Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Response to Question 2 - Additional Information 2.1 This representation refers to two adjoining sites. The smaller site comprises about 0.4ha to the north of Craft Way suitable for up to 4No. dwellings. It is bounded by a public right of way to the west beyond which is the curtilage of a listed residential dwelling known as No. 40 Hay Lane – sometimes referred to as ‘Two Trees’. It’s boundaries to the north and east are to the curtilage of No. 60 Hay Lane which comprises the second site subject to this representation. The site is presently unused and overgrown, characterised by a dense scrub of mainly self sewn woodland. 2.2 The second site has an illustrated capacity of 21 dwellings in addition to the retention of the existing residential property. It is also accessed in full from Craft Way and would enable the present driveway from Hay Lane serving the existing dwelling to be used solely as a pedestrian connection. The land comprises mainly residential garden although the parcel to the south of the house and adjoining Craft Way comprises a grassed paddock. 2.3 As illustrated, the scheme could provide a mixture of house types including detached and semi-detached dwellings and would provide the airport’s mix of tenures. If allocated in conjunction with the smaller site, the proportion of affordable dwellings would be calculated on the basis of a total of 25 dwelling units. 2.4 The boundaries of the larger site are to Craft Way to the south, existing residential curtilage to the west and to the curtilage of a large gated development of flats known as Woodland Grange to the north. The eastern boundary is to the grounds of a large but unlisted house at Brook End. As a result, the two parcels do not have a common boundary with open countryside. 2.5 The larger parcel is wholly excluded from the conservation area save for the present entrance drive. Both can be developed independently, or together retaining their existing boundaries supplemented by new landscape planting. As such development could reflect a sympathetic design in relation to the surrounding context in regard to structure, form and character in the settlement, enabling the development to seamlessly integrate into the existing development. Specifically, any development would not affect the setting of the listed building which is to the west of the public right of way and would not give rise to overlooking of the grounds of that dwelling or of No 60 Hay Lane to the north east. 2.6 A new access can be achieved from the site onto Craft Way, with suitable visibility splays achievable in both directions. 2.7 Particular attention can be paid to matters of access, to the relationship with the site boundaries and public rights of way which follow the western and northern boundaries, but which are outside the site limits. In addition, the wildlife and woodland designations and the proximity of the listed buildings can be taken into account to ensure that any impacts are mitigated against through means of design. 2.8 The site is free from constraint, available and deliverable and would not adversely impact on either the existing neighbouring dwellings or the character and appearance of the adjoining Conservation Area.

No uploaded files for public display

Nothing chosen

2.9 As long as the plan provides a consistent amount of housing provision throughout the course of the plan and the plan is adaptable to change, then planning to 2040 can be considered an appropriate date to be planning towards. 2.10 Moreover, it assures that the Plan when adopted will have at least a 15 year horizon of need at the point of adoption and will avoid the need, experienced by some Authorities, to extend the original period due to delays in preparation or the adoption process. 2.11 Therefore, whilst in terms of setting strategic patterns of growth, we would advocate as long a horizon as possible, in this instance we consider that 2040 reflects an appropriate balance of future planning and certainty of delivery.

Nothing chosen

2.12 The proposed ‘big themes’ are of significance, but the essential priority should be the delivery of sufficient development across the District.

Nothing chosen

2.14 Climate adaption should be seen as a universal and not as an exceptional requirement or characteristic in Grater Cambridge 2.15 A balance will be needed between delivering the development needed and the national objective of moving towards properly sustainable communities: this is unlikely to be fully delivered in the period to 2040 which must be considered to be a transitional period and planned for accordingly. 2.16 Climate adaptivity – and the general approach to development form and distribution – should be considered on a site by site basis tailored to each individual site, as the viability differs between each site and what can be realistically provided by each development in terms of climate adaptation, that will inherently increase the costs of development. In short, accelerated costs that diminish the viability of development or so work against needing economic and social needs must be avoided as this will damaging to key matters such as social inclusion as well as to the delivery of a sustainable future. 2.17 In particular therefore, we do not consider that climate adaption should dictate, for example, that all new development should be focused on a small number of central urban locations or new planned sustainable settlements. Rural communities which are a fundamental characteristic of the Greater Cambridge area, will continue to need support and levels of growth that will sustain them as communities. The way in which we build, the energy we use in our homes and the way we travel may change but delivering climate resilience should not mean either a substantial shift of existing populations out of rural communities nor the curtailment of future growth (of an appropriate scale) within them. 2.18 Climate resilience measures must however be realistic and deliverable within the economic, social and fiscal requirements to meet the housing needs of the population; they must also be capable of being delivered within whatever legislative framework driving sustainability and carbon neutrality shall prevail during the plan period.

2.19 Connectivity is a key consideration allowing greater movement within communities and enhancing the scope to support and create wildlife corridors. 2.20 As part of the development for proposals for the land off Craft Way, Steeple Morden there is the scope to provide additional public open space, and improve the connectivity of the existing footpath/biodiversity corridors within the village. Furthermore, the provision on site would enable scope for greater integration of community groups. 2.21 Currently the site is in private ownership and is not accessible to the wider public, under the development proposals greater public access would be permitted to natural habitats such as the woodland areas. 2.22 The provision of enhance open space, properly designed and managed would permit a greater level of biodiversity than the current dominating feature of vacant greenfield. Therefore, as a direct result of permitting this development in Steeple Morden there would be an inherent enhancement in the provision of publicly accessible green spaces.

2.23 As a matter of general principle, we support a greater integration of development into the natural environment. Biodiversity net gain can be achieved in a number of ways but in relation to meeting the housing needs of the Greater Cambridge area the focus should be on site selection which minimises impacts on established biodiversity resources but equally, using development to secure regeneration and enhancement. So, for example, the enhanced value of habitat can often better be secured by positive management – such as new tree planting of appropriate species - rather than simply seeking to preserve existing poor-quality vegetation. 2.24 We would also support the principle of off-site biodiversity projects where focused habitat creation can be delivered that helps support and encourage notified species and which can be more effective, in our view, than attempting to encourage the on-site coexistence of habitat and human occupation. That does not of course preclude taking action through design to allow for the encouragement of flora and fauna within our built-up areas. 2.25 As noted, the majority of the overall site area is residential curtilage and there is significant scope to regenerate unmanaged scrub and trees. Development would not however affect previously undisturbed open countryside. 2.26 As is demonstrated in the attached plans, the proposed development could be landscaped in a means that will encourage biodiversity and fulfil other functional requirements.

Nothing chosen

2.27 Enhancing the tree cover across Cambridgeshire is an important consideration, especially given the comparable lack of coverage in the region compared to other areas. It reflects on our comments regarding Q14 insofar as ecological and biodiversity enhancement should not be seen as confined to the individual does allocated for development. 2.28 In relation to the proposed sites at Steeple Morden the sites offer significant scope to incorporate new tree planting, both supplementary and in replacement, but in our view this opportunity alone, whilst supporting the implementation of the Cambridge Tree Strategy, is not suffice to meet the acknowledged need to increase tree cover in the Greater Cambridge area as a whole.

2.29 The larger site is capable of providing a policy compliant proportion of affordable housing provision to aid in improving social wellbeing and social inclusion. 2.30 Connectivity and integration are also important, especially in rural communities. The central rather than peripheral location of the sites and access from an established residential area is important as is the relationship to, and scope for enhancement of, the local footpath network. 2.31 By enhancing local greenspaces through the creation of on-site provision which should also be accessible to the existing community there is scope to promote better wellbeing through positive inclusion of the site into the wider community.

2.32 It is crucial that new development embodies the existing high-quality character features of the surrounding context which are highlighted by the local community. As part of the development proposals at Steeple Morden the high-quality design cues can be incorporated to the design reflecting local design considerations. In short, the scheme a scheme is capable of being designed which is appropriate to its location, but which also creates its own sense of place. This is supported by, and achieved through, the provision of public open space on site of a type that is appropriate to the needs of the community.

2.33 At Steeple Morden, the sites at Craft Way could contribute toward providing a varied suite of homes for the community, including an affordable portion of development. Moreover, as illustrated, the sites taken as a whole can provide for a mix of house types and sizes that would help further the creation of an inclusive community. 2.34 Notwithstanding the provision of affordable homes, all of the dwellings should be capable of being provided with energy efficiency measures: specifically, there would be scope given the form and density of the envisaged development as shown to make provision for energy saving technology such as heat pumps or integrated solar generation.