Greater Cambridge Local Plan: Proposed Submission

Recommended Policy Amendments
To ensure Policy S/RRA/SCS meets the tests of Soundness, the following specific amendments should be incorporated into the draft policy text:
• Height Controls (Paragraph 3): Amend Paragraph 3 to explicitly state that building heights must strictly comply with Zone 1 parameters under Appendix H, capped at a maximum of 13 metres, without reliance on long-term landscape buffer growth to justify non-compliance.
• Commercial Traffic Restrictions (Paragraph 9iv): Expand Paragraph 9iv to mandate routing controls, Traffic Management Plans, and enforcement mechanisms covering Light Goods Vehicles (LGVs) and local distribution vans, in addition to HGVs, to protect Boxworth and surrounding villages.
• Commuter Impact Assessment (Paragraph 9): Insert a specific requirement for the Transport Assessment to model shift-pattern commuter traffic from surrounding settlements (e.g. Boxworth, Elsworth, Knapwell, Cambourne, Cambourne North) and secure proportional off-site local road mitigations.
• Cumulative Traffic Coordination (Paragraph 9): Insert a mandatory requirement for the Transport Assessment and Traffic Management Plan to be coordinated with Policy S/RRA/SHF (Slate Hall Farm, Bar Hill) and any anticipated unconsented commercial developments in the corridor, establishing joint trip budgets, cumulative junction capacity assessments, and unified traffic enforcement.
• Access Infrastructure (Paragraph 9iii): Amend Paragraph 9iii to explicitly require that primary vehicular site access be constructed directly off the Strategic Road Network (A14 / Junction 24A), with an absolute prohibition on primary commercial access via a C-class local road.

Soundness Failed:
• Not Justified: Failure to align building height controls with the low-rise, Fen-edge landscape character and low settlement scale, omitting the Zone 1 baseline height of 9m and tall building threshold of 13m from Policy GP/ST. Policy fails to justify the traffic scope omitting LGVs and employee commuter traffic from local road impact.
• Not Effective: Policy lacks enforceable height parameters, allowing tall commercial structures (e.g. high-bay logistics units) to cause visual intrusion across rural landscapes. Also ineffective as it treats transport impacts in isolation, failing to mandate cumulative traffic coordination across the A14 corridor.

Required Modifications to Ensure Soundness
To make the Plan Sound and ensure Policy GP/ST and Appendix H operate as effective development management controls, the following modifications are required:
• Mandatory Prohibition on Exceeding Threshold Heights: Policy GP/ST and Appendix H must be amended to state explicitly that the context height (9m) and tall building threshold (13m) in Zone 1 represent mandatory maximum parameters, and that development exceeding these height thresholds will not be permitted.
• Standardized Measurement for Commercial Buildings: Paragraph H.19 or H.21 should be amended to clarify that building heights for commercial and industrial structures (Use Classes B2 and B8) are measured to the highest structural point, including roof ridges, parapets, and plant enclosures.
• Ineffectiveness of Landscape Mitigation for Excess Height: Appendix H (Criterion 1 or 3) must explicitly specify that proposed landscape planting will not be accepted as justification to exceed Zone 1 height limits. Native structural planting requires 15 to 25 years to mature in flat rural landscapes, and seasonal leaf loss significantly reduces winter screening effectiveness. Landscape buffers cannot mitigate the visual impact of structures that exceed context height thresholds.

Tests of Soundness Failed:
Not Effective: Establishing height parameters for Zone 1 is sound in principle, but the policy draft fails to make these thresholds mandatory. Lacking explicit, prohibitive language that bars developments exceeding the 13m tall building threshold, it cannot function as an effective development control mechanism—leaving sensitive rural landscapes exposed to high-bay commercial structures.
Inconsistent with National Policy: The framework lacks the definitive statutory control required under the NPPF to safeguard rural settings, landscape character, and village gateway approaches.

Amend to make maximum height parameters mandatory.

Tests of Soundness Failed:
Not Effective: Establishing height parameters for Zone 1 is sound in principle, but the policy draft fails to make these thresholds mandatory. Lacking explicit, prohibitive language that bars developments exceeding the 13m tall building threshold, it cannot function as an effective development control mechanism—leaving sensitive rural landscapes exposed to high-bay commercial structures.
Inconsistent with National Policy: The framework lacks the definitive statutory control required under the NPPF to safeguard rural settings, landscape character, and village gateway approaches.

Required Modifications to Ensure Soundness
To make the Plan Sound and ensure Policy GP/ST and Appendix H operate as effective development management controls, the following modifications are required:
• Mandatory Prohibition on Exceeding Threshold Heights: Policy GP/ST and Appendix H must be amended to state explicitly that the context height (9m) and tall building threshold (13m) in Zone 1 represent mandatory maximum parameters, and that development exceeding these height thresholds will not be permitted.
• Standardized Measurement for Commercial Buildings: Paragraph H.19 or H.21 should be amended to clarify that building heights for commercial and industrial structures (Use Classes B2 and B8) are measured to the highest structural point, including roof ridges, parapets, and plant enclosures.
• Ineffectiveness of Landscape Mitigation for Excess Height: Appendix H (Criterion 1 or 3) must explicitly specify that proposed landscape planting will not be accepted as justification to exceed Zone 1 height limits. Native structural planting requires 15 to 25 years to mature in flat rural landscapes, and seasonal leaf loss significantly reduces winter screening effectiveness. Landscape buffers cannot mitigate the visual impact of structures that exceed context height thresholds.

Tests of Soundness Failed:
Not Effective: Establishing height parameters for Zone 1 is sound in principle, but the policy draft fails to make these thresholds mandatory. Lacking explicit, prohibitive language that bars developments exceeding the 13m tall building threshold, it cannot function as an effective development control mechanism—leaving sensitive rural landscapes exposed to high-bay commercial structures.
Inconsistent with National Policy: The framework lacks the definitive statutory control required under the NPPF to safeguard rural settings, landscape character, and village gateway approaches.