Introduction ; Policy Context

Showing comments and forms 1 to 21 of 21

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168635

Received: 15/02/2021

Respondent: Forestry Commission

Representation Summary:

Key general points provided about existing trees in the community ; ancient woodland; deforstation; and woodland creation.
Forestry Commission does not have the resources to respond to individual neighbourhood plans

Full text:

Thank you for inviting the Forestry Commission to respond to the consultation on the Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan. Unfortunately we do not have the resources to respond to individual neighbourhood plans but we have some key points to make relevant to all neighbourhood plans:
Forestry Commission and Neighbourhood Planning
Existing trees in your community
The Forestry Commission would like to encourage communities to review the trees and woodlands in their neighbourhood and consider whether they are sufficiently diverse in age and species to prove resilient in the face of tree pests and diseases or climate change. For example, if you have a high proportion of Ash, you are likely to see the majority suffering from Ash Dieback. Some communities are proactively planting different species straight away, to mitigate the effect of losing the Ash; you can find out more here. Alternatively, if you have a high proportion of Beech, you may find they suffer particularly from drought or flood stress as the climate becomes more extreme. There are resources available to help you get ideas for other species you can plant to diversify your tree stock and make it more resilient.
Ancient Woodland
If you have ancient woodland within or adjacent to your boundary it is important that it is considered within your plan. Ancient woodlands are irreplaceable, they have great value because they have a long history of woodland cover, with many features remaining undisturbed. This applies equally to Ancient Semi Natural Woodland (ASNW) and Plantations on Ancient Woodland Sites (PAWS). It is Government policy to refuse development that will result in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including ancient woodland, unless “there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists” (National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 175).
The Forestry Commission has prepared joint standing advice with Natural England on ancient woodland and veteran trees. This advice is a material consideration for planning decisions across England and can also be a useful starting point for policy considerations.
The Standing Advice explains the definition of ancient woodland, its importance, ways to identify it and the policies that relevant to it. It provides advice on how to protect ancient woodland when dealing with planning applications that may affect ancient woodland. It also considers ancient wood-pasture and veteran trees. It will provides links to Natural England’s Ancient Woodland Inventory and assessment guides as well as other tools to assist you in assessing potential impacts.

Deforestation

The overarching policy for the sustainable management of forests, woodland and trees in England is a presumption against deforestation.

Woodland Creation

The UK is committed in law to net zero emissions by 2050. Tree planting is recognised as contributing to efforts to tackle the biodiversity and climate emergencies we are currently facing. Neighbourhood plans are a useful mechanism for promoting tree planting close to people so that the cultural and health benefits of trees can be enjoyed alongside their broader environmental benefits. Any planting considered by the plan should require healthy resilient tree stock to minimise the risk of pests and diseases and maximise its climate change resilience, a robust management plan should also be put in place.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168636

Received: 23/02/2021

Respondent: Crime Prevention Design Team Cambridgeshire

Representation Summary:

Response highlights paragraph 127 in the National Planning Policy Framework regarding creating places that are safe.

Crime prevention should be considered as an integral part of any initial design for a proposed development. It should incorporate the principles of ‘Secured by Design’. In particular to demonstrate how their development proposal has addressed the following issues, in order to design out crime to reduce the opportunities for crime

Full text:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above document – in regards to Policy we would wish to mention:

NPPF s.12 Para 127 which states: -

Developments should create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.


In regards to design and layout regarding new commercial and residential development we would wish to make the following comment:

Crime prevention should be considered as an integral part of any initial design for a proposed development. It should incorporate the principles of ‘Secured by Design’. In particular to demonstrate how their development proposal has addressed the following issues, in order to design out crime to reduce the opportunities for crime:

• Natural Surveillance of public and semi-private spaces, in particular, entrances to a development, paths, play areas, open spaces and car parks.
• Defensible space and the clear definition, differentiation and robust separation of public, private and semi-private space, so that all the spaces are clearly defined and adequately protected in terms of their use and ownership.
• Consideration for some lighting, in particular shared parking courts and footpaths.
• Design and layout of pedestrian, cycle and vehicle routes into and within the site, including how these integrate with existing patterns in the village.
• Landscaping and planting, in particular, potential hiding places and dark or secluded areas should not be created.

