Question 51: Generic Question
I have looked at the two short reports in Mandela House and find that the local plan includes thousands of new homes BUT no sewage works, rubbish pits nor extra recycling depots. This is disastrous, I am aware that the City Council has given permission to reduce the present sewage works and some cash to find a new place but we need that now There is another stupid approval due to the right land being valuable to house builders - the proposed P & R at Waterbeach north which is too far from the new rail station to be attractive. Might the building sites for the A14 be available ? There is one site left for Rubbish and that is Bassingbourne which still has a possible rail access to be used by Vulture vehicles, perhaps, This would need to have the best construction and a surrounding area of grassland. ALSO + Use of methane from composting- at least for use in the depot itself + sorting and compaction of recycling + raptor nest site on the chimneys, which have smoke recapture facility + provision of district heating from recycled materials and later: a factory for making plastics in to new products such as road bollards
No uploaded files for public display
We act on behalf of Merton College Oxford in relation to the Land at Grays Road, Merton Farm and Land off Greenacres, Gamlingay which was put forward as part of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Call for Sites undertaken in Spring 2019. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan will shape how Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire changes over the period to 2040, and possibly beyond. The Issues and Options 2020 Consultation enables the first conversation and explores big themes that will influence how homes, jobs and infrastructure are planned. As set out in the Issues and Options 2020 consultation the cost of renting or buying a home in Greater Cambridge is much higher than the national average. If the Local Plan does not make provision for a larger quantity of housing this will be exacerbated. To achieve this, the Council must set itself an ambitious housing target for the plan period. Greater Cambridge is at the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, the UK Innovation Corridor and the Cambridge-Norwich Tech Corridor, all of which will transform the regional economy, it is imperative the Councils plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government. The Local Plan should provide a range of housing sites, both small and large scale to enable flexibility and competition in the market. As set out in paragraph 68 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 small and medium sites make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of the area and can be built out quickly alongside larger scale developments such as significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities as set out in paragraph 72 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. There is significant demand for housing within Gamlingay given its level of services and facilities and it is accessible to surrounding towns and villages such as Potton, Sandy, Biggleswade, St Neots, Huntingdon and Cambridge. The land at Grays Road, Gamlingay is well related to the village edge on two sides and the development will provide a ‘rounding off’ of the village on the north side. The site has good access links to the village centre and facilities, and good connections to the wider village path network. The site can deliver a range of housing types and tenure to meet the housing need in Gamlingay. At present the housing to the north side of the village is exposed with minimal boundary hedgerows and landscaping. The site will enable a soft green edge to the village with further landscaping which could be extended along the northern boundary of the existing development off Murfitt Way to improve the view when entering the village from the north and this also provides the opportunity to enhance biodiversity. The development will provide the opportunity for footpath improvements linking the village to Gamlingay wood and through to Grays Road along with the provision of gateway parks forming public open space. The Merton Farm site offers the opportunity to create residential and office development. The development would provide much needed housing and affordable housing through re-using existing traditional buildings on the road frontage. In addition the proposal will replace existing substantial modern utilitarian farm buildings visible from the Conservation Area with more appropriate scale high quality buildings. The proposal enables a sensitively designed scheme with a landscaped private drive and footpath as well as the ability to accommodate offices for Hutchinson Builders, a local builders looking to relocate from Potton which will retain and enable local jobs. New hedgerow will be provided on the northern and eastern boundary which will also provide ecology benefits. The land off Greenacres, Gamlingay will also provide much needed housing and affordable housing with access achievable off Greenacres. Given the land is of low ecological value there is the opportunity to create biodiversity net gain, one of the big themes outlined in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues and Options 2020. The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 sets out in 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. 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 nearby villages. Given the services and facilities in Gamlingay the village is ideally placed to accommodate further growth. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan should help to meet its housing need by having a combination of large and small sites. Therefore, dispersal through new settlements and villages would be appropriate locations to develop housing and the land at Grays Road, Merton Farm and Land off Greenacres are ideally place to assist with achieving this aim and enable sustainable development in accordance with paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.
No uploaded files for public display
I am chair of a newish cohousing group that is still searching for land to build our project on, but it is very difficult to find land as we are up against developers who can move fast and afford the high Cambridge prices. Cohousing brings many social and community benefits, combating loneliness, improved health and well being, sharing resources, which means that each household doesn’t need to duplicate rarely used items, and much more. Other community housing initiatives can take advantage of rural exception sites, but cohousing groups usually draw on members from a wide area so they do not all have connections with one location, which appears to be a requirement for rural exception developments. My request to the local plan is to make provision for cohousing initiatives in new developments, especially city centre ones, as people will often think of moving to cohousing developments at times of big life changes when resources on offer locally are particularly needed, eg access to nurseries, hospitals, etc. And people interested in cohousing are often cyclists, so long journeys from rural locations by bike on a daily basis aren’t feasible for the majority
No uploaded files for public display
All new buildings should have solar panels. More wind farms and solar farms Wild flower planting along roadsides More trees Dial a ride for villages Free bus transport to Addenbrooke’s for staff and patients.
No uploaded files for public display
Summary of Comments: Growth MUST STOP. It is NOT inevitable that the city get either more jobs or more housing. The current “issues and options” fails to take this possibility into account at all. Pressure from central government for growth must be resisted absolutely. Otherwise we fail to learn from history – we must avoid doing to Cambridge what we have done to London, Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Glasgow, etc. Cambridge needs to stay SMALL.
