Question 47. What do you think about growing our villages?

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. The promoted development at land at Fen Drayton Road in Swavesey would support the existing services and facilities in the village, including a variety of convenience stores, a post office, a primary school (Swavesey Primary School) and a secondary school (Swavesey Village College), doctor's surgery and pharmacy, public houses and restaurants. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridgeshire. Therefore, it is requested that medium sized sites such as land at Fen Drayton Road in Swavesey is allocated to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including medium sized sites that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, the promoted development at land at Fen Drayton Road in Swavesey is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport, and is well-related to the Cambridge Guided Busway stop to the north of the village. As set out in the call for sites submission, there are no significant constraints to development at land at Fen Drayton Road in Swavesey, and the promoted development includes flood and drainage improvement works to reduce the risk of flooding at the site and adjacent residential areas, which would benefit approximately 120 nearby properties on Moat Way and Whitegate Close. The site is not in the Green Belt. There are no heritage assets that affect the site. There is an established woodland belt at the western boundary of the site, and trees and hedgerows at the other site boundaries. The trees and hedgerows would mostly be retained and additional planting would be provided within the promoted development, and as a result there should not be a significant adverse effect on the landscape setting of the village. The proposed development includes a new access on to Fen Drayton Road with appropriate footways and junction arrangements. The promoted development would include a number of biodiversity enhancement measures, including planting, trees and habitats to support species, invertebrates and reptiles, a wildlife pond and a swale, and bird and bat boxes. For all these reasons it is requested that land at Fen Drayton Road in Swavesey is allocated for residential development in emerging GCLP.

8.6 The principle of spreading some growth (new homes and jobs) out to the villages is supported. The NPPF advises, at paragraph 78, that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. It adds that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. 8.7 The ability of new development to support rural communities is especially important given the loss of rural services experienced in recent years. The impact of these service losses on rural communities is accentuated when considering pre-existing low service levels compared to better served, urban areas. The ‘Dispersal: Villages’ option therefore presents an opportunity for sustainability enhancements within rural communities. 8.8 The approach of directing some growth to the villages should also take account of existing and proposed public transport improvements. With reference to Shepreth, whilst it is a relatively small village, it benefits from a railway station and being within the A10 corridor, plus close proximity to further facilities and services available in nearby villages.

2.40 As set out, many villages within the Greater Cambridge area are sustainable in their own right, with local services and public transport facilities. Furthermore, a large number of villages in the area are in close proximity to the outer fringe of Cambridge. As such, several villages within the Greater Cambridge area are sustainable for the development of both jobs and homes. Therefore the new Local Plan should look to allocate for appropriate levels of employment and housing growth within and to the edges of villages. 2.41 Paragraph 72 of the NPPF sets out that ‘the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed, and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities.’ As such there is clear national policy encouragement for the growth of villages. Paragraph 78 adds that ‘planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby’. 2.42 As has been demonstrated throughout these representations, Teversham is such a village that is sustainable in its own right, but is also in very close proximity to Cambridge. Teversham is therefore a village that is able to accommodate a proportionate amount of new housing growth in order to meet the needs of the area. The development of the Land at Fulbourn Road, Teversham site would also provide new and enhanced local facilities to the benefit of both new and existing residents, helping to boost the sustainability of the settlement further.

As set out above, it is considered that the villages play an important role in ensuring that the existing services and facilities within the village can continue to be sustained. As referenced at Question 42 above, we fully support the delivery of new development in villages. Such development has the benefit of increasing and sustaining the population of the villages. One important factor to consider is that without development, the population can fall and average age increase as younger residents who may wish to move outside the family home, are forced to move elsewhere due to a lack of available housing stock or being priced out of the village housing market. Meanwhile older people tend to stay in larger family homes due to a lack of options to downsize. New development can deliver a range of housing types, including housing for the elderly, which can mean that older residents can move to more suitable accommodation, freeing up existing family housing. New affordable housing can also be provided by developments, further improving the range of housing tenures that local people can access. Specialist housing such as care homes or the increasingly popular retirement villages can also be delivered where required. With regards to delivery, the NPPF is unequivocal that the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns. We consider that large extensions to villages, where well integrated to public transport, is a viable option to assist in meeting increased housing needs. Such proposals can deliver high quality schemes as envisaged within the Oxford Cambridge Arc. We consider the two proposals included in these representations are optimally positioned to deliver in this regard.

8.10.1 The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing need towards the growth of existing villages. Sustainable development in these areas provide financial support for existing services, opportunities for enhancements to biodiversity and open space provision, improvements to existing services including doctor’s surgeries and schools and provides an opportunity for the provision of market and affordable homes to those who may not be able to live in these settlements. 8.10.2 Careful consideration should be given to the location of development within villages. Minor Rural and Rural Centres should be the focus of development, due to the provision of existing services capable of supporting an additional population. Sustainable transport should be expected with the locations, including clear and safe cycle lanes, footpaths and a good level of public transport. 8.10.3 Cottenham, for example, is a sustainable location to accommodate some new development and help to cater for some of the growth needs of Greater Cambridge. The development of the site to the south of Oakington Road, Cottenham could deliver social, economic and environmental benefits to the village including: ● The opportunity to deliver affordable homes to help meet the housing needs of Cottenham and the wider district; ● Locating residential development within one of the District’s largest and most sustainable villages. The site is located within 1km of the village centre; ● A landowner who wishes to work closely with the local residents to provide residential development to address their needs; ● Supporting the existing services of Cottenham; ● Enhancing net biodiversity on site, by delivering high quality green infrastructure for the benefit of ecology as well as existing and future residents.

