5. Creating the Place - Section 3: Locally Distinctive

Showing comments and forms 1 to 22 of 22

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 167785

Received: 09/07/2019

Respondent: Mr Marc Zwierzanski

Representation:

3A RESPONDING TO CONTEXT

Medium and high density housing should remain away from the site perimeter. A large hotel at the main entrance would be the same as Cambourne and so the sites would actually be very similar. This is something to be avoided if an independent identity is a 'real' consideration.

Screening of a hotel complex from Highfields is important so as not to detract from the existing village outlook.

Full text:

Medium and high density housing should remain away from the site perimeter. A large hotel at the mail entrance would be the same as Cambourne and so the sites would actually be very similar. This is something to be avoided if an independent identity is a 'real' consideration.
Screening of a hotel complex from Highfields is important so as not to detract from the existing village outlook.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 167915

Received: 21/07/2019

Respondent: Mr Mark Stewart

Representation:

3E OPEN SPACES AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER
3E needs more details of the general character of the country park and design approach. Large bland areas of open flat grass should be avoided. Instead the space should be broken up/punctuated with native trees, bushes and wildflower meadows in a way which complements the natural views. E.g. more like Wimpole Country Estate and not like Trumpington Meadows Country Park.

Full text:

3E needs more details of the general character of the country park and design approach. Large bland areas of open flat grass should be avoided. Instead the space should be broken up/punctuated with native trees, bushes and wildflower meadows in a way which complements the natural views. E.g. more like Wimpole Country Estate and not like Trumpington Meadows Country Park.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 167986

Received: 23/07/2019

Respondent: Mrs Jean Jenner

Representation:

3F INTEGRATING INHERITAED ASSETS

Disgrace to the memory of those who died flying from Bourn Airfield with no proper named cenotaph.

Attachments:

Support

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 167991

Received: 24/07/2019

Respondent: The Wildlife Trust

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES & CORRIDORS

The Wildlife Trust supports Fix F Green Wedges & Corridors, as they provide an integrated green infrastructure network through and around the development site, that will provide a range of walking and recreational routes on-site that have the potential to meet much of the demand for recreational routes, without impacting other nearby more sensitive habitats and sites. This is however, likely to be contingent on delivery of a country park type space within the strategic landscape area to the south.

Full text:

The Wildlife Trust supports Fix F Green Wedges & Corridors, as they provide an integrated green infrastructure network through and around the development site, that will provide a range of walking and recreational routes on-site that have the potential to meet much of the demand for recreational routes, without impacting other nearby more sensitive habitats and sites. This is however is likely to be contingent on delivery of a country park type space within the strategic landscape area to the south..

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168009

Received: 17/07/2019

Respondent: Shelford and District Bridleways Group

Representation:

FIX F - GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDOORS

Horse riding is not included in the definition of active travel, equestrians are excluded from these opportunities.

Full text:

4B Access to natural environments
We support the references to bridleway creation in woodland settings set out in this
section although it appears to conflict with comments referred to in other sections.

Fix G Recreational walking, cycling and horse riding routes
We appreciate the creation and inclusion of equestrian routes in this section but do no understand the need for separate walking and cycling routes where there is a bridleway which is available to all users?

Fig. 47 | Recreational walking, cycling and horse riding
We support this proposed scheme although as previously stated, we would like to see the inclusion of a circular Restrict Byway open to carriage drivers. Whilst we appreciate that this might be of concern, it would be a bold and progressive step in much the same way that the hugely popular Cambourne peripheral bridleway was when it was first constructed.

6 Cohesive, well‐planned and well‐governed
Somewhere in the SPD there should be defined the responsibility and accountability for the maintenance of PROW's and a requirement for them to be maintained to be accessible all
year around.

5. Infrastructure Delivery Plan
Non Motorised User Infrastructure Fig 55
1 Improved walking and cycling network
Refers to riding in the text so horse riding should be included in the first column.
2 Cycleway Improvement
What provision is being made for equestrians on this route?
3 Rights of Way Network
Does not include access for carriage drivers.