No uploaded files for public display
This is ' Our Ideal Cambridgeshire' poster we made on 8th February (attached) explaining what we, as the next generation, want to see happen for the future in our community. We are a child led group ,who want to save the environment so we can have better futures, called HIYEC ( Histon and Impington Youth Eco Council ). We heard about the Greater Cambridgeshire Local Plan and wanted to have an input on how our area is run. ' Our Ideal Cambridgeshire' poster includes: • Green energy for all vehicles including emergency vehicles, taxi / car hire and public transport • Under 18's and students free on public transport • More biodiversity in Cambridgeshire's green spaces including encouraging a wide spread of animals especially insects and bees • Recycled water in car washes • Public gyms that power electricity when people exercise • More electric car charging stations to encourage people to get electric cars • For solar power / panels to be cheaper and more accessible • More school funding for environmental things eg. solar power • For our roads to be safer and to have new zebra crossings ( places for them could include Station Rd, Impington lane, outside Impington Village College, outside Histon Tesco's ) • Eco cafe - vegetarian, vegan, sustainable etc... • Affordable accommodation just in general and on top of shops • Encouraging charity shops and small businesses ( keeping rent down etc... ) • Solar powered bins like in Cromer • More community gardens for everyone ( social inclusion ) • Eco newsletter containing more events and ideas for the community • More eco - friendly events Attached are our pictures of the poster. Thank you for taking our ideas and input on your plan,
No uploaded files for public display
Question 3:Please submit any sites for green space and wildlife habitats you wish to suggest for consideration through the Local Plan. Please use the site submission form that can be found on our website, and provide as much information and supporting evidence as possible. Q3 Response: The RSPB will be looking to work with the Greater Cambridge Authorities to ensure the continued conservation and potential enhancement of its current suite of reserves (Ouse Fen, Fen Drayton and Fowlmere), and ensuring that development through the plan protects, but also improves the management of the protected areas and reserves within the Plan boundary, which should be at the heart of a Green Infrastructure network. We are also aware of existing efforts to identify existing and potential greenspace/wildlife habitats by organisations such as BCN Wildlife Trust and Cambridge Past, Present and Future which the plan authorities should take account of. As below we also think that the Greater Cambridge authorities should work with relevant stakeholders and neighbouring authorities to formulate a Green Infrastructure supplementary planning document to identify how and where the ‘doubling nature’ target will be met. We would encourage the Greater Cambridge Local Plan to accept sites with exceptionally high nature and carbon potential in neighbouring districts as greenspace/wildlife sites under the Local Plan - we believe this will be necessary to address the climate and ecological emergency in Cambridgeshire. The CUSPE report for the County Council found the majority of the county's carbon emissions are from land in surrounding districts, and the only substantial funding available to address this will be linked to development in the Greater Cambridge area.
No uploaded files for public display
We act on behalf of Edward Sills Trust in relation to the Land adjacent Greenacres, Gamlingay which was put forward as part of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Call for Sites undertaken in Spring 2019. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan will shape how Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire changes over the period to 2040, and possibly beyond. The Issues and Options 2020 Consultation enables the first conversation and explores big themes that will influence how homes, jobs and infrastructure are planned. As set out in the Issues and Options 2020 consultation the cost of renting or buying a home in Greater Cambridge is much higher than the national average. If the Local Plan does not make provision for a larger quantity of housing this will be exacerbated. To achieve this, the Council must set itself an ambitious housing target for the plan period. Greater Cambridge is at the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, the UK Innovation Corridor and the Cambridge-Norwich Tech Corridor, all of which will transform the regional economy, it is imperative the Councils plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government. The Local Plan should provide a range of housing sites, both small and large scale to enable flexibility and competition in the market. As set out in paragraph 68 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 small and medium sites make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of the area and can be built out quickly alongside larger scale developments such as significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities as set out in paragraph 72 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. There is significant demand for housing within Gamlingay given its level of services and facilities and it is accessible to surrounding towns and villages such as Potton, Sandy, Biggleswade, St Neots, Huntingdon and Cambridge. The land adjacent Greenacres, Gamlingay is well related to the village edge and the site has good access links to the village centre and facilities, and can deliver a range of housing types and tenure to meet the housing need in Gamlingay. The site will enable a soft green edge to the village with further landscaping and this also provides the opportunity to create biodiversity net gain, one of the big themes outlined in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues and Options 2020. The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 sets out in 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. 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 nearby villages. Given the services and facilities in Gamlingay the village is ideally placed to accommodate further growth. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan should help to meet its housing need by having a combination of large and small sites. Therefore, dispersal through new settlements and villages would be appropriate locations to develop housing and the land adjacent Greenacres, Gamlingay is ideally placed to assist with achieving this aim and enable sustainable development in accordance with paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.
No uploaded files for public display
The Milton Road Residents' Association committee met yesterday evening to consider what information we had gleaned from the meeting of 28/1/20 organised by Mike Sargeant about the Local Plan for Greater Cambridge. He explained the importance attached to the input of residents in drafting this plan, and encouraged us to submit our ideas. However, we are left with deep concern about how this is to be done. We are sure you would agree that the ease with which people can make their views known is vital, and that this should apply to online and traditional methods of communication. Alas, this is far from the case. Members who tried to navigate the website by going to "How to make your views known" found it so difficult that it was a positive disincentive to continue. The card which Mike Sargeant gave us at his meeting has space for comments on the back, but no indication as to how to deliver it. It just says "Send us your ideas at" and gives an email address. Also, it being the first we had seen of these cards, we were left wondering if/when they were to be put through doors. Is there a planned distribution? Will local libraries be given piles of them and boxes for people to put in the ones they fill out? How many booklets giving the details of the Local Plan will be lodged in libraries for reference? (Even if you are conversant with the internet, the document is understandably long. It takes some commitment to read it through in its entirety or to print it out.) Since the deadline for submission of views (24/2/20) is approaching fast and half term falls within this period, it would be much appreciated if you could address these issues as a matter of urgency. We are keen to encourage all our members to participate in the consultation, but are naturally reluctant to direct them to methods of doing so which are virtually unworkable.
No uploaded files for public display
General Comments on CFS 2.0 Site Context and Background 2.1 Chivers Farms Ltd is submitting Land adjacent to St Georges Way and Woodcock Close, Impington. The site was submitted for consideration as part of the Call for Sites in March 2019. The site is located on the north-eastern edge of the Village of Impington, Cambridgeshire. Impington is adjacent to Histon Village which is situated immediately north of Cambridge and the A14. 2.2 The site consists of three fields currently used for grazing sheep and horses. Hollyoaks Veterinary Surgery is located within the north-eastern section of the site and the Master Plan includes a proposal to relocate this facility nearby. 2.3 The site is enclosed by Impington village to the north, south and west and framed by a tree belt on the eastern boundary between the site and open countryside. The site is approximately 1km from Histon village centre which provides a range of facilities for the local community. Impington and Histon 2.4 Impington and Histon is classified as a Rural Centre in the settlement hierarchy within the adopted Local Plan. Rural Centres are the most sustainable settlement type within the hierarchy and perform a role in terms of providing services and facilities for a rural hinterland. They are considered to have good access to education, employment opportunities, a variety of services and facilities and have good public transport services to Cambridge or a market town. 2.5 The adopted Local Plan states that Rural Centres comprise the most sustainable villages in South Cambridgeshire and there is no strategic constraint on the amount of development or redevelopment of land for housing that can come forward within the development frameworks, provided that the proposals are in accordance with the policies in the Plan. 3.0 Development Proposals 3.1 The site was submitted as part of the Call for Sites consultation in 2019 and Chivers Farms Ltd is continuing to promote the site for allocation in the Local Plan. 3.2 The site lies outside of the existing development framework and is located in the green belt and it is acknowledged that proposals for green belt development could only happen via releases in the Local Plan. The accompanying Masterplan Development Vision Document demonstrates the development potential of the land immediately adjacent to the east of Impington following a process of assessment and evaluation. 3.3 The principles identified in the Masterplan are as follows: ● Achieve 30dph which equates to approximately 50 new dwellings (Inc. affordable housing); ● Utilise existing site accesses; ● Enhance pedestrian and cycle links to connect to existing routes; ● Provision of green infrastructure to encourage ecological corridors and increase biodiversity; and ● Provision of public open space and areas of play. 3.4 The Master Plan proposals demonstrate the site is in a sustainable location, within walking and cycling distance to local services and facilities in Histon and Impington. The proposal creates a sensitive extension in this edge of village location, adjacent to an existing well-established tree belt to the east of Impington Village. The opportunities and constraints of the site have informed the masterplan proposals which have taken into consideration the existing pattern of development and local context, to ensure a village sense of place is reflected, supporting Histon and Impington as a single community. 3.5 The proposals also provide the opportunity to incorporate a pedestrian and cycle links through the site connecting to existing footpaths, enhancing connectivity to the village and providing improved public access to the site. This will enable both new and existing residents to access the provision of open space and formal play contributing to an inclusive community within the village. Summary of Technical Assessments 3.6 A Flood Risk and Drainage site appraisal has been carried out to support this promotion. The site is located entirely in Flood Zone 1 on the Environment Agency Flood Mapping data and, therefore, at ‘low risk’ of flooding. The site is not considered at significant risk of surface water flooding. There are sporadic areas of surface water flooding located in the southern field and surface water flooding only occurs in the northern field in a low risk scenario. 3.7 In conclusion, the site is at low risk of flooding overall and the technical assessment demonstrates that there are a number of mitigation measures that can be implemented to bring forward the development proposals demonstrating practical and sustainable SUDs solutions for both foul and surface water drainage. 3.8 A Transport Access Review of the existing site access has been carried out to support this promotion. This proposes access from the existing access off Woodcock Close. A primary vehicle route aligns from Woodcock Close, crossing the existing drainage channels via a culvert and aligns centrally through to provide access to the northern section of the site. In addition, a private road provides access for the dwellings on the former Veterinary site. 3.9 In terms of the highway capacity, all traffic would enter and exit via the existing access at Woodcock Close onto Milton Road. Flow counts have been undertaken at this junction and a baseline PICADY capacity model of the junction has been prepared which confirms that there are no capacity issues. 3.10 The site is located within a highly sustainable location with the nearest bus stop approximately 500 metres where the Citi 8 bus runs every 20 minutes on weekdays into Cambridge and north to Cottenham. There is also an existing footpath link from Woodcock Close towards Impington Village. Access to the Guided Busway is approximately 1km from the site with pedestrian access along existing roads. The proposal is considered acceptable in highway terms. 3.11 This promotion is also supported by a Preliminary Ecology Appraisal. This document indicates that the site falls within the Impact Risk Buffer Zone of the Cam Washes SSSI, which is located approximately 8.7km to the north-east. It should be noted, however, that Natural England do not consider new residential development within this risk zone to constitute a risk to the SSSI. 3.12 The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal also notes that the site has a baseline biodiversity value of 9.94 habitat units. In order to achieve no net loss to biodiversity, the report stipulates that 0.9 hectares of grassland would need to be retained and enhanced (31% of the total site area). To achieve a 10% net gain, then 1.1 hectares of grassland would need to be retained and enhanced (38% of the total site area). Such calculations, however, do not take into account the opportunity for the provision of additional ecological compensatory measures e.g. the provision of bird and bat boxes across the site. It is therefore likely that less grassland would need to be retained and enhanced in order to achieve a biodiversity net gain, on the basis that additional ecological mitigation is provided as part of the development. 3.13 In terms of protected species, the report indicates that site has the potential to support the following fauna: ● Great Crested Newt; ● Reptile; ● Water Vole; ● Bat; and ● Bird. 3.14 The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal concludes that further surveys of the above species may be required in order to enable an assessment of the impact of the proposed development. Benefits to be delivered by the proposals 3.15 It is considered that the development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to the local area, including: ● Residential development providing up to 50 dwellings (including 40% affordable housing), of an appropriate scale and form which supports, and is informed by its village edge location. This is also compliant with the policies in the Histon and Impington Neighbourhood Plan; ● New publicly accessible open space and play space in line with local plan policy; ● Pedestrian and cycle access through the site linking to the existing network; ● Provision of green links to encourage ecological corridors and increase bio-diversity; ● Supporting Impington and Histon’s economy, including local shops and services; ● A sustainable site location with good access to the facilities and services in Impington and Histon; and ● Relocation of Hollyoaks Veterinary Surgery to purpose built premises at Bedlam Farm, Impington.
No uploaded files for public display
We have reviewed the above document and can confirm that National Grid has no comments to make in response to this consultation.
No uploaded files for public display
The Greater Cambridge Local Plan will shape how Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire changes over the period to 2040, and possibly beyond. The Issues and Options 2020 Consultation enables the first conversation and explores big themes that will influence how homes, jobs and infrastructure are planned. One of the big themes outlined in the Local Plan Issues and Options 2020 is climate change and achieving net zero carbon is an important consideration in the preparation of the Local Plan. The land at 20 Bourn Road, Caxton was put forward as part of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Call for Sites undertaken in Spring 2019 and provides an opportunity to create a well located extension to Caxton with efficiently designed homes. The site can accommodate tree planting which will also create biodiversity net gain another important big theme. The development of Land at 20 Bourn Road, Caxton will enable homes and enhance the setting of the village through much needed housing providing environmental and social benefits. As set out in the Issues and Options 2020 consultation the cost of renting or buying a home in Greater Cambridge is much higher than the national average. If the Local Plan does not make provision for a larger quantity of housing this will be exacerbated. To achieve this, the Council must set itself an ambitious housing target for the plan period. Greater Cambridge is at the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, the UK Innovation Corridor and the Cambridge-Norwich Tech Corridor, all of which will transform the regional economy, it is imperative the Councils plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government. The Local Plan should provide a range of housing sites, both small and large scale to enable flexibility and competition in the market. As set out in paragraph 68 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 small and medium sites such as land at 20 Bourn Road, Caxton will make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of the area and can be built out quickly. There is significant demand for housing within Caxton given its proximity to Cambourne and Cambridge. The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 sets out in 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. 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 nearby villages. The land at 20 Bourn Road, Caxton is ideally placed in relation to Caxton and the transportation corridors. Caxton’s proximity to Cambourne lends itself to be a highly sustainable location for future growth in Cambridgeshire along with the proposed new railway station at Cambourne as part of the Cambridge to Oxford Arc. The terminus of the proposed busway will be located in Cambourne and the Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) will be through Cambourne and beyond towards St Neots. The Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) has indicated that the proposed Cambridge-Cambourne busway could be completed as soon as 2024, making it a key consideration in determining where future growth should be located. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan should help to meet its housing need by having a combination of large and small sites as well as along transport corridors. Therefore, dispersal through new settlements, villages and transport corridors would be appropriate locations to develop housing and this site would be key to achieving this aim and enable sustainable development in accordance with paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.
No uploaded files for public display
Response: We have reviewed the above document and can confirm that National Grid has no comments to make in response to this consultation
No uploaded files for public display
Response to Question 2 Endurance Estates have already submitted details of the landholdings at land off A10 at Melbourn for allocation in the emerging Local Plan during the original 'Call for Sites' consultation in March 2019. This submission included: Site Promotion Document Indicative Masterplan Technical Note on Drainage Technical Note on Highways Ecology Report Further to this original submission progress has been made on several the technical studies in relation to the site. A summary of these studies is set out below. Highways WSP, as highways and transportation consultants for the project, have designed a four-arm roundabout arrangement on the A10 to serve the proposed scheme. This arrangement has a number of benefits including slowing the speed of traffic on the A10; providing a much safer arrangement for vehicles exiting or entering Melbourn onto of off the A10; providing a dedicated bus stop on the A10 and providing a safe crossing and associated footpath network link into Melbourn for pedestrians. This arrangement has been assessed by Cambridgeshire County Council Highways and received provisional approval in principle. Utilities A utilities assessment has been undertaken by WSP to confirm that the site can be served by water; electricity; gas and telecoms. The findings of this report have confirmed that it is possible to serve the site with each of these utilities with several diversions and new connections. Ground Conditions Ground conditions have identified the underling ground conditions and potential sources of contamination. The Oil and Gas pipeline which crosses part of the site has been clearly indicated and will be considered in future site planning. Nothing has been highlighted that would preclude the site from being allocated for commercial uses. Market Conditions Update Further to the previous submission an update on market conditions is set out below based on the used we are intending to deliver on the site. B1/B2 Further to our previous representations the growth of Cambridge remains one of the fastest growing cities in the UK and an important driver to the UK economy. The region continues to attract inward investment and with continued upgrades to the transport infrastructures including the completion of the A14 upgrade works this year; new businesses will continue to be attracted to Cambridge and the surrounding region. The demand for commercial space (B1; B2) remains strong with companies attracted by the pool of skilled workers; links to the university and science parks. There continues to be generally low vacancy rates and stable demand for industrial floorspace. Office market conditions continues to see most activity in the prime locations in Cambridge City Centre however there is evidence to support there continues to be demand for offices that are well located with good transport links. Endurance remains confident that this site would have strong interest for commercial uses considering the occupier interest to date when the land has not yet been allocated in the development plan. There also remains a strong market for in the research and development sector across Cambridgeshire. The site would be suited to this type of development which is already established at Melbourn through the existing science park. C2 Care/Care Village There continues to be demand for care places across Cambridgeshire and the demand for specific Care Villages continues to increase. Endurance commissioned an independent report by HPC to look at C2 demand across the local plan area (See submitted report in full). The study concludes that, whilst rental options will remain predominant, ownership forms of specialist housing across Greater Cambridge are required in greater number. The Study references the Shop@ methodology which identifies areas of similar affluence to Greater Cambridge as having a need for 67% of specialist housing for the elderly subject to ownership (of varying form). This would not appear unrealistic, given that our own research identifies a little over 70% of Greater Cambridge individuals over the age of 65 to be owner occupiers. The site at Melbourn allows for the delivery of a care village on the parcel of land to the east of the A10 and closest to the existing built form of the village. Roadside Services (A1; A3; A5) The proposed development of a roadside services scheme at this site to serve the road users of the A10 remains a potential option. Endurance are in discussions with potential end users to deliver a scheme which would be brought forward in association with the new roundabout arrangement. Since the previous representations there have been no other applications for roadside services to serve this section of the A10. The A10 continues to be one of the primary transport corridors in Cambridgeshire serving the regional economy. The traffic use on the road is comfortably within the range of traffic required to justify a roadside services scheme in this location. The latest data from the Department of Transport (2018) indicates 16,000 daily traffic movements (both directions) past the site for all types of vehicle. This is likely to have only increased since the survey date. The nature of a roadside services scheme is that is not a new retail destination and its primary function is to serve the road user. There is currently a gap in the roadside services coverage on this part of the A10 so the proposed scheme will deliver the necessary services which are likely to include a Petrol Filling Station and Drive Thru Restaurants. The site will provide associated benefits to the residents of Meldreth and Melbourn, its primary function will be to serve motorist using the A10. Roadside services schemes due to their nature are located on the road network where a demand exists. They are generally not promoted through the local plan process as they are reacting to needs of the road user rather than the needs of a settlement. It is intended that a planning application will be submitted for this element of the site as this use can be delivered in isolation and is not reliant of the allocation of the wider site for business park use in the new Greater Cambridgeshire Local Plan. Public House (A4) There has been some interest to deliver a public house on the site. This is likely to be a family led pub with the focus being on the food offer with ancillary bar. There remains a possibility that an end user would also deliver associated overnight accommodation in adjoining building; which is a concept now being used by several of the major operators on sites well located to primary transport routes. Battery Storage/Renewables It remains the intention for the scheme to deliver some elements of renewable energy. Both battery storage and solar panels remain options for the scheme which would potentially link into the nearby grid connection and sell electricity back to the grid or provide renewable energy for the future business park. There remains the potential for collaboration with the adjoining solar park. With the emergence of more electric vehicles the site would also be suited to provide an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging for vehicles. It is currently estimated that the UK needs more than 80,000 EV charging points over the next two years to cope with future demands. There are more than 1million electric vehicles on UK roads in 2020 but currently only 16,500 charging points of which only 1,500 are the high-speed variety. At least 100,000 charging points are required to meet current demand. With the A10 being a primary transport corridor, the site is well placed to be able to deliver a highspeed charging facility for the use of motorists.
No uploaded files for public display
Response to Question 2 3.1 The site was submitted as part of the Call for Sites consultation in 2019 and Chivers Farms Ltd in continuing to promote the site for allocation in the Local Plan. The Site is an opportunity to deliver small scale employment development to help meet the needs of the District but most importantly provide local employment opportunities. Description of Proposals 3.2 An illustrative masterplan has been prepared to show additional employment development in the form of four new buildings could be accommodated on the site. These are shown on land to the south of the existing former agricultural buildings and now employment buildings, and east of the cottages. 3.3 The site is already well screened due to vegetation to the east and south. Additional planting is proposed to provide further screening and provide an ecological and biodiversity gain. Summary of Technical Work 3.4 A Transport Review has been carried out to examine the implications of the proposal on the highway network. The assessment recognises the site’s close proximity to existing settlements and notes that Histon, Impington and Milton can all be accessed via a 9-11minute cycle ride. There are nearby cycle routes which pass by the site which future tenants could utilise to access the site. A TRICS assessment for a mixed B1, B2 and B8 use development of approximately 8,500sqm was completed and the resulting AM and PM peak hour vehicle trips generated are considered to have an insignificant impact on the local road network. Access onto Milton Road is also considered accessible. The proposal is considered acceptable in highway terms. 3.5 A Flood Risk and Drainage site appraisal has been carried out to support this promotion. It notes that the site falls wholly within Flood Zone 1 of the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone maps. It is also shown to be predominantly at very low risk of surface water flooding with small areas of flood risk with low depths. It is assumed that these areas are topographic low points and will be mitigated against by the new development. This will be also be mitigated by installing an effective surface water drainage system on the site. In conclusion, the site is at low risk of flooding overall with practical and sustainable solutions for both foul and surface water drainage. 3.6 This promotion is also supported by a Preliminary Ecology Appraisal. This document indicates that the site falls within the Impact Risk Buffer Zone of the Cam Washes SSSI, which is located approximately 7.6km to the north-east. It should be noted, however, that Natural England do not consider new residential development within this risk zone to constitute a risk to the SSSI. 3.7 The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal also notes that the site has a baseline biodiversity value of 4.53 habitat units. In order to achieve no net loss to biodiversity, the report stipulates that 0.5 hectares of grassland would need to be created (24% of the total site area). To achieve a 10% net gain, then 0.59 hectares of grassland would need to be created (28% of the total site area). Such calculations, however, do not take into account the opportunity for additional ecological compensatory measures e.g. the provision of bird and bat boxes across the site. It is therefore likely that less grassland would need to be retained and enhanced in order to achieve a biodiversity net gain, on the basis that additional ecological mitigation is provided as part of the development. 3.8 In terms of protected species, the report acknowledges that the site has the potential to support the following fauna: ● Great Crested Newt; ● Reptile; ● Water Vole; ● Bat; and ● Birds. 3.9 The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal concludes that follow-up surveys should be undertaken in order to establish the potential development impacts on the species identified above. Benefits 3.10 It is considered that the development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to the local area, including: ● Delivery of local employment facilities, this includes the relocation of Hollyoaks Veterinary Surgery to Bedlam Farm from its existing premises at Woodcock Close; ● Supporting the employment activities of an existing Site near homes and essential infrastructure. The site is located within walking and cycling distance of the village centre, reducing the need to travel by private car; ● A landowner who is part of the community and whose activities provide local employment; ● Support the areas local economy, including shops and services; and ● Enhance biodiversity levels across the site, the site is predominantly agricultural land and can currently be considered to be of low ecological value.
No uploaded files for public display
General comments about site Site Description 2.1 The site is located to the north of Milton Road, to the east of Impington, and lies within South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC). 2.2 Bedlam Farm is part of the Chivers Farms portfolio and is located to the east of the village of Impington, north of Milton Road. The site measures approximately 2.12ha and is currently a mixture of agriculture, commercial B1 and B2 and a residential building. 2.3 The buildings on the site comprise a combination of farm and commercial buildings. Two cottages are located at the northern end of the access road that runs some 550m north from its junction with Milton Road. The two most northern buildings are modern, steel framed, profiled metal steel clad, they sit parallel to each other either side of a concrete hardstanding that provides respective access, parking, and vehicle turning space. 2.4 The centre of Impington, with its range of services and facilities, is located approximately 2km to the west of the site. An existing footpath with cycle way along Milton Road provides easy access to Impington and Histon to the west and Milton (including Milton Park & Ride) to the east. 2.5 The site is not subject to any environmental designations and is located within Flood Zone 1, as indicated by the Environment Agency’s Flood Maps, and therefore has a 0.1% chance (low probability) of flooding. 2.6 The site is not located within a Conservation Area, nor are there any Listed Buildings on site. The current adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2018) Policies Map shows the site as being within the Green Belt. Histon and Impington 2.7 The closest existing settlement to the site is Impington which, together with Histon, is classified as a Rural Centre in the settlement hierarchy within the adopted Local Plan. Rural Centres are the most sustainable settlement type within the hierarchy and perform a role in terms of providing services and facilities for a rural hinterland. They are considered to have good access to education, employment opportunities, a variety of services and facilities and have good public transport services to Cambridge or a market town. 2.8 The current Local Plan notes that since Rural Centres comprise the most sustainable villages in South Cambridgeshire there is no strategic constraint on the amount of development or redevelopment of land for housing that can come forward within the development frameworks, provided that the proposals are in accordance with the policies in the Plan. This classification demonstrates that the settlement is one of the better served and, therefore, more sustainable villages in the district. 2.9 A number of bus services operate through the Village providing public transport to Cambridge and beyond. As stated, the site is also in close proximity to the Milton Park & Ride and is accessible by an existing footpath along Milton Road. 2.10 The site is also ideally located to benefit from the proposed transport infrastructure in the local area which includes improvements to the A10, enhanced accessibility for pedestrian and cyclists, including a new cycle route along Mere Way connection to Cambridge, and improvements to public transport. Planning History 2.11 The site’s planning history relates mainly to its former agricultural use. However, of relevance is the 2013 approval for the Subdivision of the southern unit to form 3 Class B1 & B2 units (under reference S/0180/13/FL). The unit to the north is still in agricultural use.
No uploaded files for public display
I saw you at one of your pop up roadshows last week (at Anglia Ruskin University) and wanted to email in with my thoughts. It’s clear to me that there needs to be a change in the use of the petrol/diesel car especially during rush hour in city centres as this not only does the environment harm but is especially harmful for young children walking to school. I work in the middle of Cambridge and since the beginning made the choice that I need to cycle within the city centre as much as possible. I drive part of the way as I live near Royston, and it really is too far and dangerous to cycle the whole way. I part on a residential street near Barton, which is not ideal as I’m sure local residents aren’t thrilled by this. I think there should be more park & cycle opportunities for all roads leading into Cambridge, I’m sure that more commuters would be willing to do this if the facilities were offered. I also think that commuters would be willing to pay a parking fee (perhaps with parking season tickets available) for this too. I also think that, great though the cycle infrastructure is in Cambridge, we’re still treated as second class citizens by too many drivers in the city centre. I would like to see even more cycle infrastructure and prominence in the city to make it feel that those walking and cycling are King (or Queen) rather than the car trumping all as currently feels the case.
No uploaded files for public display
In your message to everyone 13.01.20 with a formal notification attached you ask that we all think about things and then make contact with you before 24.02.20. I have done my thinking and am now committing “my thoughts” to you in this message – In summary:- There is no joined up thinking being employed in your “planning” west of Cambridge. No matter how much “consulting” occurs – no notice is paid by those carrying out “planning” functions to the things that are written/said -- So what is the point of yet more “consultation”? On the first point:- i) The Government has recently announced that the Oxford to Cambridge railway is to be built and an express timetable is to be the way it happens; it is to go south of St Neots – via Cambourne (not clear if that is to the north or the south of that settlement) where there will surely be a large Car Park for the station there? – and onto the new Station promised at the west of the Cambridge Biomedcal Park – presumably in the CCC’s Open Space to the west of the existing main line London to Cambridge. ii) Highways England are underway with the building of a new road between those two towns and the route is decided for the improved A.428 from the end of the Bedford By-pass all the way to where it joins with the A.14 at the bottom of the back of Madingley Hill – It goes JUST to the north of Cambourne and under the main dual-roundabout-ed entrance to that ever enlarging settlement/now nearly a town. iii) You are planning a Park & Ride at or close to Scotland Farm that is “remote” from any settlement – so all parties to use it will have to use a car to get to it – not walk or bicycle (as was admitted to be “unlikely” in the papers regarding it as the “chosen location” & despite all the negative press and comment that it received!) rather than putting it in a place adjacent/near to where people actually live! iv) You are planning a new bus service on a route through beautiful (and at present) unspoilt countryside that all but mirrors the route of the new railway – which will in any event take a lot of travellers off the roads altogether no mater by what means they are travelling – so why on earth develop a bus route at a cost of millions now? v) When xx was in charge of SCDC planning – xx promised that Camborne would never be more than 3,000 houses in three “villages” and that it would deliver ALL of the promised benefits in the S.106 Agreement signed by SCDC for us locals with the Developers which is supposed to be a legally enforceable document. – Shortly there will be 10,000 houses in this area – Very few of the S.106 “promises” have been or ever will be delivered – rather houses are even now being built of the areas of the promised golf course Etc!! AND YET – someone wanting to convert an existing barn to a single story dwelling close-by and convert an old building to 2 very nice dwellings in a nearby village can not get a planning consent !! It is clear that there is one rule for Bovis/Countryside Etc and totally another for “the small people” who are easy for your staff to boss about and frustrate! All of this culminates in a need for a RADICAL re-think as a consequence of nationally decided matters which SHOULD have huge impact on your “local” thinking – The new “West of Cambridge” Park & Ride should double with a huge Station Car Park virtually “in Cambourne” where all those west of the city are being forced to reside. So you should now allow Cambourne to enlarge more to the north of the A.428 and become (as it could) a 21st Century Garden City – where that P & R facility + the new railway will totally obviate the need for a new busway and REALLY stop people driving into the City. On the second point:- a) I attended the Greater Cambridge forum and spent 4 weekend days listening to such short “introductions” (to which it was clear that little or no though had been given) from which, as a consequence, no one learnt anything – then trained table-heads put random ideas arising on each table in the room onto stick-it notes all over white-boards and those became “agreed policy” – I did not recognise much of the “outcome” that was presented in the subsequent papers which in any event was more or less wholly “City oriented” anyway despite the huge numbers involved to the west of the city! b) I and many others have written to you about the Bourn Airfield Development and particularly the access to it, which is about to lead to the inundation by high-speeding vehicles through the village of Bourn (with a very narrow so dangerous part of the high street of which you will be well aware) – yet no notice has been paid to all the communication you have received from many people and you are about to grant a consent for another huge development with a second access that is totally unfit for purpose. You will have a lot for which to answer when the first child is hurt or worse killed outside the houses on the Broadway in Bourn. c) Your consultation schedule shows that you are to be in the many locations stated for perhaps 2 hours – Is that really a suitable time in which to gather and consider serious suggestions of/for change or to give people a really full understanding of what is proposed? d) I am quite sure that, as in the past, absolutely no notice will be paid to these or any other comments that you receive!! I would be pleased to receive an immediate confirmation that you have received this missive & an undertaking that you will read and will REALLY consider the views expressed and will let me have a considered reply in due course.
No uploaded files for public display
I refer to the Greater Cambridge Local Plan issues and Options document. As part of the MOD, the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) is the estate expert for defence, supporting the armed forces to enable military capability by planning, building, maintaining, and servicing infrastructure. As you may be aware the MOD has land interest within the Plan area at Bassingbourn Barracks. Paragraph 95 of the NPPF sets out that planning policies should take into account wider security and defence requirements by b) recognising and supporting development required for operational defence and security purposes, and ensuring that operational sites are not affected adversely by the impact of other development proposed in the area. As part of the formulation of the new plan we would ask that consideration is given to paragraph 95 of the NPPF to ensure this existing military establishment is protected and also supported in terms of maintaining its purpose to support the needs of national defence. For example consideration should be given to the plan supporting proposals associated with military operations at Bassingbourn Barracks where they would enhance or sustain operational capabilities. It would also be consistent with the NPPF for the plan to set out non-support of non-military or non-defence related development within or in the areas around this military site where they would adversely affect military operations or capability. DIO would be pleased to engage further with the plan as it progresses and would welcome being consulted on future iterations.
No uploaded files for public display
A sequence of observations: Until you recognise the true demograph and where and why the majority of standard tech industry employees live, you will not understand the true compromises required. The National Design Guide identifies a few key items that are utopian and over idealistic, The flavour of the document suggests; Building homes in a manner that invokes physical closeness of people as it reiterates “compactness” and convenience of access to amenities which indeed is applaudable on one hand however it is necessary to understand sociological behaviours and psychological impact that the move in modern times has had by reducing the size of living accommodation down considerably in urban areas. The further compactness is pushing toward the old 1800’s slum environments which were impacted by anti-social elements in society as were the more recent 1950’s / 60’s high rise accommodations that have all but been demolished and also had that same issue. The assumption that it is modern and thus will be successful is flawed as the psychological impact on the individual and especially families if there is not enough room in a house to segregate the individuals in the house to allow their own space and “alone time” can be highly detrimental to their mental state and indeed become a burden on the already stretched NHS. Numerous building plans drawn up in and around Cambridge have previously failed to deliver on GP surgeries and open spaces and park facilities that were originally promised in outline planning. It is acknowledged that more recent projects are starting to deliver on some aspects; it will also be far more important with high concentration populations proposed. The Eddington estate is to many people a rather unattractive example of modern community building. It is a very high concentration and very enclosed. It is actually quite depressing when visited on anything but the “brightest of weather” day’s! compare with the better style of condition promoted many years ago ref https://www.cadbury.co.uk/about-bournville The "high tech" research element for Cambridge consists of extremely highly paid group that afford property in the city boundary, and the mid-range earners are generally a transient population who rent from property lease owners who, in many cases, bought property over the 80's 90's and 00's step by step accruing. The other residents own, of old (pre 1990 purchase), or via inheritance. There are a huge number living inside the City boundary who commute to London and have mega income to support mortgages in Cambridge city. Many who grew up in south Cambs and the city have been pushed out to reside in cheaper property north of the city due to only having low to medium income with families to support and in doing so HAVE to travel in from the likes of Fenland area (up into Lincolnshire even) where public transport is VERY SPARSE, check out March Wisbech Chatteris & Ramsey for public transport options to get into Cambridge and then around to various industrial businesses within the City boundary. Thus most spend over £2600 / year on fuel alone to get to work in cambridge spending over 2 & 1/2 hours a day sat in their cars. Other modes are not viable due to bus routes and connections making trip times in excess of 2 hrs each way. That’s 4 hours travel for 7-8 hours paid work time. No wonder life expectancy is variable with additional stress of travel and associated impacts on health, also geographical inaccessibility which adds to living costs and further stress. This applies to people who move down from northern counties who have enjoyed nice 4 bed properties and on moving to the region can barely afford more than a 3 bed property in the cheaper areas. I know this to be true as a few individuals have experienced this and live in Fenland in order to have adequate garden for personal leisure and their children. It is not possible to sustain the work force in Cambridge as well as cripple the commuter with additional charges for parking and access to the work place. Many companies cannot use "work from home" approach due to data security's (National level Security, International company NDA’s and ITAR). The added costs that burden the commuter are due to not being able to afford property more locally to enable the use of bus routes, taxis or cycling, much as many would consider if they were fortunate to live within 2 miles of the city boundary. The cost burden on the commuters of around 20 to 35 miles is currently not fully appreciated by the city council and is effectively ignored by ALL Local authority's And the draconian enforcement of proposals with blinkered localised NIMBY mindsets is detrimental to the city and all businesses. The utopian view of diverse communities is always going to be marred by basic human sociological influence of the tribe instinct. This has been borne out in history and resulted in micro cultural community divisions and often (for want of a better descriptive) “ghetto” style communities arising. It is admirable and desirable to get the full diversity though, whilst it is uncertain that will be achievable. Notwithstanding the aforementioned is very much a critical issue status that has to be recognised and embraced within the decision making. No wonder Cambridge lacks the soul it had back in the 70's & 80's. The desire to travel in is much reduced as availability of convenient, cost effective travel resource / parking is very much negative. Unfortunately over the last 30 years the changes have taken their toll. It is a sad place and on a route to further self-destruction. With regard to home building, it seems unlikely much will be resolved without capping the greed on developers where property value differential between different areas of the country are assumed and based on a perceived desirability rather than a true worth ( cost to build + sensible business profit of say 12%). The resale value should remain relatively similar with cost of living delta only rather than Estate Agents imposed and assumed “desirability premium” . A house is essentially a manmade cave for shelter and as such identical property within the small geographical region of the UK ( on world scale) should be deemed as having the same value to the individual no matter where they live.
No uploaded files for public display
I'm writing in regards this Wednesday's open meeting at St Philips Church, Mill Road to discuss the new Local Plan. Very unfortunately I'm not able to attend due to a work event but I was hoping to briefly share my thoughts. Last summer's closure of Mill Road was revelatory for me. Almost from one day to the next, the air smelled better, the reduction in fumes and pollution was noticeable right away, there was more space on the road for people and I felt safer walking and cycling. The parklets were a wonderful touch and many of the local businesses seemed very busy with all the extra people sitting outside. I would like to see this reflected in the local plan by 1. removing private vehicle through-traffic from Mill Road (while keeping buses and cycle traffic) 2. creation of semi-permanent parklets or other green areas with seating on the street in commercial areas Apologies if this isn't the preferred way to receive comments from the public but it's what I would say if I were able to attend on Wednesday.
No uploaded files for public display
With a New Town being planned for Waterbeach, it is important that the heritage assets in the area are accessible to all current local inhabitants and to future residents. I am the Chair of the Farmland Museum at Denny Abbey, and whilst Cambridge city has a wealth of heritage that can be accessed and enjoyed by people, South Cambridgeshire has relatively little, and in fact the Farmland Museum is the only accredited museum currently in South Cambs. Re-opening the ancient Causeway from Waterbeach through the new town to Denny Abbey will provide a heritage trail where people can learn thehistory of the entire area from 12th Century religious orders, through farming in the area and the military presence right through to the new town development. Re-opening the causeway will also provide a walking and cycling route between the museum and Abbey from Waterbeach, rather than having to drive along the A10. This will also give easier access for volunteers and potential volunteers in the village to help at the Museum, whilst helping to connect the old village to the new town. There is very little concerning heritage in the local plan, whilst this could provide historical education, health benefits, decreased car journeys on A10, volunteering opportunities and inclusion of all residents.
No uploaded files for public display
Heritage missing from document. Opening old causeway as a route from Waterbeach to Denny. Learning opportunities. Encourage healthy lifestyles.
No uploaded files for public display
Apologies for sending to you; I was not sure the best address to use. We received the news-sheet from The LibDems at the end of last week. It was a surprise to find that there is a consultation on the “Greater Cambridge?” Local Plan, and that the closing date is only a few days away (stated as 24th Feb on the GC website, rather than the 26th as stated in the news-sheet - unless it is a different Local Plan. I went on to to the GC website and tried to make sense of the consultation focus (3 or 4 areas with the 24th deadline) and in despair, gave up as it so complex and unclear, given the short time available to us; we have had a deluge of consultations to respond in the last 3 months and trying to keep up with (SE Transport Plan, South Station, Church use survey, local section 106 fund use survey and Stapleford retirement home/countrypark). I have a request please: Can you/Lib Dems make the points on our and others behalf that: • whilst we welcome the first evidence we have seen of an attempt to join-up thinking between South Cambs and the City, raise communication weaknesses to individuals (such as ourselves) as a big weakness. • improve user-navigation options around the online draft plan much, much easier; and • raise the perceived/apparent (to us) non-integration/joined up planning between the big transport projects (Cambridge South and the SE Transport Plan), which do not seem to refer to the other in the latest plans. We still cannot understand how the £155 m cost of the SE Transport Plan to primarily join two research campuses, with little benefit to those communities that will suffer the greatest disruption, can be justified, unlike the South Station which seems to make more sense. Furthermore, one, the SE Transport Plan, is already generating further development plans (Stapleford retirement home - does Stapleford require such a home?). Thank you for reading this and I hope that you can help to get voices heard on these and other issues.
No uploaded files for public display
I have been aware of the recent consultation meetings connected to the development of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan but I am disappointed to see that the South the region is more or less missed out. The documents recognise Sawston as being one of the largest residential areas outside the city centre. Residents are well aware of issues with transport (A505 / A1301 roundabout, proposed busway) and developments (Houses, Huawei, Wellcome Genome Campus) and yet there appears to be a limited attempt to reach out for views. I appreciate it is probably a bit late now, with the closing date being next Monday but it was a shame to not have any opportunity.
No uploaded files for public display
Thank you for organizing the event at Cambridge tonight. I would like to provide you with the following feedback. I live in Cambridge the last 20 years and I have seen the following: 1) Major development takes place over the last few years. Major areas have been converted to big residential estates that lack of any human vision towards the battle of climate change. Clusters of dense housing that only benefit developers' stakeholders. Those new neighborhoods are still expansive, ugly, dense, and unfriendly. 2) You need more space for self build, and serviced plots, that enable the diversity, and the organic growth of a community. All the small towns we admire in England with the great character comes from the self build and less regulated sites. 3) Encourage 10%-20% of the new residential places to be self-built with energy efficient A - Reduce council tax to those build energy efficiency A, and don't classify them as luxurious homes, Band-F 4) Developers deliver just the basic house quality the regulation demands. However, they are less flexible to make the upgrades the customer wants to deliver an energy efficient house. Example: I asked Hill Development to deliver higher standard house (energy efficiency A), willing to pay the extra money, but they didn't do. Think the developers need be more flexible. 5) Need more of Marmalade Lane.
No uploaded files for public display
Response to Question 2 3.1 The site was submitted as part of the Call for Sites consultation in 2019 and the Chivers Family are continuing to promote the site for allocation in the Local Plan. The Site is an opportunity to deliver small scale residential development to help meet the needs of the District. Description of Proposals 3.2 An illustrative masterplan has been prepared to show how five new homes could be developed on the site. The proposal shows five dwellings arranged in a layout comprising 2 no two bed dwellings and 3 no three bed dwellings. The proposed development density is 38dph. 3.3 Existing landscaping to the east and south boundaries will be retained and enhanced. The landscaping will provide both screening of the development and enhanced ecological and biodiversity. The proposal is modest in scale, is in keeping with the character of the area, and appropriate given the site’s location adjacent to existing residential dwellings. Summary of Technical Assessments 3.4 A Transport Access Review of the existing site access has been carried out to support this promotion. The assessment acknowledges the site’s highly sustainable location and notes that there are many daily facilities to the north of the site circa 1.6km (20-minute walk / 5-minute cycle) which future residents can frequent. 3.5 In terms of the highway capacity, all traffic would enter and exit via an access onto Cambridge Road. A TRICS assessment has been undertaken using the nationally recognised trip rate database ‘TRICS’ to determine an appropriate vehicle trip rate, this concludes that vehicle generation from the development would have a negligible impact on the local road network. 3.6 Bus stops are situated within 210 metres of the site which provide one bus every 20-minutes Monday to Saturday and one bus every 30-minutes on Sundays, providing future residents the opportunity to travel without the use of a car. The proposal is considered acceptable in highway terms. 3.7 A Flood Risk and Drainage site appraisal has been carried out to support this promotion. It notes that the site falls wholly within Flood Zone 1 of the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone maps. It is also shown to be predominantly at very low risk of surface water flooding with small areas of flood risk with low depths. It is assumed that these areas are topographic low points and will be mitigated against by the new development. This will also be mitigated by installing an effective surface water drainage system on the site. In conclusion, the site is at low risk of flooding overall with practical and sustainable solutions for both foul and surface water drainage. 3.8 This promotion is also supported by a Preliminary Ecology Appraisal. This document indicates that the site falls within the Impact Risk Buffer Zone of the Madingley Wood SSSI, which is located approximately 4.5km to the south-west. It should be noted, however, that Natural England do not consider new residential development within this risk zone to constitute a risk to the SSSI. 3.9 The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal also notes that the site has a baseline biodiversity value of 0.48 habitat units. In order to achieve no net loss to biodiversity, the report stipulates that 0.06 hectares of grassland would need to be retained and enhanced (25% of the total site area). To achieve a 10% net gain, then 0.07 hectares of grassland would need to be retained and enhanced (29% of the total site area). Such calculations, however, do not take into account the opportunity for the provision of additional ecological compensatory measures e.g. the provision of bird and bat boxes across the site. It is therefore likely that less grassland would need to be retained and enhanced in order to achieve a biodiversity net gain, on the basis that additional ecological mitigation is provided as part of the development. 3.10 In terms of protected species, the report indicates that a range of common woodland bird species are likely to nest in the adjoining plantation woodland. Furthermore, the mixed plantation woodland surrounding the site has the potential to be used as commuting and foraging habitat by a range of bat species. The Preliminary Ecology Appraisal therefore recommends undertaking a bat activity survey in order to determine the potential mitigation and enhancement measures required to ensure that no harm comes to these species as a result of the proposed development. 3.11 A Tree Survey and Constraints Plan also accompanies this representation. As previously noted, the site comprises a mature vegetated boundary. The Tree Survey and Constraints Plan indicate that the vast majority of the site’s boundary comprises Category B specimens, with only one Category C tree. Unclassified ivy-covered stumps are present on the western boundary. 3.12 Because of the visual screening and arboricultural quality of the mature vegetated boundary, the report recommends the retention of as many trees as feasibly possible. Such recommendations have been incorporated into the design, with all trees to be retained (albeit it is likely pruning would be required to facilitate the access). The unclassified ivy-covered stumps would be removed in order to facilitate both a vehicular and separate pedestrianised access. Benefits to be delivered by the proposals 3.13 It is considered that the development proposals could deliver numerous tangible social, economic and environmental benefits to the local area, including: ● Residential development in the form of new family homes of an appropriate scale and form which supports, and is informed by, its village edge location; ● Locating residential development within one of the District’s largest and most sustainable villages. The site is located close to 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; ● Supporting Impington and Histon’s economy, including local shops and services; and, ● A sustainable site location with good access to the facilities and services in Impington and Histon and Cambridge City to the south.
No uploaded files for public display
5.3 The four big themes are all considered to be important aspects towards achieving positive development. All four themes should be used to inform the spatial strategy within the Local Plan in terms of distributing growth and determining planning applications to deliver growth. It is therefore not considered necessary to rank the options in order of preference.
No uploaded files for public display
Guilden Morden Parish Council resolved at its recent meeting to submit the following comments regarding the Local Plan Consultation: The Parish Council objects to development on the Green Belt and the Local Plan should have strong policies to prevent this. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of these comments, as the online downloadable form is not working.
No uploaded files for public display
Comberton Parish Council resolved at its recent meeting to submit the following comments regarding the Local Plan Consultation: The Parish Council would be opposed to development on the edge of Cambridge inside the Green Belt, but would possibly be amenable to development on the edge of Cambridge outside the Green Belt. The Parish Council is also opposed to dispersal of development to the villages. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of these comments, as the online downloadable form is not working. On behalf of Comberton Parish Council
No uploaded files for public display