In practice this means that Secured by Design status for new housing developments can be achieved through careful design and the use of a limited number of through routes, so that they are well used, effectively lit and overlooked, thereby creating a safe and secure atmosphere. Developers should, at an early stage, seek advice from the Police Designing out Crime Officers at Cambridgeshire Police Headquarters on designing out crime.

Hopefully our comments will be considered.

Support

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168637

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Jude Sutton

Representation Summary:

I whole heartedly support and endorse this proposed Neighbourhood Plan.

Full text:

Please accept this comment Waterbeach Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan Consultation.

I whole heartedly support and endorse this proposed Neighbourhood Plan.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168638

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: Jackie Flitney

Representation Summary:

With the high volume of traffic on the A10 and it being a link road at peak hours and continuing throughout the day, how can further development even be considered before safety in waterbeach? As a clinician, the number of accidents is already extremely high, and already over the past twelve months there have been four deaths locally, through serious accidents on this stretch of road, and many minor accidents that go unreported. It is absolutely devastating that concerns raised have been responded to as a non priority, and as to such maybe we need to start looking at priority rather than money making, unworkable, slums.

Why move a railway from the centre of our village after just spending millions extending the platform and inconveniencing village people for your new development who walk to the station to get to work, and have done for many years?

The volume of traffic will increase in the village to it’s already gone bursting capacity and local services that can already not cope!

Our wildlife is being pushed out if it’s natural habitat into more built up areas of the village!
Why should decent people, born here, moved here for a village life, to be near the amenities they want, make way for proposals that totally spoil a rural habitat and change their way of living, for those who have no idea of the impact and safety of others.

Full text:

With the high volume of traffic on the A10 and it being a link road at peak hours and continuing throughout the day, how can further development even be considered before safety in waterbeach? As a clinician, the number of accidents is already extremely high, and already over the past twelve months there have been four deaths locally, through serious accidents on this stretch of road, and many minor accidents that go unreported. It is absolutely devastating that concerns raised have been responded to as a non priority, and as to such maybe we need to start looking at priority rather than money making, unworkable, slums.

Why move a railway from the centre of our village after just spending millions extending the platform and inconveniencing village people for your new development who walk to the station to get to work, and have done for many years?

The volume of traffic will increase in the village to it’s already gone bursting capacity and local services that can already not cope!

Our wildlife is being pushed out if it’s natural habitat into more built up areas of the village!
Why should decent people, born here, moved here for a village life, to be near the amenities they want, make way for proposals that totally spoil a rural habitat and change their way of living, for those who have no idea of the impact and safety of others.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168642

Received: 13/04/2021

Respondent: National Grid

Agent: Avison Young

Representation Summary:

Proposed development sites crossed or in close proximity to National Grid assets:
An assessment has been carried out with respect to National Grid’s electricity and gas transmission assets which include high voltage electricity assets and high-pressure gas pipelines.
National Grid has identified that it has no record of such assets within the Neighbourhood Plan area.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168643

Received: 14/04/2021

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Mapping
In earlier comments to the Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan we had suggested to the Parish Council that they should include a map to cover the whole of their parish to provide a comprehensive Policies Map. The Submission Plan does not include such a map that brings together all the site allocations and site-specific issues. Practitioners generally find it useful to go to a single point for land related designations, such as in a Policies Map with more detailed Inset Maps for areas where there are a number of policy designations, rather than have a number of maps to look at that are dotted through a Plan.