6.5 DEVELOPMENT PHASING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY
No reference to the delivery of rights of way network other than cycle and pedestrian routes.

APPENDIX 1: BOURN AIRFIELD LOCAL PLAN POLICY 94 BOURN AIRFIELD NEW VILLAGE | A SPATIAL
FRAMEWORK & INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN | CONSULTATION DRAFT
Policy SS/7: New Village at Bourn Airfield
No reference to the Rights of Way network.

Object

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168021

Received: 25/07/2019

Respondent: Mr Peter Ashton

Representation:

The development must have direct access to the A428 and it's own healthcare facilities.
Without these, the development will have unacceptable negative impact on the surrounding villages and its future residents.

Full text:

The development must have direct access to the A428 and it's own healthcare facilities.
Without these, the development will have unacceptable negative impact on the surrounding villages and its future residents.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168033

Received: 23/07/2019

Respondent: Historic England

Representation:

3: LOCALLY DISTINCTIVE

Proposals to reflect the former airfield could also be extended to include the use of tools such as street naming to reflect this former use and provide local identity and connection with the past.

Full text:

SEA Screening Opinion for Bourn Airfield SPD
In terms of our area of interest, given the nature of the SPD and on the basis of the
information provided in this consultation, we would concur with your assessment that the document is unlikely to result in any significant environmental effects and will simply provide additional guidance on existing Policies contained within a Adopted Development Plan Document which has already been subject to a Sustainability Appraisal/SEA. Although there are designated heritage assets both within and around the site, these are listed at grade II, rather than in the case of Waterbeach where Denny Abbey is listed at Grade I and is a scheduled monument, where the proposed development was substantially larger and where the connection between the heritage asset and the landscape subject to the SPD was arguably greater. As a result, we would advise that it is not necessary to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment of this particular SPD.
The views of the other three statutory consultation bodies should be taken into account before the overall decision on the need for an SEA is made.

Comments on Draft SPD
We broadly welcome the preparation of the SPD. This is an important bridge
document between the high level policy in the Local Plan and any future planning
application. We made a number of comments on an initial draft in May 2019. Thank
you for making some amendments to the document in response to our comments.
We make the following comments:

Page 12, Paragraph 2.3
There are a number of designated and non-designated heritage assets within and
around the site. Page 12, para 2.3 mentions The grade II listed barns to the north of
the Grange lie within the red line boundary of the site, albeit to the south of the
southern limit of major development as defined by policy SS/7. The paragraph also
refers to the grade II listed Great Common Farmhouse which lies immediately to the
west of the site. The paragraph should be amended to include reference to the Bourn Conservation Area which lies to the south of the site and the three Registered Parks and Gardens nearby.

Page 17
We welcome reference to the Registered Parks and Gardens on p 17 We welcome the commitment to assessment of visual impact. Of course, setting issues for heritage assets extend beyond purely visual impact. These wider setting issues (noise, light, etc.) will need to be considered for these and other heritage assets in and near the site. This requirement should be included on page 17.

Page 18
We welcome reference to Bourn church, Bourn windmill and other landmarks as well
as to Great Common Farmhouse. Maintaining sight lines and key views of such
landmark buildings off site can be an important way to enhance the legibility of the site. We suggest that this should be referenced in the SPD at the end of the eighth
paragraph on page 18. No reference is made in this section (with the exception of the yellow star on one of the diagrams and the photograph on page 19) to the listed barn north of the Grange. This should be included. Reference should also be made to the need to preserve and enhance the listed buildings and their settings. This may be through an appropriate buffer of open space, landscaping etc.

