the C/CBN. It would inhibit any future complimentary development potential offered by the Site Ref. 48096. We consider that the boundary of the SEA should be drawn less tightly around the eastern edge of Papworth Everard, to avoid prejudicing a proportionate level of settlement expansion. It is emphasised that our land interest would not seek to compete with the primacy of the Cambourne North expansion. Proportionate and incremental extensions to existing settlements like Papworth Everard present a sustainable alternative.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/HM: Housing mix
Representation ID: 207026
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Mic Mac Land supports the objective to secure a balanced housing mix, including the delivery of family housing, smaller homes and accommodation suitable for older people. However, the use of fixed percentage requirements could undermine scheme design and may inadvertently undermine deliverability. In this regard, we welcome the supporting text which confirms that deviations from the prescribed housing mix will be permitted where an alternative mix is justified. This flexibility is strongly supported.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/TH: Travel hub facilities
Representation ID: 207027
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Mac Mic Land supports the role of travel hubs as strategic components of the sustainable transport network and considers them to be particularly important in the context of town extensions, which are a key component of the Local Plan development strategy. The policy provides additional information and design requirements for Travel Hub facilities. It is suggested that an additional criterion is added under part 2, i.e as clause (g) for the following lines to include accessibility of facilities: “(g) they incorporate inclusive and step-free access between transport modes, appropriate lighting and natural surveillance”. This would strengthen the effectiveness of the policy, whilst also ensuring that the delivery of these travel hubs are future proofed and inclusive of wider population needs.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/ST: Sustainable transport and connectivity
Representation ID: 207028
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
The principle of reducing reliance on private car travel and the promotion of sustainable, inclusive and well-connected development through a vision-led approach is strongly supported and align with objectives for Papworth South.
Of particular support is subsection (c) which requires the provision of new mobility (travel hubs) to enable interchange between different modes of sustainable transport. It is considered that the wording used to define travel hubs are expanded to other community and connectivity requirements, to provide flexibility to the community in question.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/SI: Safeguarding important infrastructure
Representation ID: 207029
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
The policy identifies land that is subject to safeguarding directions, including EWR. Mac Mic Land are concerned with the extent of land safeguarded for EWR which is contained within the ownership boundary of Crow’s Nest Farm (Site Ref. 48096). Our view is the land safeguarded, and subsequently confirmed on the draft Prosposals Map has not been justified by EWR and extends northwards into Site Ref 48096, and so prejudices the site’s development potential. It is unclear why such an extensive tract of land is safeguarded beyond the proposed route of the railway. For the avoidance of doubt, Mac Mic Group strongly supports the principle of EWR as a catalyst to realising the regions growth potential but land should be safeguarded in a proportionate and justified manner that does not sterilise the development potential of adjacent land.
Mac Mic Land are largely supportive of the principle of maximising affordable housing delivery in Greater Cambridge and recognises the acute affordability pressures for the authoritative area. However, as currently drafted, Policy H/AH risks being overly rigid, insufficiently responsive to site-specific viability and inconsistent with national policy expectations on flexibility and deliverability. Modifications are required to ensure the policy is effective, justified and consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) particularly in respect of overly prescriptive tenure mix.
The draft policy proposes a minimum affordable housing requirement of 40% on major developments of 10 dwellings or more, unless otherwise specified through site specific allocation policies or within the Green Belt. While the principle of a policy led approach to affordable housing delivery is supported, the imposition of a uniform minimum requirement risks failing to adequately reflect the diversity of site conditions, abnormal costs and market circumstances that can materially affect scheme viability. Although the policy allows for viability testing, the overall framing remains prescriptive, which may discourage development coming forward, particularly on marginal or constrained sites. Its suggested perhaps a tiered approach to affordability is implemented in order to encourage SME provision.
In addition, the tenure requirements set out in Table 00: (Affordable Housing Tenures) are considered overly rigid. For schemes delivering 10–14 dwellings, the requirement for 75% social and affordable rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable housing, and for schemes of 15 dwellings or more, the requirement for 65% affordable rent, 10% social rent and 25% shared ownership or other affordable tenures, significantly limits flexibility. Such fixed tenure splits do not adequately account for site specific viability considerations, local market demand, or the ability of registered providers to take on particular tenures. As a result, these requirements risk prejudicing the deliverability of development and undermining the overall objective of maximising housing supply, including affordable homes.
Mac Mic Land therefore considers that Policy H/AH should be amended to introduce greater flexibility in both the headline affordable housing requirement and the prescribed tenure mix, with clearer recognition of viability considerations at the planning application stage.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/DS: Development strategy
Representation ID: 207032
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Mac Mic Land are supportive of the proposed role of Cambourne and surrounding areas as a cornerstone of the spatial strategy for Greater Cambridge, which offers a significant growth potential subject to the delivery of major infrastructure projects including East West Rail. Outside of development in, or on the edge of Cambridge, Cambourne is the third strand of the development strategy with a proposed allocation at Cambourne North, and an updated Cambourne allocation identified. We suggest that the development strategy should be flexible to enable deliverable development sites that compliment strategic growth objectives to be progressed in the early years of the plan period.
Request for allocation of Papworth South.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy J/AL: Protecting the best agricultural land
Representation ID: 207035
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Mac Mic Land
Agent: Planning Potential
Mac Mic Land supports the principle of protecting the best and most versatile agricultural land and recognises the importance of safeguarding Grades 1, 2 and 3a land where reasonable alternatives exist. Policy sets out in criterion (b) that the protection of agricultural land must be balanced against wider sustainability considerations and demonstrable development needs. This planning balance strand is supported and consistent with national policy, which requires decision-makers to take a proportionate and pragmatic approach where the benefits of development clearly outweigh the loss of agricultural land and where there are no suitable or available lower-grade development.
Request for allocation of Papworth South.
