Greater Cambridge Local Plan: Proposed Submission

British Land considers that, for the reasons set out in Chapters 2 to 5, the emerging Plan is not fully justified and is not fully effective insofar as it excludes Land at South Trumpington from the development strategy. The allocation of the Site would improve flexibility, resilience and delivery capability whilst remaining wholly consistent with the Plan's overarching spatial strategy and objectives. The Site is available, achievable and suitable for development and represents a sustainable edge-of-Cambridge opportunity capable of contributing towards the Plan's housing and employment objectives. British Land therefore requests that the Councils reconsider the role of Land at South Trumpington within the development strategy and modify the Plan to allocate the Site for development.

The Local Plan should be assessed against minimum housing requirements and against its ability to respond positively to uncertainty in future housing and employment demand. Given the scale of proposed economic growth within GC, the reliance on a small number of large strategic sites and the Government's continued emphasis on supporting growth in Cambridge, it is appropriate that the Plan incorporates additional sustainable and deliverable opportunities capable of strengthening housing and employment delivery. Allocation of South Trumpington would improve the resilience, flexibility and effectiveness of the Strategy whilst remaining consistent with the Plan's preference for sustainable edge of Cambridge growth.

British Land therefore considers that, for the reasons set out in Chapters 2 to 5 of their Representations, the emerging Plan is not fully justified and is not fully effective insofar as it excludes Land at South Trumpington from the development strategy. The allocation of the Site would improve flexibility, resilience and delivery capability whilst remaining wholly consistent with the Plan's overarching spatial strategy and objectives. The Site is available, achievable and suitable for development and represents a sustainable edge-of-Cambridge opportunity capable of contributing towards the Plan's housing and employment objectives. British Land therefore requests that the Councils reconsider the role of Land at South Trumpington within the development strategy and modify the Plan to allocate the Site for development.

British Land considers that the exclusion of Land at South Trumpington from the Development Strategy is not justified by proportionate Green Belt evidence. The Plan has not demonstrated that the chosen strategy represents the most appropriate strategy when reasonable alternatives, including sustainable and deliverable grey belt opportunities on the edge of Cambridge, are properly considered. The omission of the Site therefore contributes to British Land’s conclusion that the Plan is not justified and is not effective. The Plan should be modified to allocate Land at South Trumpington for development.

British Land therefore considers that, for the reasons set out in Chapters 2 to 5 of its Representations report (attached), the emerging Plan is not fully justified and is not fully effective insofar as it excludes Land at South Trumpington from the development strategy. The allocation of the Site would improve flexibility, resilience and delivery capability whilst remaining wholly consistent with the Plan's overarching spatial strategy and objectives. The Site is available, achievable and suitable for development and represents a sustainable edge-of-Cambridge opportunity capable of contributing towards the Plan's housing and employment objectives. British Land therefore requests that the Councils reconsider the role of Land at South Trumpington within the development strategy and modify the Plan to allocate the Site for development.

British Land supports the broad sequential approach established by Policy S/DS, including its identification of the edge of Cambridge as a preferred location for growth after the Cambridge urban area. However, the evidence does not demonstrate that this preference has been applied consistently when selecting sites for allocation. In particular, the Councils have reached conclusions about the Site that are not justified by the evidence, particularly given the changed circumstances at South Trumpington and the strategic objectives of the Plan.

British Land considers that, for the reasons set out in Chapters 2 to 5, the emerging Plan is not fully justified and is not fully effective insofar as it excludes Land at South Trumpington from the development strategy. The allocation of the Site would improve flexibility, resilience and delivery capability whilst remaining wholly consistent with the Plan's overarching spatial strategy and objectives. The Site is available, achievable and suitable for development and represents a sustainable edge-of-Cambridge opportunity capable of contributing towards the Plan's housing and employment objectives. British Land therefore requests that the Councils reconsider the role of Land at South Trumpington within the development strategy and modify the Plan to allocate the Site for development.

The Local Plan should be assessed against minimum housing requirements and against its ability to respond positively to uncertainty in future housing and employment demand. Given the scale of proposed economic growth within GC, the reliance on a small number of large strategic sites and the Government's continued emphasis on supporting growth in Cambridge, it is appropriate that the Plan incorporates additional sustainable and deliverable opportunities capable of strengthening housing and employment delivery. Allocation of South Trumpington would improve the resilience, flexibility and effectiveness of the Strategy whilst remaining consistent with the Plan's preference for sustainable edge of Cambridge growth.

The Plan should include sufficient flexibility to accommodate delays, market changes or infrastructure constraints that may affect their delivery.

British Land supports the broad sequential approach established by Policy S/DS, including its identification of the edge of Cambridge as a preferred location for growth after the Cambridge urban area. However, the evidence does not demonstrate that this preference has been applied consistently when selecting sites for allocation. In particular, the Councils have reached conclusions about the Site that are not justified by the evidence, particularly given the changed circumstances at South Trumpington and the strategic objectives of the Plan.

The accompanying Technical Note highlights that the most robust way to assess the potential of land for grey belt consideration would be to use the latest NPPF approach, which has gone through several publication updates and clearly sets out how grey belt is identified and used in both plan making and decision-taking.

British Land considers that the exclusion of Land at South Trumpington from the Development Strategy is not justified by proportionate Green Belt evidence. The Plan has not demonstrated that the chosen strategy represents the most appropriate strategy when reasonable alternatives, including sustainable and deliverable grey belt opportunities on the edge of Cambridge, are properly considered. The omission of the Site therefore contributes to British Land’s conclusion that the Plan is not justified and is not effective. The Plan should be modified to allocate Land at South Trumpington for development.