Page 27 and 47,48
We welcome the reference to locally distinctive development. Part of this includes the need for building materials to reflect the local traditional vernacular and palette of materials to enhance the sense of place and provide character and identity to the new community. We suggest that Objective 4 on page 27 and page 47should include
greater reference to local character, identity and materials within the SPD.
We welcome the reference on p47 to responding to context including listed buildings
and WWII heritage. We welcome proposals to reflect the former airfield through a
linear park. Other tools such as street naming etc. can be used to reflect this former
use and provide local identity and connection with the past. This should be mentioned on page 47.

Pages 49 and 53
Care should be taken with regard to the location of taller buildings and ensuring they
do not compete with or dominate listed buildings of other landmark buildings offsite.
This requirement should be included on page 49 and/or 53.

Archaeology
Relatively little is mentioned in the SPD with regard to archaeology. We suggest that
greater reference be made to this in the SPD and encourage you to discuss the matter further with Cambridgeshire County Council.
Finally, we should like to stress that this opinion is based on the information provided by the Council in its informal consultation. To avoid any doubt, this does not affect our obligation to provide further advice and, potentially, object to specific proposals, which may subsequently arise where we consider that these would have an adverse effect upon the historic environment.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168034

Received: 23/07/2019

Respondent: Historic England

Representation:

3C: SCALE, HEIGHT AND MASSING

Care should be taken with regard to the location of taller buildings and ensuring they do not compete with or dominate listed buildings of other landmark buildings offsite. This should be included on page 49 and/or 53.

Full text:

SEA Screening Opinion for Bourn Airfield SPD
In terms of our area of interest, given the nature of the SPD and on the basis of the
information provided in this consultation, we would concur with your assessment that the document is unlikely to result in any significant environmental effects and will simply provide additional guidance on existing Policies contained within a Adopted Development Plan Document which has already been subject to a Sustainability Appraisal/SEA. Although there are designated heritage assets both within and around the site, these are listed at grade II, rather than in the case of Waterbeach where Denny Abbey is listed at Grade I and is a scheduled monument, where the proposed development was substantially larger and where the connection between the heritage asset and the landscape subject to the SPD was arguably greater. As a result, we would advise that it is not necessary to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment of this particular SPD.
The views of the other three statutory consultation bodies should be taken into account before the overall decision on the need for an SEA is made.

Comments on Draft SPD
We broadly welcome the preparation of the SPD. This is an important bridge
document between the high level policy in the Local Plan and any future planning
application. We made a number of comments on an initial draft in May 2019. Thank
you for making some amendments to the document in response to our comments.
We make the following comments:

Page 12, Paragraph 2.3
There are a number of designated and non-designated heritage assets within and
around the site. Page 12, para 2.3 mentions The grade II listed barns to the north of
the Grange lie within the red line boundary of the site, albeit to the south of the
southern limit of major development as defined by policy SS/7. The paragraph also
refers to the grade II listed Great Common Farmhouse which lies immediately to the
west of the site. The paragraph should be amended to include reference to the Bourn Conservation Area which lies to the south of the site and the three Registered Parks and Gardens nearby.

Page 17
We welcome reference to the Registered Parks and Gardens on p 17 We welcome the commitment to assessment of visual impact. Of course, setting issues for heritage assets extend beyond purely visual impact. These wider setting issues (noise, light, etc.) will need to be considered for these and other heritage assets in and near the site. This requirement should be included on page 17.

Page 18
We welcome reference to Bourn church, Bourn windmill and other landmarks as well
as to Great Common Farmhouse. Maintaining sight lines and key views of such
landmark buildings off site can be an important way to enhance the legibility of the site. We suggest that this should be referenced in the SPD at the end of the eighth
paragraph on page 18. No reference is made in this section (with the exception of the yellow star on one of the diagrams and the photograph on page 19) to the listed barn north of the Grange. This should be included. Reference should also be made to the need to preserve and enhance the listed buildings and their settings. This may be through an appropriate buffer of open space, landscaping etc.