We also highlighted that any map showing the intention of policies in the Plan show be accurate and at a scale large enough to be clearly seen. We consider that the Plan would benefit if a Policies Map at A3 scale were included so that it is easy to read for a future user of the Plan. Alternatively consideration could be given to the approach used in our Local Plan Policies Map where individual villages can be covered by several A4 maps at legible and easy to read scales.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168644

Received: 14/04/2021

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Glossary
The Submission draft has not included a comprehensive glossary which may be helpful to explain a number of specific planning terms used in the Plan that the local community may not be familiar with.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168645

Received: 14/04/2021

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

General comments on the Plan
It would be helpful if the Summary of Policies and Lists of Maps, Figures and Tables included page numbers to improve the navigation through the Plan

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168646

Received: 14/04/2021

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Table 2.1
We are always hesitant/concerned when a neighbourhood plan only highlights some policies in the Local Plan as being relevant as this implies others are of lesser importance.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168647

Received: 14/04/2021

Respondent: South Cambridgeshire District Council

Representation Summary:

Map 2.1 and 2.2
We would suggest that these maps should be at a larger scale to clearly show the boundaries of the Local Plan designations.

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168671

Received: 15/04/2021

Respondent: Natural England

Representation Summary:

Natural England does not have any specific comments on this submission of the Waterbeach neighbourhood plan.

However, we refer you to the attached annex which covers the issues and opportunities that should be considered when preparing a Neighbourhood Plan.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168680

Received: 19/04/2021

Respondent: Defence Infrastructure Organisation

Representation Summary:

The MOD would wish to be consulted on any proposed development within the Waterbeach NP area which consists of structures or buildings exceeding 45.7m Above Ground Level (AGL) and which also include landscaping and SUDS involving open water bodies and bio-diverse roofs / attenuation schemes.

Attachments:

Object

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168681

Received: 19/04/2021

Respondent: Sarah Smart

Representation Summary:

Proper procedures were not followed by Waterbeach Parish Council to agree that a Neighbourhood Plan was done or the in agreeing the area for designation. The submitted plan, subject to this consultation , is out of date and does not reflect the current situation of the designated area, the management of surface water or sewage treatment.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168682

Received: 19/04/2021

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Representation Summary:

We note that the Neighbourhood Development Plan does not include any policies relating to surface water flood risk or drainage in Waterbeach. Given that a number of flood events have been reported in Waterbeach in recent years, we advise that such policies are included and we
would draw your attention to the Cambridgeshire Flood and Water Supplementary Planning Document which should assist in the development of the Neighbourhood Plan.

Attachments:

Support

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168684

Received: 19/04/2021

Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)

Representation Summary:

CPRE supports the Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan as a means for the Parish to positively engage with the planning authority and developers.
CPRE believes it is important that once “made” SCDC, developers and Waterbeach Parish Council, through the WNP and other initiatives, work together to ensure future development is managed, monitored, and enforced to future-proof the Parish for existing and future residents including all those who live and work in the Parish.
CPRE support the policies and holistic approach of the WNP and the vision that the Parish will be a place where people live, work and grow whilst maintaining the village character, respecting and enhancing the natural environment, the landscape and the flora and fauna that live within it.

Attachments:

Support

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168685

Received: 20/04/2021

Respondent: Mrs Barbara Brown

Representation Summary:

As a resident of this village and a member of this vibrant, friendly community, I wish to highly recommend this accurate and forward thinking view and plan for our village.

Sadly for nearly the last decade, we have felt that we are the forgotten and ignored community. WPC and the residents of Waterbeach, plus tens of thousands of surrounding local village residents have fought hard to try to contain this over development. Unbelievably there are still NO plans for any infrastructure.

Full text:

I wish to put forward a number of comments concerning the above mentioned plan. It is my hope that these comments go forward to the committee.

1) As a resident of this village and a member of this vibrant, friendly community, I wish to highly recommend this accurate and forward thinking view and plan for our village.

