Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Object

Representation ID: 209262

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy S/GF – 7 (h): PE wish to promote the notion that a range of employment uses will be needed on site to create a mixed and balanced new community and also recognising the relationship of the site to nearby science parks in the southern cluster. However, we do not feel that the policy at this stage should be overly prescriptive, pending further work on the appropriate scale and mix of employment uses. Whilst we are supportive of the desire to promote local lastmile logistics hub / warehousing, the wording infers that this is the only purpose of any employment, which could serve to restrict the market (and prevent delivery).

Object

Representation ID: 209263

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy S/GF – 7(i): PE support E(g)(i) office uses appropriate for the site. However we question the need to be so specific about the Use Classes Order. What is the intention here? Consideration should be given to increasing the amount of floor space to create a sustainable community – further evidence / justification required to determine appropriate scale/ mix.

Support

Representation ID: 209264

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Policy S/GF – 7 (j): PE very much support the ambition for a mixed use town centre, and early delivery of amenities to support community integration from the earliest stages of development.

Comment

Representation ID: 209265

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Policy S/GF – 7 (k): PE support the desire to include primary and secondary education. This should be extended to include early years provision. We note in particular the comment that these should be delivered “from the early phases” of development. We support the sentiment, but are aware that there is considerable experience in the Greater Cambridge area of careful management of the timing of opening new schools (both primary and secondary), with implications for other nearby schools.

Support

Representation ID: 209266

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Policy S/GF – 7 (l): PE support in principle the desire to see provision of a new healthcare facility on the development. We wish to encourage early dialogue with the Integrated Care Board to understand the likely requirements and land take.

Support

Representation ID: 209267

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

Policy S/GF – 7 (m): PE support the intentions of the policy, noting further work is required to establish the scale of each element of open space, sports provision and to work through how best to integrate into a landscape led masterplan.

Comment

Representation ID: 209268

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

There seems to be an error with the paragraph numbering which reverts to 2. We have adopted this numbering for clarity, noting it will need to change.

Comment

Representation ID: 209269

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

PE support the desire for high quality design, and whilst we
share the ambition for an exemplar approach, greater clarity
is required on interpretation of what this means. We very much welcome the opportunity to develop a robust masterplan framework and to test the approach to a range of matters to reach common ground with GCSP on these point.

Comment

Representation ID: 209270

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

2(a): PE very much support the ambition of this aspect of policy. We support in principle but request clarity on what is referred to by “the landscape within its rural setting”. This may be interpreted in different ways and therefore we would welcome a discussion about what is intended here.

Support

Representation ID: 209271

Received: 30/01/2026

Respondent: Pampisford Estate Farms Limited and the Trustees of the James Binney Will Trust

Agent: No. 6 Developments

2(b) (i) through to (v): We support, in principle, the protection of the Ancient Monument (Roman Road) and Grade II Listed Building (Farmhouse), and are working through a process of better understanding the important features of the site, in order to consider an appropriate design response. This include a geophysical survey of parts of the site. We agree that key heritage assets need to be treated sensitively – and would seek to develop some broad principles in agreement with GCSP and all key stakeholders. We also support the need to carefully consider local townscape including local Conservation Areas. Minor amendments:
• Typo “burrows” should be “barrows”
• Typo “Far” should be “Farm”