Page 27 and 47,48
We welcome the reference to locally distinctive development. Part of this includes the need for building materials to reflect the local traditional vernacular and palette of materials to enhance the sense of place and provide character and identity to the new community. We suggest that Objective 4 on page 27 and page 47should include
greater reference to local character, identity and materials within the SPD.
We welcome the reference on p47 to responding to context including listed buildings
and WWII heritage. We welcome proposals to reflect the former airfield through a
linear park. Other tools such as street naming etc. can be used to reflect this former
use and provide local identity and connection with the past. This should be mentioned on page 47.

Pages 49 and 53
Care should be taken with regard to the location of taller buildings and ensuring they
do not compete with or dominate listed buildings of other landmark buildings offsite.
This requirement should be included on page 49 and/or 53.

Archaeology
Relatively little is mentioned in the SPD with regard to archaeology. We suggest that
greater reference be made to this in the SPD and encourage you to discuss the matter further with Cambridgeshire County Council.
Finally, we should like to stress that this opinion is based on the information provided by the Council in its informal consultation. To avoid any doubt, this does not affect our obligation to provide further advice and, potentially, object to specific proposals, which may subsequently arise where we consider that these would have an adverse effect upon the historic environment.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168035

Received: 23/07/2019

Respondent: Historic England

Representation:

Relatively little is mentioned in the SPD on archaeology. Greater reference should be made to this.

Full text:

SEA Screening Opinion for Bourn Airfield SPD
In terms of our area of interest, given the nature of the SPD and on the basis of the
information provided in this consultation, we would concur with your assessment that the document is unlikely to result in any significant environmental effects and will simply provide additional guidance on existing Policies contained within a Adopted Development Plan Document which has already been subject to a Sustainability Appraisal/SEA. Although there are designated heritage assets both within and around the site, these are listed at grade II, rather than in the case of Waterbeach where Denny Abbey is listed at Grade I and is a scheduled monument, where the proposed development was substantially larger and where the connection between the heritage asset and the landscape subject to the SPD was arguably greater. As a result, we would advise that it is not necessary to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment of this particular SPD.
The views of the other three statutory consultation bodies should be taken into account before the overall decision on the need for an SEA is made.

Comments on Draft SPD
We broadly welcome the preparation of the SPD. This is an important bridge
document between the high level policy in the Local Plan and any future planning
application. We made a number of comments on an initial draft in May 2019. Thank
you for making some amendments to the document in response to our comments.
We make the following comments:

Page 12, Paragraph 2.3
There are a number of designated and non-designated heritage assets within and
around the site. Page 12, para 2.3 mentions The grade II listed barns to the north of
the Grange lie within the red line boundary of the site, albeit to the south of the
southern limit of major development as defined by policy SS/7. The paragraph also
refers to the grade II listed Great Common Farmhouse which lies immediately to the
west of the site. The paragraph should be amended to include reference to the Bourn Conservation Area which lies to the south of the site and the three Registered Parks and Gardens nearby.

Page 17
We welcome reference to the Registered Parks and Gardens on p 17 We welcome the commitment to assessment of visual impact. Of course, setting issues for heritage assets extend beyond purely visual impact. These wider setting issues (noise, light, etc.) will need to be considered for these and other heritage assets in and near the site. This requirement should be included on page 17.

Page 18
We welcome reference to Bourn church, Bourn windmill and other landmarks as well
as to Great Common Farmhouse. Maintaining sight lines and key views of such
landmark buildings off site can be an important way to enhance the legibility of the site. We suggest that this should be referenced in the SPD at the end of the eighth
paragraph on page 18. No reference is made in this section (with the exception of the yellow star on one of the diagrams and the photograph on page 19) to the listed barn north of the Grange. This should be included. Reference should also be made to the need to preserve and enhance the listed buildings and their settings. This may be through an appropriate buffer of open space, landscaping etc.

Page 27 and 47,48
We welcome the reference to locally distinctive development. Part of this includes the need for building materials to reflect the local traditional vernacular and palette of materials to enhance the sense of place and provide character and identity to the new community. We suggest that Objective 4 on page 27 and page 47should include
greater reference to local character, identity and materials within the SPD.
We welcome the reference on p47 to responding to context including listed buildings
and WWII heritage. We welcome proposals to reflect the former airfield through a
linear park. Other tools such as street naming etc. can be used to reflect this former
use and provide local identity and connection with the past. This should be mentioned on page 47.

Pages 49 and 53
Care should be taken with regard to the location of taller buildings and ensuring they
do not compete with or dominate listed buildings of other landmark buildings offsite.
This requirement should be included on page 49 and/or 53.

Archaeology
Relatively little is mentioned in the SPD with regard to archaeology. We suggest that
greater reference be made to this in the SPD and encourage you to discuss the matter further with Cambridgeshire County Council.
Finally, we should like to stress that this opinion is based on the information provided by the Council in its informal consultation. To avoid any doubt, this does not affect our obligation to provide further advice and, potentially, object to specific proposals, which may subsequently arise where we consider that these would have an adverse effect upon the historic environment.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168037

Received: 24/07/2019

Respondent: Cambridge Past, Present & Future

Representation:

3E OPEN SPACES AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

Concerns about the major open space being the N/S axis of the old airfield and think it needs further explanation and understanding; is it to be 'greened'?

If this is the significant open green space, consider how it would be used by the residents if it is only a long, wide strip of runway through the site. There is potential for it to be an exemplar of amenity, but the SPD needs more precision on how this space is to be handled to guide the development.

Attachments:

Object

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168062

Received: 28/07/2019

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

Representation:

FIX E DENSITY AND HEIGHT

Problem with Fix E: the diagram shows that the highest density of dwellings is clustered around the primary street. This choice appears to maximise the exposure of people to road danger, pollution and noise. We oppose this arrangement of primary street and dwellings.

Full text:

The following comments are in regard to Fix E.

Problem: the diagram shows that the highest density of dwellings is clustered around the primary street. This choice appears to maximise the exposure of people to road danger, pollution and noise. We oppose this arrangement of primary street and dwellings.

Solution: the primary street should be routed to the north, away from where people are living, and the areas of highest density should be served by quiet streets with few cars that are pleasant for walking and cycling. Any car parking facilities (apart from blue badge spaces) should be kept near the relocated primary street, away from dwellings, in order to avoid excessive motor traffic on residential streets where children are playing.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168112

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: DB Group (Holdings) LTD

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDORS - 5 EMPLOYMENT SITE EDGE

It is therefore essential that the employment site edge which comes forward as part of the Bourn Airfield New Village takes full account of DB Group's existing operations and will not hamper future expansion plans. This will require particular consideration being given to adequate distance separation from noise sources and the provision of acoustic barriers along this edge as deemed necessary (to be provided at the developer's expense) following detailed assessment in accordance with the PPG.

Full text:

Creating the Place; Fix F, Green Edges and Corridors; 5, Employment Site Edge:

The provision of new or enhanced hedgerow planting buffer between the existing employment site and proposed surrounding development is supported.

The edge to the employment site should also ensure that the proposed surrounding development is sufficiently offset from the existing employment uses to avoid any adverse impacts. The operations and processes which take place on site include the following:
* Sand grading - filtering sand to provide different levels of fineness;
* Production of additives used in concrete mixes - blending of powders from silo storage;
* Warehousing - receipt and dispatch of goods either manufactured or purchased off site for resale.

These uses, in combination, amount to a B2 General Industrial use. The blending and grading process undertaken on site generates external noise, particularly in respect of the extraction system used to reduce material spillage and particles in the air. The site is also serviced by an average of 2 incoming and 3 outgoing HGV movements a day.

It is therefore essential that the employment site edge which comes forward as part of the Bourn Airfield New Village takes full account of DB Group's existing operations and will not hamper future expansion plans. This will require particular consideration being given to adequate distance separation from noise sources and the provision of acoustic barriers along this edge as deemed necessary (to be provided at the developer's expense) following detailed assessment in accordance with the PPG.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168113

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: DB Group (Holdings) LTD

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDORS - EMPLOYMENT SITE LINK

In light of the existing industrial operations which take place within this employment area, particularly those of DB Group, it will be essential to ensure that a safe route can be created which ensures that pedestrians and cyclists are separated from vehicular traffic. It is also important that DB Group retains flexibility for unfettered access to its site to enable its existing operations, short term future expansion plans and the company's continued long term growth.

Full text:

Creating the Place; Fix F, Green Edges and Corridors; Employment Site Link:

The draft SPD states: "A formal green landscape which creates a legible and direct route through the employment site, providing a link between the eastern HQPT stop/mixed use area and the residential area to the south".

Fig.43, Green Edges and Corridors, illustrates this employment site link. As a result of the scale and detail of this figure the exact route of this corridor is unclear.

In light of the existing industrial operations which take place within this employment area, particularly those of DB Group, it will be essential to ensure that a safe route can be created which ensures that pedestrians and cyclists are separated from vehicular traffic. This is considered to be of particular importance as a result of the HGV movements which are associated with DB Group's existing operations (currently an average of 5 HGV vehicles coming in and out each day - and this will increase with the company's expansion plans). Another consideration is that the precise activities of most companies do change over time as product/markets change and changes in technology dictate that processes need to change to remain competitive and deliver what the customer wants. It is important that DB Group retains flexibility for unfettered access to its site to enable its existing operations, short term future expansion plans and the company's continued long term growth.

Object

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168131

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Mrs Ann Griffiths

Representation:

3C SCALE, HEIGHT AND MASSING

The proposed 3-4 storey buildings are totally unsuitable and out of keeping for a rural village environment.

Attachments:

Support

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168160

Received: 30/07/2019

Respondent: Natural England

Representation:

3E OPEN SPACES AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

Fully support open spaces and landscape character requirements in section 3E including multifunctional open space. Support integration of new village with its landscape, incorporating and enhancing existing features and network of landscaped green, natural and multifunctional open spaces within and surrounding development.

Particularly support requirement for strategic landscaping including a county park incorporating naturalistic landscape features and habitats and recreational paths, informal play space and facilities, SuDS.

Requirements for a network of green corridors and other open spaces within easy walking distance of all residents is fully endorsed.

Quantum and quality of open space is key to delivering numerous environmental services including flood management, climate change, landscape enhancement, recreation and health benefits and net biodiversity gain. To achieve these benefits and avoid impacts to designated sites we advocate provision of SANGS. Identification of a management body and funding mechanism for long term maintenance will be critical. Quantum of informal open space is not clearly stated. SANGS requires in order of 78ha. SPD suggests this level is achievable - further detail would confirm this.

Greenspace provision to meet this will ensure no adverse impact on nearby designated sites (Hardwick Wood SSSI, Overhall Grove SSSI and Eversden and Wimpole Woods SAC). Already under considerable pressure from visitors. High quality greenspace provision will help achieve net biodiversity gain in accordance with NPPF para 170 and DEFRA 25 Year Environment Plan.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168181

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Aitchison Developments Ltd. on behalf of Savills Investment Management

Agent: Neame Sutton Ltd

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDORS

Fix F (page 55) identifies a formal green landscape which creates a legible and direct route through the employment site. As with the strategic pedestrian and cycle network this is not objected to and is provided for within the Aitchison Developments proposals for the site, the spatial fix needs to be applied flexibly to allow the proposed employment layout to make the most efficient use of the space available.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168199

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Dr Tumi Hawkins

Representation:

3E OPEN SPACES AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

The SPD on page 51 states:
"Strategic landscaping of the village's edges to create a landscape setting for the village, mitigate the impact of the new village on surrounding landscape areas and limit the sense of coalescence with adjacent settlements. There is potential to include play space that is compatible with the countryside edge. Edge treatments are set out in Fix G and described in Policy SS/7 (6)"

Private gardens on West Drive, Highfields Caldecote back onto the Eastern boundary of the site.

