Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document Consultation
Representation ID: 200298
Received: 24/01/2025
Respondent: Savills UK
Please see attached document for representations on behalf of Pigeon.
Please see attached document for representations on behalf of Pigeon.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document Consultation
Representation ID: 200325
Received: 24/01/2025
Respondent: Home Builders Federation
The SPD suggests that planning obligations may be sought from any development, and these may be sought on-site as part of the development works to secure new rights of way over the proposed development site or for the upgrade of existing routes. It also suggests that financial contributions may be appropriate where necessary to establish better links / connections between new and existing routes on site. The HBF is concerned about the lack of detail provided in relation to this requirement, it is not apparent under what circumstances developments may be required to establish better links to new and existing routes or to the wider network, or as to how long these new connections may expected to be and therefore what the costs may be.
This section of the SPD is based on the Cambridge Local Plan Policies 5, 80 and 81, and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan Policy HQ/1 and TI/2. The SPD suggests that planning obligations may be sought from any development, and these may be sought on-site as part of the development works to secure new rights of way over the proposed development site or for the upgrade of existing routes. It also suggests that financial contributions may be appropriate where necessary to establish better links / connections between new and existing routes on site. The HBF is concerned about the lack of detail provided in relation to this requirement, it is not apparent under what circumstances developments may be required to establish better links to new and existing routes or to the wider network, or as to how long these new connections may expected to be and therefore what the costs may be.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document Consultation
Representation ID: 200337
Received: 21/01/2025
Respondent: Ramblers Association Cambridge Group
Please find attached the Ramblers Association Cambridge Group response to the draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document. Our response primarily focuses on Public Rights of Way and how these can be enhanced.
Please find attached the Ramblers Association Cambridge Group response to the draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document. Our response primarily focuses on Public Rights of Way and how these can be enhanced.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document Consultation
Representation ID: 200532
Received: 16/01/2025
Respondent: British Horse Society
Developments only ‘may’ create a need for publicly accessible routes on-site or to move in and out of the development and then only to link with existing pedestrian and cycle routes and the wider rights of way network! Equestrians cannot use pedestrian / cycle active travel routes therefore they are, once again excluded. This statement is highly discriminatory against those residents who want to use soft surface rights of way and not urban style sealed cycle and pedestrian paths. It fails to meet the requirements of the Cambridgeshire ROWIP and CPCA Transport Local Transport and Connectivity Plan.
Please see attached report.