Q47: What do you think about growing our villages? We strongly support suitable growth within villages, particularly the villages located in the most sustainable locations. The focus on growing our villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within them and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers. The new Plan needs to ensure that existing businesses within the villages are able to stay open and provide services not only for the village that they are located, but also for smaller infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within and adjacent to larger settlements. Sustainably located villages such as Histon, Impington and Girton are ideally located and of a size to accommodate a suitable proportion of housing and employment growth. Growing these would not necessarily see an increase in commuting by car or the need to travel to access services and facilities due to availability of services and easy access to public transport links. Conversely, it would assist with minimising the impact on the already at capacity highway infrastructure in and around Cambridge City Centre, which has recently had substantial housing growth. In addition, to ensure supply is maintained, Local Planning Authorities are also required to monitor the progress in building out sites, to comply with the housing delivery test, as outlined within our covering letter. Currently, the supply of housing in South Cambridgeshire is only marginally above the 5-year requirement (5.05 years – Appeal Reference APP/W0530/W/19/3220761) and the Government’s recently published housing delivery figures for 2019 indicate delivery to be at 95% which while not significantly below the target is still falling short. The current Local Plan 2018 for both South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City includes allocations for two new settlements at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield as well as the continued development of Northstowe. However, these larger growth sites will only be delivered later on in the plan period and as acknowledged within the Inspectors Report, there is ‘no requirement for these sites to deliver housing in the early years of the plan period and consequently there will be an opportunity to review progress through the preparation of a joint local plan.’ The Council will also be aware of the recent outcome of the Uttlesford Local Plan Examination, where the Inspector was concerned that an overreliance had been placed on the development of three new garden communities and that insufficient smaller sites had been identified throughout the rural area to ensure that a 5-year supply could be maintained. In recent years many villages across the Greater Cambridge area have lost vital services as shops have closed, public houses have been converted into residential properties and bus services have been reduced. Histon, Impington and Girton are fortunate in this regard and have maintained a number of its key services and transport options. It is therefore important to enable modest, appropriately-sized extensions to rural centres and villages so that the remaining services can be supported and to enable much needed new market and affordable housing to be provided. Summary of Comments: Support for a strategy that includes growth in villages at a level that is commensurate with their size and scale and enables sustainable growth.

Strongly agree. Particularly where these villages are well-connected via transport corridors. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. Papworth Everard is defined as a Minor Rural Centre in South Cambridgeshire District Council's current settlement hierarchy and therefore sits towards the top of the Council’s settlement hierarchy. Papworth Everard contains an extensive range of services and facilities including a convenience store, hairdressers, fish and chip shop, coffee shop and a restaurant, a primary school, children’s nurseries, post office, library, doctor’s surgery/health centre, veterinary surgery, churches and village hall. Development has also commenced to deliver a bakery, microbrewery and Public House on the former print works site, south of Church Lane. Accessibility to these services from the site is illustrated on the submitted drawings produced by MLM. As will be noted – see Connections Plan, the site is very well connected to existing services and facilities within the village. Papworth Hospital has previously been the main employer in the village although the facilities and functions of the hospital have now been relocated. The former hospital site is however positively promoted within the adopted plan for future employment generating uses. Papworth Business Park, located at the southern edge of the village, is the main employment area. The services, facilities and employment opportunities which exist within Papworth Everard are all reflective of its designation as a Minor Rural Centre. Where people do need to travel out of the village, access to an established bus service which provides connections from the village to Cambourne, St Neots, Cambridge, Huntingdon and St Ives. The main bus route is provided by the X3 bus. While this service currently provides an hourly service, there are gaps in the timetable during the AM and PM peak hour. As a result it is very difficult for residents of Papworth to utilise this as a commuter service. It was therefore agreed with the operator during the consideration of the previous applications on the site that the development would deliver enhancements to the service to provide additional services in the AM and PM peak hours. In addition to the above, Cambridgeshire County Council are seeking to deliver a cycle and pedestrian link from Papworth to Cambourne. It is the County Council’s intention to deliver a 2m wide cycle path along the eastern side of the A1198 to provide a link between the existing cycle path located north of the A1198/A428 junction, and the existing footpath network at the southern point of Papworth. The County’s programme for delivering this connection are not known at this time, it was however agreed that the previous applications would contribute towards the delivery of this link. When delivered, it will provide a direct cycle link to Cambourne and all of the facilities provided within it. Papworth Everard and land to the east of the Ridgeway and Old Pinewood Way, Papworth Everard are sustainably located to accommodate much needed new housing development which will also ensure the existing facilities and services within the village are supported. This accords with paragraph 78 of the NPPF which seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges the role that housing has in enhancing or maintaining the vitality of rural communities and supporting local services. The proposed development would also deliver a number of benefits including significant areas of public open space, green infrastructure and biodiversity enhancements. The protected trees within the site would be retained and significant new woodland planting would take place. The proposals would also include for the benefits that were associated with the previous proposal for the site including: reserve land for a pre-school facility; contributions towards primary and secondary school provision; library contribution; contribution for improvements to Papworth Surgery; enhancements to off-site public footpaths; enhancements to bus services to deliver an additional service in the peak hour; contributions towards cycle and pedestrian links between Papworth Everard and Cambourne.

82. Please refer to response to Question 40.

The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing need towards the growth of existing villages. Sustainable development in these areas provide financial support for existing services, opportunities for enhancements to biodiversity and open space provision, improvements to existing services including doctors surgeries and schools and provides an opportunity for the provision of market and affordable homes to those who may not be able to live in these settlements. Careful consideration should be given to the location of development within villages. Minor Rural and Rural Centres should be the focus of development, due to the provision of existing services capable of supporting an additional population. Sustainable transport should be expected with the locations, including clear and safe cycle lanes, footpaths and a good level of public transport. Linton is a sustainable location for development and a suitable opportunity to grow the village, such as the land to north of Horseheath Road. A development of the site could deliver social, economic and environmental benefits to the village including: ● The opportunity to deliver affordable housing to help meet the housing needs of Linton; ● Locating residential development within one of the District’s largest and most sustainable villages. The site is located within 1km of the village centre. ● A landowner who wishes to work closely with the local residents to provide residential development to address their needs; ● Supporting the existing facilities and services of Linton; ● Improving biodiversity levels on site, by delivering high quality green infrastructure for the benefit of existing and future residents.

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. The promoted development at land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham would support the existing services and facilities in the village. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridgeshire. Therefore, it is requested that small sized sites such as land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham is allocated to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including small sized sites that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, the promoted development at land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham would be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village. Cottenham is connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. There is a shared use path between Cottenham and Histon. As set out in the call for sites submissions, there are no significant constraints to development at land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham. The site is not in the Green Belt. The site is within Flood Zone 1 which means it has a low probability of flooding, and the promoted development would include an appropriate drainage strategy to manage surface water drainage. The site is not located within the setting of any listed buildings or scheduled ancient monuments and is not within a designated conservation area. The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of the site demonstrated that the site is not sensitive in terms of protected habitats or species, and the promoted development would provide ecological enhancements. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been prepared for the site, which demonstrated that views of it are currently relatively well contained by hedgerows, trees and tree belts. The views of the site and the landscape character and setting will change once the consented developments to the north and east of the site are completed; the promoted development would not be isolated from the settlement and encroach into the countryside. In any evet the promoted development would retain the existing higher quality landscape features, and additional landscaping would be provided on the north-western and south-western boundaries to enhance the landscape setting of the village. In addition, it is noted that other sites have been promoted on land to the north of Oakington Road in Cottenham, and if all these sites were allocated for development a comprehensive landscaping scheme could be delivered on the western edge of the village. Furthermore, the allocation of a number of sites on the western edge of Cottenham could also ensure that the delivery of infrastructure and community facilities are co-ordinated. For all these reasons it is requested that land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham is allocated for residential development in emerging GCLP.

2.62 With regard to Q42-46, the most suitable solution is to disperse a proportion of development throughout the villages for their own sake and so as not over burden a single area with additional demands or over rely on a strategy that is of uncertain deliverability. This approach can help to sustain existing facilities in the village and create a more diverse population. And development should be allowed where there is sufficient infrastructure to support additional development or is located in close proximity to the main transport corridors. 2.63 Given Steeple Morden’s location near to the main transport corridors and infrastructure available within the settlement it would be well positioned to cater for a portion of the demand. In addition, due to the scale of the proposals the development could provide around 25 net additional dwellings as detailed in the accompanying plans.

As mentioned throughout this consultation response, the Local Plan must promote growth and development within existing villages to ensure the sustainability and viability of the village. The Local Plan must recognise that promoting growth in villages should be prioritised over the development of new settlements. Major infrastructure and highway works would be required for the development of new settlements. However, by promoting appropriate development in existing villages, it results in being able to improve the existing infrastructure and services within the village. This would be in accordance with paragraph 78 of the NPPF which states that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities, it confirms that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where it will support local services. With a lack of ‘lifetime homes’ or downsizing homes available in villages, elderly people aren’t willing to relocate and therefore there is no alternative housing available for the community especially for young families. Therefore, the Local Plan must promote the development of villages and ensure policies are progressive in accompanying this.

Some growth at villages can help sustain existing communities. The take-up of neighbourhood planning has been poor with only one made Neighbourhood Plan within South Cambridgeshire at the time of writing. As a result, this planning tool has not been as successful in delivering localised non-strategic growth to date. With only 18 other designated NP areas and little progress on each, there can be little or no reliance upon NP’s as a source of housing land supply during the plan period. Many villages have been identified by planning inspectors on appeal as being sustainable locations for proportionate growth. In order for a Neighbourhood Plan to be in a position to review its Green Belt boundaries, it requires a level of policy support within the strategic policies of the GCLP. As suggested through the response to Q.31, this should occur in order to meet the requirements of NPPF paragraph 65. Great Shelford is one of those settlements where the Parish Council of Stapleford and Great Shelford is preparing a Neighbourhood Plan. However, its ability to deliver growth is currently restricted by Green Belt boundaries. Para 31 of the NPPF requires local planning authorities to ensure that their Local Plans consider relevant market signals. There is a known affordability issue within rural South Cambridgeshire area and the plan must look to positively address this issue. Local Housing Need is derived across the whole area, and the villages also need a sufficient mix of market and affordable homes to ‘support vibrant rural communities.’ For example, using the latest Gt Shelford Village Housing Needs Survey (March 2017) prepared by Acre, there was an identified requirement for 97 affordable homes to meet current and immediate housing need in Great Shelford. There is no opportunity to deliver this level of growth within the existing settlement confines and it is otherwise constrained by green belt. A localised Green Belt release, such as the Land off Cambridge Road, could contribute significantly towards providing a high proportion of that need as part of a housing development. For example, at 120 units, 40% provision of affordable housing would be 48 homes to meet identified need. Similarly, with regard to older persons accommodation, Great Shelford differs from the district and county profiles in two key respects, one being a higher proportion of older people (75+). The Acre study identified other housing needs from owner occupiers requiring an alternative form of accommodation for downsizing and/or single-level living. The options put forward for the site through the 2019 Call for Sites exercise includes the potential to accommodate a 60-bed care home (Use Class C2) or Older Persons accommodation (C3). Again, this can only occur through a Green Belt release and a recognition that Green Belt boundaries will need to be reviewed. We refer officers to our 2019 Call for Sites response which outlines the previous Green Belt reviews undertaken by the Council’s and its conclusions that development of the site would have a ‘negligible impact upon the Green Belt and could be considered for release in the short-term’. Such sites can clearly contribute towards delivering the growth strategy in a sustainable manner. We consider there should be a more proactive and positive plan that provides more clarity for local communities and meets the development needs of Green Belt villages in a sustainable manner. This is considered to be more in keeping with the thrust of the NPPF to boost the supply of housing and maintain a rolling 5-year supply of suitable housing sites throughout the lifetime of the plan. We consider that a balanced portfolio of housing sites in terms of geography, quantum and tenure is essential to the success of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan. To deliver the economic growth scenario, there is a need to utilise different approaches of delivery, such as proportionate extensions to sustainable villages, including Green Belt settlements where there are clear sustainable reasons to do so and specifically, where there would be no overall reduction in the objectives, or effectiveness of Green Belt policy.

Strongly agree. It should be noted that some villages, including Histon and Impington, are also located in the Green Belt and are on transport corridors, and as such development options that include these locations are also supported. As set out in the response to Question 39 national guidance allows the release of land from the Green Belt through the plan-making process, and that exceptional circumstances exist to release land which is related to the significant need for housing and affordable housing in Greater Cambridge and the need to support economic growth. Therefore, it is considered that land on the edge of villages and within the Green Belt, such as Histon and Impington, should also be considered as options to meet development needs. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of planmaking. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. Land South of Milton Road, Impington is in a sustainable location with good public transport links. The proposals for the site would also include measures to increase its accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists, improving the site’s sustainability credentials. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas, and acknowledges the role that housing has in enhancing or maintaining the vitality of rural communities and supporting local services. Land South of Milton Road, Impington provides a unique opportunity to deliver a Community Park of 4.8ha, to address an existing deficit (10.75ha) in open space provision, alongside 50 much needed new homes. Additionally, the developer, Flagship, are a Housing Association and are committed to the delivery 50% affordable housing on this site to meet local need in Impington. In 2018 there was an identified need for 48 affordable dwellings in Impington for those with a local connection to the village – see South Cambridgeshire District Council's 'Housing Statistical Information Leaflet' (December 2018). Histon and Impington have a number of facilities and services including schools, doctor’s surgeries, sports centre, shops, pubs, restaurants and a post office. There are also a number of employment opportunities within the villages, notably at Compass Point Business Park. The proposed development of Land South of Milton Road, Impington would therefore deliver a significant number of benefits for the villages and the wider Greater Cambridge area and is located in an area that is sustainable and suitable for growth.