Recommendations:
Play space should not be placed at the eastern edge of the site because of potential noise from the playing fields and light pollution from lighting on the fields and any paths that are adjacent to the site.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168200

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Dr Tumi Hawkins

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDORS - EASTERN EDGE

SPD has NOT properly addressed issue of strategic landscaping and is missing a substantial part of it.

ONLY 30m of woodland belt, and NOT within site but in existing wooded area. Not showing any woodland to fill existing gap. Contradicts Policy SS/7 and Members' intentions to provide protection and separation. Adding land moved boundary of BAD 50m closer to Highfields Caldecote. Boundary of Bourn Airfield & Highfields is end of gardens along West Drive. Gardens to provide 'Countryside separation', on premise that building in Highfields will only be allowed within development framework.

Recommend:
(1) 50m woodland belt planted.
(2) Gap MUST be filled both within and outside settlement boundary to same depth.
(3) Whilst footpath within woodland is acceptable, location of playing fields is not, especially when there is a significant risk of noise and lighting pollution.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168257

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Representation:

3F INTEGRATING INHERITED ASSETS

An archaeological trial trench evaluation and geophysical survey was undertaken in the proposed development under S/2953/15/E2 & S/3440/18/OL. These identified that the application area was intensively settled and cultivated in the Iron Age and Roman period. The 20th century military aviation heritage is also of significance.

The development proposals will result in the impact of sub surface assets of archaeological interest. This can be managed by an archaeological condition as previously advised for planning application S/3440/18/OL.

We note that the 20th century use of the site as a military airfield is referenced but consider that heritage assets within the site have greater potential to contribute to the character and distinctiveness of the emerging new settlement.

Full text:

The attached note sets out the County Council officer comments on the Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document in response to a consultation by South Cambridgeshire District Council. Whilst local County Members have been made aware of the consultation, this response does not include their comments or considerations or those of the Economy and Environment Committee which will endorse this response at its meeting on 19th September.

This response includes the comments of the following Council services and functions:
- Transport Assessment
- Education
- County Planning Minerals and Waste
- Historic Environment
- Local Lead Flood Authority
- Public Health

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168307

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Dr Tumi Hawkins

Representation:

FIX F GREEN EDGES AND CORRIDORS - NORTH EAST GREEN GAP

SPD proposing planting that contradicts Draft Caldecote Village Design Guide - page 22, paragraph 9.3 and Figure 26, page 23 shows the area as a "desired green amenity buffer to distinguish between settlements."

Recommend the area is currently an open vista that has been the character setting of Highfields Caldecote and that openness MUST be maintained.

There should be no tree planting on southern boundary edge adjacent to West Drive. That boundary is currently mid height hedge which could be enhanced to maintain open aspect.
Due to proximity of houses, there should be no playspace on the green gap to avoid noise nuisance and light pollution to residents.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168323

Received: 29/07/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd

Agent: Andrew Martin Associates

Representation:

3 LOCALLY DISTINCTIVE

CP are content with this section, except under 3F Integrating inherited assets. In the first sentence the words 'where possible' should be added, i.e. 'the site has a number of existing features which should where possible be preserved and/or incorporated into the development in order to protect existing character and contribute to the distinctiveness of the new village'.

Comment

Draft Bourn Airfield Supplementary Planning Document - June 2019

Representation ID: 168360

Received: 26/08/2019

Respondent: Mr Stephen Jones

Representation:

FIX E DENSITY AND HEIGHT
The SPD states that, The Local Plan Policy SS/7 provides that the new village will deliver approximately 3,500 dwellings. However, the final number of dwellings will be determined through a design-led approach and be appropriate to creating a high-quality community which can support a range of local facilities. The new village should provide: An average density of 40 dwellings per hectare (Policy H/8).
Bourn Parish Council would like more detail on the nature of the high-density housing including height and storey limits.

Attachments: