Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
Search representations
Results for Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council search
New searchComment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/NS: Existing new settlements
Representation ID: 56869
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We agree with the proposals.
We agree with the proposals.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
The rural southern cluster
Representation ID: 56870
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We support the general principle of appropriate development in the rural southern cluster because it improves sustainability by co-locating employment and housing.
We support the general principle of appropriate development in the rural southern cluster because it improves sustainability by co-locating employment and housing.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
Rest of the rural area
Representation ID: 56871
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We support the settlement hierarchy which prioritizes development around Cambridge City and in new settlements rather than in the rural area.
We support the settlement hierarchy which prioritizes development around Cambridge City and in new settlements rather than in the rural area.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/RRA: Allocations in the rest of the rural area
Representation ID: 56875
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council has declared a climate emergency and agrees with the red classification in the HELAA of the 16 sites in the parish identified as red [a] since sufficient housing has already been identified elsewhere, [b] due to the amount of windfall development that has already taken place in the parish and [c] for lack of sustainability and the transport-related emissions for travel out of the area to work. We consider that the four sites rated amber should be rated red due to adverse impact on the road network and loss of trees.
Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council has declared a climate emergency. In the HELAA, we agree with the red classification of the 16 [of 20] sites already identified as red in the parish [40020, 40106, 40202, 40203, 40204, 40227, 40228, 40230, 40311, 40328, 40330, 40342, 40398, 40560, 40105, 40299] [a] since sufficient housing has already been identified elsewhere, [b] due to the amount of windfall development that has already taken place in the parish and [c] for lack of sustainability and the transport-related emissions for travel out of the area to work. We consider that the four sites [of 20] classified as amber [40073, 40164, 40216 and 40463] should be classified as red for the same reasons and due to the adverse impact on the road network. Additionally we are concerned about the loss of woodland if site 40216 were to be developed.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/RRP: Policy areas in the rest of the rural area
Representation ID: 56876
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We agree that the areas designated in the 2018 Local Plan should be carried forward into the new Local Plan.
We agree that the areas designated in the 2018 Local Plan should be carried forward into the new Local Plan.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
Climate change
Representation ID: 56877
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council has declared a climate emergency and considers these policies to be essential.
Consideration of new zero carbon technologies needs to be kept under review.
Page 6, para 1 – some data on things like rising sea level and impact on our area (maybe a map) might add valuable context for the reader.
Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council has declared a climate emergency and considers these policies to be essential.
Consideration of new zero carbon technologies needs to be kept under review.
Page 6, para 1 – some data on things like rising sea level and impact on our area (maybe a map) might add valuable context for the reader.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
CC/NZ: Net zero carbon new buildings
Representation ID: 56878
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We support this policy. The policy should recognize the savings in embodied carbon to be made by repurposing existing buildings rather than building new – planning policy should facilitate appropriate change of use. Further comments are made about the detail of this policy.
We support this policy. The policy should recognize the savings in embodied carbon to be made by repurposing existing buildings rather than building new – planning policy should facilitate appropriate change of use.
Page 11 – Oxford Cambs Regional Arc – this seems woolly. Why can we not adopt a more prescriptive approach like that set out in the London Plan which already goes beyond Part L of the building regulations. It is commendable to work with government to enhance building regulations, but shouldn’t the Oxford-Cambridge arc be leading the way on this? This would encourage greater micro-generation, for example.
Page 11 – we will encourage Arc Partners to exceed minimum standards. This should be firmer – stipulate, don’t encourage to avoid a race to lowest cost.
Page 12 – is BREEAM the best measure?
Page 15 –should this be more prescriptive in terms of how much emissions from construction plant should be reduced by? Maybe something here and something around Air Quality could encourage electric plant.
Page 19 – could the last resort offsetting option be somehow more onerous financially?
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
CC/WE: Water efficiency in new developments
Representation ID: 56879
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
The policy must also consider supply capacity not just water efficiency. Water supply and water efficiency are vital to any new development. New development should only be permitted where adequate water supply can be demonstrated.
Page 26, can the standard be stated rather than cross referencing to BREEAM? Is BREEAM the best tool moving forward?
Elsewhere BREEAM is not a requirement in the report.
The policy must also consider supply capacity not just water efficiency. Water supply and water efficiency are vital to any new development. New development should only be permitted where adequate water supply can be demonstrated.
Page 26, can the standard be stated rather than cross referencing to BREEAM? Is BREEAM the best tool moving forward?
Elsewhere BREEAM is not a requirement in the report.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
CC/DC: Designing for a changing climate
Representation ID: 56880
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
We support this policy.
Design led approach p33: How does one decide which approach is applicable?
Could it be considered obligatory to use tm59 on larger developments?
Would CIBSE TM52 be appropriate for non-domestic buildings
We support this policy.
Design led approach p33: How does one decide which approach is applicable?
Could it be considered obligatory to use tm59 on larger developments?
Would CIBSE TM52 be appropriate for non-domestic buildings
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
CC/FM: Flooding and integrated water management
Representation ID: 56881
Received: 08/12/2021
Respondent: Bassingbourn-cum-Kneesworth Parish Council
New development should not be permitted in Environment Agency Zone 3 flood risk areas.
Might there be something here about the types of storm that need to be accounted for in drainage calculations? Particular ref. to SUDS?
New development should not be permitted in Environment Agency Zone 3 flood risk areas.
Might there be something here about the types of storm that need to be accounted for in drainage calculations? Particular ref. to SUDS?