It is considered that the growth of villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and there is national guidance that supports this approach. Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. Foxton contains a primary school, convenience store and post office, places of worship, village hall, sports and recreation grounds, public house and a cluster of business units at Burlington Park. The promoted development at land off Shepreth Road in Foxton would support the existing services and facilities in the village. Paragraph 68 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridgeshire. Therefore, it is requested that small sized sites such as land off Shepreth Road in Foxton is allocated to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including small sites that are easily deliverable. Paragraph 102 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 103 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. As set out in the response to Qu.37, Foxton has a railway station and is served by buses. The Greater Cambridge Partnership has proposed two transport improvement projects in Foxton, which are the Foxton Rural Travel Hub and the Melbourn Greenway, which would deliver new walking and cycling routes and facilities. Therefore, the promoted development at land off Shepreth Road in Foxton would be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. As set out in the call for sites submission, there are no significant constraints to development at land off Shepreth Road in Foxton. The trees and hedges on the site that contribute to the landscape character would be retained as part of the promoted development, and additional planting would be provided to protect and enhance that character.

3.36 As set out above, sustainable growth within the villages is considered essential in order to meet the four big themes of the Local Plan and reduce pressure on already constrained infrastructure in and around Cambridge City. 3.37 It is considered that the level of growth in settlements should be relative to the size of the settlement, along with its sustainability credentials. As recognised within the existing Local Plan, Minor Rural Centres are currently the second highest tier settlements within the settlement hierarchy. 3.38 The table below contains an overview of the 13 settlements and their population. Policy S/9: Minor Rural Centres Location Population 1 Bar Hill 4,000 2 Bassingbourn 3,583 3 Comberton 2,400 4 Fulbourn 5,000 5 Gamlingay 3,247 6 Girton 4,599 7 Linton 4,525 8 Melbourn 4,400 9 Milton 4,679 10 Papworth Everard 2,880 3.39 Linton is fifth largest Minor Rural Centre in population terms, behind Waterbeach, Fulbourn, Milton and Girton. Waterbeach is already subject to substantial growth as part, with the Waterbeach North Garden Settlement providing some 6,500 dwellings. Fulbourn, Milton and Girton are all located within the Green Belt. 3.40 Therefore, Linton is the largest Minor Rural Centre that is not located within the Green Belt. It is also worth noting that of the 13 Minor Rural Centres, only Waterbeach has a train station (which for reasons explained above should not take any further growth). Linton is best placed of all the Rural Service Centres, to provide housing for employees at the major employment sites to the east of Cambridge. 3.41 In addition, Linton benefits from a vast range of services, with Linton Village College also providing excellent sport and community facilities. A full list of the facilities within Linton are set out below: Service / facility Closest service / facility Distance from the site Cycling Time Walking Time Primary School Linton Heights Junior School 270 metres 1 min 4 mins Linton C of E Infant School 1 kilometre 3 mins 12 mins Secondary School Linton Village College 2.3 kilometres 8 mins 27 mins Local Services The Dog & Duck 1.4 kilometres 5 mins 17 mins BP Garage 1.7 kilometres 8 mins 10 mins Parish Church of St Mary the Virgin 1.4 kilometres 6 mins 16 mins Linton Zoo 1.25 Kilometres 3 mins 14 mins Boswell’s Bakery, Linton 1.4 kilometres 6 mins 18 mins Linton Free Church URC Church 1.4 kilometres 4 mins 17 mins Co-op Food, Linton 850 metres 2 mins 10 mins Jigsaw Bakery 800 metres 2 mins 9 mins Linton Post Office 1.2 kilometres 3 mins 14 mins Linton Pharmacy 1.2 kilometres 3 mins 15 mins 11 Swavesey 2,463 12 Waterbeach 5,166 13 Willingham 4,015 Service / facility Closest service / facility Distance from the site Cycling Time Walking Time Community facilities Linton Community Sports Centre 1.9 kilometres 6 mins 23 mins Linton Library 1 kilometre 3 mins 12 mins Linton Village Hall 1.3 kilometres 4 mins 14 mins Public Transport Bus Stop, Parsonage Way 800m 2 mins 9 mins Bus Stop, Hill Way 1 kilometre 3 mins 3 mins Bus Stop, High Street 1.5 kilometres 5 mins 18 mins Healthcare School Street Surgery, Great Chesterford 15.1 kilometres 31 mins N/A 3.42 Accounting for the current number of services in Linton, that it is the largest Rural Service Centre outside of the Green Belt, along with its very good transport connections, it is considered to be settlement that should take substantial housing growth as part of the new Local Plan. 3.43 A development of 300 dwellings, with a 1 hectare rural service centre for small to medium sized start-up businesses, would be a scale of development that is fully compatible with the size of the existing village. It is considered that the allocation of land adjacent to Balsham Road, would be a sound allocation and accord with national policy.

8.5 Strongly agree. It should be noted that some villages are also located in the Green Belt and are on transport corridors, and as such development options that include these locations are also supported. 8.6 As set out in the response to Question 39, national guidance allows the release of land from the Green Belt through the plan-making process, and that exceptional circumstances exist to release land which is related to the significant need for housing, affordable housing and housing for older people in Greater Cambridge. The experience of new settlements and the redevelopment of previously developed land on the edge of Cambridge demonstrates that these options do not deliver policy compliant levels of affordable housing, and in the case of new settlements these types of development typically have much longer lead-in times than originally predicted. Therefore, releasing land from the Green Belt around Cambridge is a realistic option. 8.7 Paragraph 78 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. 8.8 Paragraph 68 of the NPPF acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridge.

47. We strongly support suitable growth within villages, particularly the villages located in the most sustainable locations. 48. The focus on growing our villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within them and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers. It is important to ensure that existing businesses within the villages are able to stay open and provide services not only for the village that they are located, but also for smaller infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within and adjacent to larger settlements. 49. Sustainably located villages such as Foxton are ideally located and of a size to accommodate a suitable proportion of housing growth. Putting a focus on growing these would not necessarily see an increase in commuting by car and needing to travel to access services and facilities due to availability of services and easy access to public transport links. Conversely, it would assist with minimising the impact on the already at capacity highway infrastructure in and around Cambridge City Centre, which has recently had substantial housing growth. It would assist with promoting train travel from Foxton to Cambridge City, as a result of an expanded population. 50. In addition, to ensure supply is maintained, local planning authorities are also required to monitor the progress in building out sites, to comply with the housing delivery test. Currently, the supply of housing in South Cambridgeshire is only marginally above the 5-year requirement (5.05 years – Appeal Reference APP/W0530/W/19/3220761) and the Government’s recently published housing delivery figures for 2019 indicate delivery to be at 95% which while not significantly below the target is still falling short. 51. In addition to this, the current Local Plan 2018 for both South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City includes allocations for two new settlements at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield as well as the continued development of Northstowe. 52. However, these larger growth sites will only be delivered later on in the plan period and as acknowledged within the Inspectors Report, there is ‘no requirement for these sites to deliver housing in the early years of the plan period and consequently there will be an opportunity to review progress through the preparation of a joint local plan.’ 53. The Council will also be aware of the recent outcome of the Uttlesford Local Plan Examination, where the inspector was concerned that an overreliance had been placed on the development of three new garden communities and that insufficient smaller sites had been identified throughout the rural area to ensure that a 5-year supply could be maintained. 54. In recent years, South Cambridgeshire have focused development in larger villages and towns, of Cambridge City. This approach is supported up to a point, but it is critical that medium-sized villages such as Foxton take some development. In recent years many villages across the Greater Cambridge area have lost vital services as shops have closed, public houses have been converted into residential properties and bus services have been reduced. Foxton is fortunate in this regard and has maintained a number of its key services and transport options. Now with much improved broadband connectivity and a significant increase in home working and ability to shop online, many of the historic barriers to sustainability in rural areas and villages are now reduced. 55. It is therefore important to enable modest, appropriately-sized extensions to villages so that the remaining services can be supported and to enable much needed new market and affordable housing to be provided. 56. Summary: support for a strategy that includes growth in villages, particularly those with existing high-quality public transport links such as Foxton.

The adopted spatial strategy of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan appropriately recognises the opportunity and potential that exists at the villages of the District to accommodate strategically significant numbers of housing which can make a materially beneficial impact on meeting the residential needs of the Local Plan area. This should be reflected within the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan by establishing that these settlements remain suitable locations to accommodate moderate levels of growth which can represent a major component of the spatial strategy and between them, deliver a substantial number of homes to meet the objectively identified need of the Plan area. It is understood that a number of these villages, such as those established as Group Villages in Policy S/10 of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan are recognised as less sustainable locations for development and therefore not preferable to accommodate new growth. However, there remains other settlements that can demonstrate enhanced sustainability credentials which are established in the South Cambridgeshire Plan as Rural Centres and Minor Rural Centres. In particular, Rural Centres are recognised as demonstrating the most sustainable settlements within the District due to their established and wide range of services available for the use of village residents. This includes, but is not limited to, a primary and secondary schools, medical facilities, community facilities and retail outlets. Cottenham benefits from such amenities and therefore reduces the need for residents to travel outside the village to meet their everyday needs. As such, the emerging spatial strategy of the new Greater Cambridge Local Plan needs to maintain this recognition, to both support the viability of this service base but also as an appropriate component of the new strategy that can ensure deliverable housing numbers to meet the identified need of the new Plan period. Although it is considered that delivery of sites as sustainable villages alone will not deliver sufficient numbers to meet the need of the new Plan, allocating sites at settlements such as Cottenham demonstrates an appropriate and deliverable approach to the new spatial strategy which will go a significant distance in satisfying the strategic housing need of the Plan area. However, it is maintained that the strategy in dispersing development to the villages of the Plan area cannot demonstrate a sustainable spatial strategy alone. Identification of the suitable sites at the villages should represent an element of a comprehensive strategy that includes other approaches to achieve the requisite level of growth that meets the identified demand of the Plan area. As such, the consideration of development at the villages of the Plan area should not preclude the consideration of other possible avenues, such as new settlements or development at the fringes of Cambridge city. Notwithstanding that, the consideration of the development dispersal to the villages should not be omitted from the Plan preparation process, given the historical success there has been in implementing this approach. Summary of Comments: Support is given to a strategy in dispersing development to the villages, alongside consideration of other approaches.

32. Our client strongly supports suitable growth within villages, particularly the villages located in the most sustainable locations. Meldreth is one such of these villages. 33. The focus on growing our villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within them and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers and diversifying the housing mix. It is important to ensure that existing businesses within the villages are able to stay open and provide services not only for the village in which they are located, but also for smaller infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within and adjacent to larger settlements. 34. Sustainably located villages such as Meldreth are ideally located and of a size to accommodate a suitable proportion of housing growth. While the opportunities afforded to commuters of Meldreth’s railway station offering travel both to London and to Cambridge (and beyond), it is also key to the prospects of young residents from Meldreth and the surrounding villages who attend sixth form education in Cambridge. Owing to so few of our local secondary schools having sixth forms of their own – and this includes Melbourn Village College – affordable transport for students to study in Cambridge is essential. 35. More importantly, the NPPF (2019) at Paragraph 68 requires, through development plans and brownfield registers, for Local Authorities to accommodate at least 10% of sites of no larger than 1 hectare in size to ensure housing requirements in an area can be met and built-out relatively quickly. Three of the four sites submitted by our client in Meldreth as part of the Call for Sites exercise are under a hectare in size and therefore would meet this requirement. 36. To ensure supply is maintained, local planning authorities are also required to monitor the progress in building out of sites, to comply with the housing delivery test. Currently, the supply of housing in South Cambridgeshire is only marginally above the 5-year requirement (5.05 years – Appeal Reference APP/W0530/W/19/3220761) and the Government’s recently published housing delivery figures for 2019 indicate delivery to be at 95%, which is below the government target. 37. In addition to this, the current Local Plan 2018 for both South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City includes allocations for two new settlements at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield as well as the continued development of Northstowe. 38. However, these larger growth sites will only be delivered later on in the plan period and as acknowledged within the Inspectors Report of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2018), there is ‘no requirement for these sites to deliver housing in the early years of the plan period and consequently there will be an opportunity to review progress through the preparation of a joint local plan.’ 39. The Council will also be aware of the recent outcome of the Uttlesford Local Plan Examination, where the Inspector was concerned that an overreliance had been placed on the development of three new garden communities and that insufficient smaller sites had been identified throughout the rural area to ensure that a 5-year supply could be maintained. 40. In recent years, South Cambridgeshire have focused development in larger villages and towns, of Cambridge City. This approach is supported up to a point, but it is critical that medium-sized villages such as Meldreth take some development. In recent years many villages across the Greater Cambridge area have lost vital services, such as shops which have closed, public houses have been converted into residential properties and bus services have been reduced. Meldreth is fortunate in this regard and has maintained a number of its key services and transport options. Now with much improved broadband connectivity and a significant increase in home working and ability to shop online, many of the historic barriers to sustainability in rural areas and villages are now reduced. 41. It is therefore important to enable modest, appropriately-sized extensions to villages so that the remaining services can be supported and to enable much needed new market and affordable housing to be provided.

8.8 The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing needs towards growth at existing villages. Sustainable development in rural areas is supported under paragraph 78 of the NPPF, which requires planning policies to identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Development within existing villages can help to sustain existing and deliver new facilities and infrastructure, support shops and business uses and meet both the market and affordable housing needs of the local community. However, growth at villages should be in locations which are or may be made sustainable. 8.9 Land to the north of Main Street, Shudy Camps, is considered to be a sustainable location for development and a prime opportunity to grow the village of Shudy Camps. The development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to Shudy Camps and the local area, including: ● Contributing to the Council’s requirement to accommodate at least 10% of their housing requirement on sites no larger than 1 hectare (NPPF paragraph 68); ● Delivering much needed affordable housing to help meet the needs of Shudy Camps and the wider District; ● Enhancing biodiversity levels and tree cover across the site. The site is currently agricultural land and can be considered to be of low ecological value; ● Delivering formal children's play space, and other recreational opportunities accessible to new and existing residents of the village. There are currently no facilities of this nature available within the village or within walking distance; and ● Encouraging new residents to use sustainable modes of transport to access services, facilities and existing transport infrastructure. The site is located approximately 100m from bus stops, providing services to Haverhill.

39. The focus on growing our villages throughout the District would help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure in villages and assist in diversifying their population. In order to help sustain existing facilities and infrastructure within villages, it is key that they are grown by increasing housing numbers. 40. Paragraph 78 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that ‘To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services’. It is important to ensure that existing businesses are able to stay open and vital services to not only the Minor Rural Centres and Group Villages but also the surrounding Infill Villages, many of which rely on the services within adjacent larger settlements. 41. In Greater Cambridge, many younger people and families have effectively been priced out of areas in which they grew up. At the same time, older people wishing to remain in their communities and downsize to smaller properties, have been prevented from doing so as a result of a lack of supply of appropriate housing. This in turn has led to the underoccupation of larger properties, and the over-occupation of some smaller properties, particularly in Cambridge itself. 42. Over the same period, many villages have lost many of their services as shops have closed, public houses have been converted into houses, and bus services have been cut back or ceased altogether. Now, with better broadband connectivity, combined with the advent of home working and online shopping, there is a unique opportunity for rural areas to reinvent themselves but they need some housing to enable them to do so. 43. The Country Landowners Association’s (CLA’s) report Sustainable Villages – Making Communities fit for the Future which draws on the Taylor Review (2008) challenges the assumption that a lack of services means that these places are unsuitable for new housing ‘due to the negative impact this process has on house price affordability, social cohesion and economic performance. This process effectively fossilises these villages instead of seeking to address the reasons behind why services are being lost, creating a cycle of decline’. 44. Over the past 25 years, local authorities have increasingly sought to focus new development in major towns and cities. Instead of enabling modest, appropriate-scale extensions to villages, planning policies have focused on a smaller number of large allocations on the edge of urban areas, this has been the case in the Greater Cambridge area, where the current adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan places considerable emphasis on the growth of a small number of very large settlements including Bourn Airfield, Cambourne, Northstowe, and Waterbeach. 45. While it is acknowledged that larger settlements accompanied by high quality public transport can provide sustainable options, it is also critical that medium-sized villages such as Orwell take some development to enable it to grow in a sustainable well, helping to support local shops, services, and facilities including the local primary school. In recent years many villages across the Greater Cambridge area have lost vital services as shops have closed, public houses have been converted into residential properties and bus services have been reduced. Orwell is fortunate in this regard and has maintained a number of its key services and transport options. Now with much improved broadband connectivity and a significant increase in home working and ability to shop online, may of the historic barriers to sustainability in rural areas and villages are now reduced. 46. It is therefore important to enable modest, appropriately-sized extensions to villages so that the remaining services (including the primary school) can be supported and to enable much needed new market and affordable housing to be provided. It is considered that the proposed site is commensurate with the size and scale of the village and could provide a sustainable expansion to the settlement whilst potentially providing additional car and cycle parking for the adjacent employment site. 47. It is vital to preserve what is special about our rural communities and environment. But equally, carefully designed additional development that enables villages to become more vibrant is essential. Any new housing schemes should be targeted at local circumstances and be commensurate with the size and scale of the individual settlements. Of the top 25 local authorities in the Halifax’s latest Quality of Life survey, the majority are in predominantly rural areas – so a key challenge will be to ensure that any development is not at the expense of what makes them great places to live. 48. Summary: Support for a strategy that includes growth in villages at a level that is commensurate with their size and scale and enables sustainable growth.

We consider that growing the existing villages in Greater Cambridge should form an important part of the Local Plan strategy, and promotes an overarching mix of sustainable development that will maximise the potential to deliver the Local Plans vision and objectives. We consider that growing the existing villages in Greater Cambridge should form an important part of the Local Plan strategy, and promotes an overarching mix of sustainable development that will maximise the potential to deliver the Local Plans vision and objectives. Page | 5 Encouraging growth in the villages can contribute to sustaining the vitality and viability of existing facilities and infrastructure in the villages. Encouraging the growth of villages will ensure that a range of housing is available across Greater Cambridge to meet the varying housing demand. The growth of the villages could allow for increased investment infrastructure generated from the CIL and S106 income from approved development schemes. The impact that development proposals can have on a village’s character are recognised as a challenge, but it is considered that through good design, any potential impact on the character of villages can be mitigated. Finally, it is noted that there are a number of the larger villages are located in the Green Belt; whereas the land we are promoting to the south of Fowlmere is located outside of the Green Belt, with a lesser impact on openness if developed than sites and land located within the Green Belt. We therefore consider that directing village growth to those villages, such as Fowlmere, with land outside of the Green Belt, should be considered for development prior to sites within the Green Belt.

9.10.1 Gladman consider it essential that the new Local Plan directs meaningful growth to the villages, and that this needs to include not just the Main Rural Villages and Minor Rural Villages but also the Group Villages. The villages across Greater Cambridge offer a range of sustainable development opportunities and growth in these types of locations is needed in order to maintain their vitality and viability. 9.10.2 It is important to consider existing services and facilities in a settlement when assessing their suitability for accommodating new growth. Daily needs are particularly important with a primary school, shop and access to public transport being the key considerations. It must be recognised that there may be an ability, through new development, to improve some of these services and facilities, particularly access to public transport, that should be considered through any settlement hierarchy exercise as well as the role that new development can play in ensuring these facilities are maintained and not lost because of lack of support. 9.10.3 Whilst it is recognised that some of the villages across the plan area are small scale and consideration of setting and character of the settlement is important, these issues must be balanced against the needs of the local community for new housing, including affordable housing and the need to ensure the long term viability of services and facilities in the village. It should also be recognised that increasing the number of sites across the plan area with allocations for residential development will increase the rate of housing completions. 9.10.4 The inclusion of an element of dispersed growth to the villages within the new Local Plan, will provide a suite of sites that are capable of delivering in the short to medium term which would complement other elements of an overall growth strategy. 9.10.5 With regards to the above comments, Gladman refer to paragraph 78 of the NPPF which states: “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to growth and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.

8.7 The Local Plan should seek to allocate a component of its housing needs towards growth at existing villages. Sustainable development in rural areas is supported under paragraph 78 of the NPPF, which requires planning policies to identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Development within existing villages can help to sustain existing and deliver new facilities and infrastructure, support shops and business uses and meet both the market and affordable housing needs of the local community. However, growth at villages should be in locations which are or can be made sustainable. 8.8 Land to the west of Mill Street, Gamlingay is a sustainable location for development and a prime opportunity to support the village of Gamlingay. The development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to Gamlingay and the local area, including: ● The opportunity to deliver a substantial amount of affordable housing to help meet the needs of Gamlingay and the wider District; ● Locating residential development within one of the District’s largest and most sustainable villages. The site is located approximately 500m from the village centre and is well placed for future residents to be able to walk and cycle, rather than travel by private car, to these facilities. Gamlingay is also within close proximity to the preferred route for the proposed east west rail, providing the opportunity to deliver homes near planned strategic infrastructure; ● A landowner who wishes to work with the community in order to shape a proposal which meets the needs of and can provide wider benefits to the village; ● Supporting Gamlingay’s economy, including local shops and services; ● The delivery of a substantial amount of on-site and off-site public open space comprising 2.53 ha, which equates to approximately 59% of the total site area. This will include formal children’s play space, creating a recreation asset to be enjoyed by future and existing residents. The proposed off-site area of dedicated open space is on land within Trinity College’s ownership and would be delivered in conjunction with the development proposals for the site; and ● Enhancing biodiversity levels across the site and delivering green infrastructure for the benefit of existing and future residents. The site is predominantly agricultural land and can currently be considered to be of low ecological value. The proposals have the potential to achieve a 10% biodiversity net gain and deliver significant new opportunities for wildlife.

2.33 The new Local Plan should provide flexibility in allowing villages to grow. This is supported by the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) which states that: “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive…” 2.34 In particular, the new Local Plan should support new housing for older people in villages. This not only allows older people to stay within their local village community, but also frees up the existing family housing stock to allow for new residents to move into the village. This is highlighted within Cambridgeshire County Council’s Older People Accommodation Strategy (2016).

Southern and Regional Developments (Willingham) consider that the adopted spatial strategy of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan appropriately recognises the opportunity and potential that exists at the villages of the District to accommodate strategically significant numbers of housing which can make a materially beneficial impact on meeting the residential needs of the Local Plan area. This should be reflected within the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan by establishing that these settlements remain suitable locations to accommodate moderate levels of growth which can represent a major component of the spatial strategy and between them, deliver a substantial number of homes to meet the objectively identified need of the Plan area. It is understood that a number of these smaller villages, have been recognised through the adopted Local Plan as being less sustainable locations for development and therefore not preferable to accommodate new growth. However, there remains other rural settlements that can demonstrate enhanced sustainability credentials which are established in the South Cambridgeshire Plan as Rural Centres and Minor Rural Centres. Willingham is regarded as a Minor Rural Centre in the adopted settlement hierarchy and is a preferable and suitable location to accommodate new residential allocations. The village itself benefits from an established service base that is within walking distance from the site. These include a primary school, public houses and medical centre which demonstrate that the village provides a significant range of facilities that reduces the need to travel out of the village to source such services. Furthermore, the village benefits from bus links into Cambridge as well as connections to other settlements in the wider area. This should be recognised within the emerging Local Plan, specifically the spatial strategy that needs to re-assess the status of these villages as sustainable and suitable settlements to accommodate moderate levels of residential growth. It is maintained that the strategy in dispersing development to the villages of the Plan area cannot demonstrate a sustainable spatial strategy alone. Identification of the suitable sites at the villages should represent an element of a comprehensive strategy that includes other approaches to achieve the requisite level of growth that meets the identified demand of the Plan area. The consideration of the development dispersal to the villages should be included within the Plan preparation process, given the historical success in this approach. Summary of Comments: Southern and Regional Developments support a strategy in dispersing development to the villages.

10.1 Martin Grant Homes support development across a range of scales to meet the housing need with Greater Cambridge. This includes development amongst the existing villages. The importance of villages is noted in Figure 23 of the Issues and Options Document, which shows 35% of development within the adopted Local Plan to 2031 will be in the rural area. The current trend suggests the villages will continue to have a key role to play in achieving anticipated future growth. 10.2 It is important that the Local Plan provides a mix of sites to allow further development within the lower hierarchical villages. Coton for example is a Group Village but has excellent sustainable links to Cambridge (as discussed in other questions and demonstrated in the Vision Document for the site). It received no specific housing allocation within the 2007/2010 Local Development Framework or 2018 Local Plan and given the tight designated village envelope, new residential development is restricted to windfall only comprising of small unit numbers. Recent development has included the exceptions site for affordable housing at Pendrick Close, which was approved on part of the same parcel of land for 19 units in 2006. As a result, the population of Coton is stagnating and is restricting the opportunity for its community to grow. 10.3 The Issues and Options document notes two specific advantages to development in villages. Given their relevance to the Site and development in Coton, they are assessed below. Firstly, it is clearly acknowledged that development within villages can sustain existing facilities and infrastructure in the village. With regard to Coton, this is relevant to those services and facilities listed in chapter 2 above. The village is also home to numerous local sports and community groups, which would also benefit from new members and increased social activity. 10.4 Secondly, it is acknowledged that development in villages will assist in providing a diversity of population in the village. Given existing development control policies within South Cambridgeshire, a scheme of 77 dwellings would provide 40% affordable housing with an appropriate mix of rented and intermediate uses. It would also provide a mix of dwelling sizes in line with development control policies. This will create a natural mix of population that would add to the social cohesion in Coton. Given Coton’s location, it will appeal to a range of occupiers, from first time buyers through to those approaching and in retirement. 10.5 The Issues and Options document highlights four specific challenges that development within villages provide. However, the Site is well placed to ensure that these do not restrict its development potential. Comments are made with regard each of these alleged challenges below. 10.6 Firstly, it is noted that village development can encourage commuting by car. Coton, however, has excellent connections to the City of Cambridge and is located just 2 miles from the employment area of West Cambridge. There is existing pedestrian and cycle access into Cambridge off the main road network via The Footpath. Madingley Road to the north of the village is served by regular bus services into Cambridge. The village will also benefit from the new Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro route which is proposed to run across the north of the village with the potential for a stop, as well as the Comberton Greenway, which will enhance pedestrian and cycling routes into Cambridge. Future residents of Coton would not be restricted to use of the car to access employment, services and facilities. 10.7 The second challenge notes that small sites do not contribute significantly to infrastructure. However, the scale of villages will dictate the level of development that could and should be provided. In relation to Coton, it is not a village capable of supporting large scale strategic development. However, development of a small/medium sized site will allow some infrastructure upgrades, be them additional classroom facilities, or footpath enhancement. Without such schemes, this smaller scale infrastructure would not come forward and, therefore, would not benefit existing residents. 10.8 The document notes the challenge of assessing impacts upon village character. By listing this as a challenge, it suggests all village development would have a serious impact. However, the Site has a key advantage in this regard. Its development would square off the village and align with existing features that would form the new defensible boundaries to the west and south, those being a copse and Bin Brook. The site provides a clear opportunity to provide 77 dwellings at Coton with no identified impact upon the character of the village. These representations are accompanied by a Green Belt Assessment which highlights the ‘Low Contribution’ the Site makes to the Cambridge Green Belt. The relationship of the Site with its surroundings and the creation of defensible boundaries is shown on the drawing below: 10.9 Finally, the challenge of the Green Belt is noted. Coton is situated just 2 miles west of Cambridge and it is well located to provide much needed housing close to the city centre and employment areas. The accompanying Green Belt Assessment undertaken by Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd demonstrates the site makes a ‘Low Contribution’ to the Green Belt when measured against the five Green Belt purposes in the NPPF. 10.10 Given the potential housing numbers that the Plan will be required to deliver, the Greater Cambridge Authority must ensure that all options are assessed to ensure development is located in sustainable locations. The Sustainability Assessment that will underpin the Local Plan must, therefore, consider the Green Belt villages, which by their very nature are better located to support growth in and around Cambridge than those villages outside the Green Belt. This matter is covered in the response to question 39. 10.11 The Issues and Options document provides two advantages and four challenges when considering development in villages. In the case of Coton, those two advantages significantly outweigh the challenges to the aim of providing sustainable development. Villages provide a clear opportunity to provide smaller sites to assist in early development and ensure sites come forward early in the process. Appropriate sites within the villages must, therefore, be identified and allocated within the Spatial Strategy.

2.46 We are supportive of growing the villages throughout Greater Cambridgeshire as an important part of the spatial strategy within the emerging Local Plan. Indeed, we do not consider that a strategy for growth could be considered sustainable without it supporting the proportionate growth of Greater Cambridgeshire’s villages. Furthermore, such an approach is necessary to ensure the Local Plan is consistent with national policy. 2.47 We agree and support with the advantages of spreading new homes and jobs out to the villages, as set out within the Issues and Options Consultation Document. These include helping to sustain existing facilities and infrastructure in the village; and helping to provide for a diversity of population in the village. 2.48 The Issues and Options document (5.3.5) sets out a number of challenges to growing villages:  Can result in increased commuting by car, and travel to access to services and facilities, particularly if the village is away from main transport corridors.  Small sites are unlikely to significantly contribute to improvements to infrastructure so services capacity within or accessible to a particular village is important.  Potential impact on village character needs to be considered.  Some of the larger better served villages are surrounded by the Green Belt. 2.49 Despite the above challenges, national policy clearly shows that there is a need to balance these with the need for sustainable growth in rural communities. There is an increasing acute housing need in rural communities, and it is fundamental that this is recognised and forms part of the spatial strategy for any new Local Plan. Ensuring the strategy captures the development needs, particularly housing need, across Greater Cambridgeshire is a key objective within the NPPF: “To support the Government’s objective of significantly boosting the supply of homes, it is important that a sufficient amount and variety of land can come forward where it is needed, that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed and that land with permission is developed without unnecessary delay.” (paragraph 59). 2.50 A key tranche of any housing need is in rural communities, with the NPPF recognising the fundamental role planning has in supporting and sustaining rural housing, in that for rural areas planning policies and decisions should be responsive to local circumstances and support new housing that is reflective of local need. 2.51 Paragraph 79 of the NPPF further emphasises this role: “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.” 2.52 The NPPF also acknowledges the potential limitations of rural communities and areas not well served by public transport in delivering sustainable growth, and recognises that in order to meet community needs in more isolated rural settlements a balance needs to be struck between accessibility and rural vitality. 2.53 As referred to earlier in this representation, a careful approach to the proportion of larger scale strategic delivery against sustainable growth to existing villages and settlements is key, in order to achieve a blended approach to the spatial strategy. With this in mind sustainable growth in rural villages and communities forms an essential part of delivering a sound spatial strategy, with growth towards villages such as Great Chishill supported.

The adopted spatial strategy of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan appropriately recognises the opportunity and potential that exists within the villages of the District to accommodate strategically significant numbers of housing which can make a material impact on meeting the residential need of the area. This should be reflected within the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan by establishing that these settlements remain suitable locations to accommodate moderate levels of growth which can represent a major component of the spatial strategy and between them, contribute substantial numbers to meet the objectively identified needs of the Local Plan area. There are a number of sustainable and suitable villages within the Plan area identified in the recently adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan as Minor Rural Centres and Rural Centres. These include Waterbeach, established as a Minor Rural Centre in adopted policy, that is considered a sustainable location for development. It is Southern and Regional Development's (Waterbeach) position that Waterbeach could indeed accommodate further growth into the new Plan period and that its position within current policy does not reflect the true sustainability credentials of the settlement. The presence of a mainline railway station and delivery of a strategic allocation, which will include significant provision of new services, will contribute towards boosting the overall sustainability of the village and in turn, the suitability of the village to accommodate new residential development. This should be recognised in the emerging Local Plan and its new spatial strategy, specifically regarding Waterbeach, but also as a comprehensive re-assessment of the suitability of the other village settlements in the Plan area and their respective capacities. It is maintained that the strategy in dispersing development to the villages of the Plan area cannot demonstrate a sustainable spatial strategy alone. Identification of the suitable sites at the villages should represent an element of a comprehensive strategy that includes other approaches to achieve the requisite level of growth that meets the identified demand of the Plan area. Summary of Comments: Southern and Regional Developments strongly support a strategy in dispersing development to the villages.