Sadly for nearly the last decade, we have felt that we are the forgotten and ignored community.
WPC and the residents of Waterbeach, plus tens of thousands of surrounding local village residents have fought hard to try to contain this over development. Unbelievably there are still NO plans for any infrastructure.

2) Road safety.
What steps will be taken to stop an ever increasing RatRun from the A14 via Horningsea Road speeding into Waterbeach to join the A10 and inevitably this New Town massive development. Traffic in all areas around the A10 will double with this overpopulation.
The Neighbourhood Plan - Restrict traffic in Cody Road to village residents only.
The Neighbourhood Plan -No New Town Traffic entering Waterbeach through Cody Road.

We wish to see a 20 mph speed limit in our village, particularly in the High Street. One way traffic on Greenside ( by White Horse pub) to help make the heart of our village safer from speeding inconsiderate non-resident drivers.
Time limited parking in layby, by pharmacy and post office.

Double yellow lines (safety barriers ) around all junctions in the Preservation Area of the village , especially where there is now inconsiderate and dangerous parking in that area. Many residents have no clear driving view right or left on leaving their street or lane and entering this area because of dangerous parking on both sides of the High Street. It is especially dangerous for pedestrians to cross a very narrow road with cars parked on both sides of the green

The Milton roundabout is still not finished. The merging of traffic from the A14 on an incredible short merging lane, will develop into an accident black spot! Constant lorries exiting A14 will ignore or not see traffic exiting the roundabout, via green traffic lights.
We hear that there are now plans for a new police headquarters to be built next to the Milton park&ride, so we will have to deal with bluelight traffic constantly using this dangerous road.
It is now time for a direct plan to be made and secured for a Bypass from Milton to Ely.

3) Environment. Car Dyke Roman Canal

The importance of preserving this Ancient Monument. This area has huge importance to our village and community, that is why it it is top of the list for preservation on the Neighbourhood plan.

It is a conservation area, an incredible Fenland landscape, massive horizons and a unique place of peace and reflection.
It's ancient hedgerow has a complete biodiversity to protect. Such a diverse numbers of birds , butterfly and insects.
During lockdown this area next to the recreation ground has been a focal part of the village, it has always been a wonderful place for walkers, especially dog walkers and for horse riding. It is a wonderful bridleway. But more important during these difficult times it has brought a special quietness and mental well being to all different age groups, toddlers up to senior citizens. All within walking distance of the village centre. This last part of our south wild fen that must be preserved for children and greatgrandchildren. Once it goes its gone forever.

At one time this area was considered to be one of many crazy areas put forward as part of a Greenway cycling lane for the New Town.

Thousands of cyclists, e scooters etc. using this area as a thoroughfare is totally abhorrent and destructive to this important environment and heritage site.
Waterbeach overwhelmingly voted to have the area adjacent to the railway line as the new Greenway. Council land I believe, flood plain When, if ever there is an upgrade to the A10 there should be a dedicated cycle lane separated from traffic.
Crossing Car Dyke road junction with pedestrian/ traffic lights replicating Denny End/A10 lights for pedestrians and traffic filter lane At the same time slowing speeding A10 traffic and stopping horrendous traffic accidents that still continue too happen on this dangerous poorly marked road . The traffic will actually come to a stop, with the filter lane safely seeing traffic crossing to the opposite lane to head towards Ely.
We have learnt the hard lessons ,about safety since Butt Lane and Denny End have gained multiple traffic lights the roads have become much safer. It is now the turn of Car Dyke road junction that desperately needs upgrading.

Roundabouts they just not up to the job, cars speed and at busy times they block the roundabout so nothing is moving. You see it in Cambridge eveyday.I

Cycles from Milton cycle way will safely enter the village near the Slap Up Pub pathway or onwards to Denny End.

That way we would have 2 safe cycle ways, with the added bonus of reducing the number of cycles on the tow path and improving the environment by the river.

May I also suggest that at these times the area of walkway for residents through Cody Way to New Town , has plenty of attractive natural looking bench's for tired family's but especially pensioners To sit and chat.



4)Travel
We need a secure New Station bus shuttle for residents who usually walk to our own train station for work and pleasure. We are informed that there is now not going to be a multi car park for the new station, so I take it our village roads will be used as a free car park for passengers. Especially Bannold Road.
RLW were given planning permission for this development because they Bragged that they would totally fund the New station out of their combined huge profits. Now we are informed that this is not happening and now we, the council tax payers are funding this unwanted station. Is this Tory government aware of these changes. We take it that is why no plans for a upgrade or bypass far the A10 or Waterbeach is even forseen in the future.

We have a perfect upgraded station in our village at Station Road, even full crossing barriers, to be updated.
Any sensible owner of that line would keep it open and maintained, in case of emergency ( sadly many have happened on this line exactly where the new station is planned ) passengers having to leave the train many times each year at Waterbeach and catch buses to further their journey +. Emergency services attending victims Thousands of villagers would still like to have a limited off peak service, perhaps twice a day or weekly and a limited weekend timetable from out convenient station. Otherwise many will no longer use either stations, instead traveling by car, bus, or use the much quicker Milton Park&Ride ( cheaper)

Where all the residents of this New Town are going to park all their many cars is a complete mystery to us , we are told (No plans are ever displayed) that no garage or parking is allowed next to their homes. Because everyone will be walking & cycling everywhere, whatever the weather. So one can imagine vast car parks dotted around this development, probably overlooking our village.

Thank you for reading this and passing on to committee.

Attachments:

Object

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168689

Received: 20/04/2021

Respondent: Ms Kate Grant

Representation Summary:

Overall the NP fails to start with a current (2021) picture of the village, significant building and planning application approvals have dramatically altered the outlook for development until 2031. Clearly the delay for Covid issues has not helped but the NP does not reflect the current situation and address the emerging development already planned to 203, this minimises its benefit. It also does not adequately cover areas such as Chittering, Long Drove, etc which need specific policies.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168691

Received: 20/04/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Representation Summary:

We welcome the production of this neighbourhood plan, and are pleased to note that it is supported by a robust evidence base in the form of both a Design Principles document and a Heritage and Character Assessment. However, we do not consider it necessary for Historic England to provide detailed comments at this time. We would refer you to any previous comments submitted at Regulation 14 stage, and for any further information to our detailed advice on successfully incorporating historic environment considerations into your neighbourhood plan, which can be found here: https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/planning/plan-making/improve-your-neighbourhood/
I

Attachments:

Support

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168702

Received: 20/04/2021

Respondent: Cambridge Innovation Parks Ltd.

Agent: WSP

Representation Summary:

We are of the view that the Submitted Draft Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan passes the basic
conditions test, specifically in relation to:
▪ National policies and guidance (basic condition ‘a’);
▪ Contribution to the achievement of sustainable development (basic condition ‘d’) and;
▪ General conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan (basic
condition ‘e’).
Therefore, the plan as submitted should be considered by an examiner and proceed towards a
referendum. We are also confident that CIPL’s proposals at CIPN are wholly in accordance with the
aims and objectives of the plan.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168703

Received: 20/04/2021

Respondent: RLW Estates

Agent: Boyer Planning

Representation Summary:

It is welcomed that previous comments in respect of the character areas at WNTE and the date of the station planning permission have been reflected in the Reg. 16 document.
Reference should, however, also be made to the RLW Outline Planning Application (ref: S/2075/18/OL) having now achieved a resolution to grant permission (subject to completion of a Section 106 Agreement) at committee on 29 January 2021.

Attachments:

Comment

Waterbeach Neighbourhood Plan - Submission version

Representation ID: 168719

Received: 26/04/2021

Respondent: Mrs Anne Felvus

Representation Summary:

Comments and questions about the neighbourhood plan covering all issues.

Attachments: