7. Infill development at Highfields

I think something has got lost in translation: the Working Party on the VDS was keen that existing hedging should be retained so that developers do not remove it and to reinforce the rural nature of the village. An example is at the top of the village on Highfiels Road on the boundary of the Linden site.

Hedge boundaries are commendable between new and existing but fear is that cheap non-indigenous varieties would be used e.g. leylandii, privet, neither of which are natural or desirable. Also, retain hedgerows that have been established, e.g. on Strympole/Furlong.

Much of the garden infill development currently being carried out is on a wholly inappropriate scale and design. Whilst it is reasonable to make fuller use of the available space, some stronger guidelines in line with those suggested would contain it to an acceptable extent, though I fear it is already too late.

Comments by page, please acknowledge receipt.

Page 6 (or page 10)
The developments to the east of Highfields road since 2000 (e.g. around Clare Drive) and now completing with the in progress CALA development completes the previous strategic plan for the village to have a sustainable community right-sized for key facilities such as the school.

Page 9:
Add new priority: maintain and enhance transport links. E.g. there are now significant concerns that as part of the proposed Borne airfield development Caldecote may loose frequent and fast bus links to Cambridge from the roundabout at the north of the village (bus being re-routed to new stop in Bourne development significantly west of current site). N.B. Already referenced in map on page 15, but could be covered more in the text.

Page 14:
Would like to see extension of 'Caldecote Path' to perimeter of new developments (omitting road as necessary). E.g. Linden development southern edge backing onto Clare Drive.

Page 15: Support new pedestrian/cycle connections, or improvement to existing paths backing onto Clare Drive as shown in map.

Page 18:
Add words underlined: Any new vehicle access should preserve and enhance existing drainage channels (ditch or piped).

Page 19:
References to ditch to be extended to include reinstating pipes where ditches have been piped, not just open ditches (echos earlier comment).

Page 19:
Please add to drawing entrance/exit sight-lines to be be enhanced for both pedestrian and viechular access to existing and new development.

Page 20:
Any development should have goal of betterment of the overall village drainage, not simply maintaining status quo.
No development should impact water flowing into SSI around the village (I believe there are planning conditions that a new development should not increase the flow of water into an SSI?).

Page 20:
Add word to caption. It's a tiny 4" pipe that drains all the surface water from the North of the village. Note that we believe that this pipe is now blocked.

Page 21:
The indicative area of the 2014 flooding is incorrect - I have the source material provided to the county, and the area is larger and needs to be moved further north. I can provide a marked up map if needed. Some houses adjacent to the light blue dotted line flooded.

Page 21:
Please add north east from Clare Drive as a valued view. This is the furthest view from Caldecote that is not broken by trees and buildings clear to Hardwick.