Protecting Cambridge Landscapes and green spaces Planning Watchdog We monitor and review planning policies and planning applications. We respond when we are concerned about their impact on heritage, landscape, environment and quality of life. In 2020 we responded formally to over 50 applications, plans or proposals. We do not have sufficient resources to submit written responses to all the development proposals that we review, and so we do not usually respond to proposals when we have no major concerns or significant comments to make about them. Click on the links below to read some of our responses, the most recent is at the top. 2021 Responses Application for commercial development and recreation and wildlife areas on land south of Coldhams Lane. We object to this application because there is insufficient detail on how the lakes will be managed and funded for wildlife and people. Consultation on the development of part of North East Cambridge by The Chesterton Partnership. We are keen to ensure that the development of the Chesterton Sidings is of the highest quality design required for this edge of city location. Consultation by Greater Cambridge Partnership on Making Connections and a congestion charge. We are pleased to see this public discussion on city access and its funding but have raised concerns that the proposals could impact the heritage, landscape and environment of Cambridge. Consultation by Greater Cambridge Partnership on Cambridge Eastern Access - Newmarket Road. We object to the options resulting in development in the Green Belt, loss of trees and impact on ecologically sensitive areas. Consultation on First Proposals for the Greater Cambridge Local Plan. We welcome the efforts to make this a greener plan but raise concerns about the environmental capacity of the area to cope with the proposed growth. Consultation by the Combined Authority on Local Transport and Connectivity Plan. We raised concerned that the Vision made no reference to landscape or heritage and that the likely benefits to nature are overstated. Application to demolish Romsey Labour Club, Mill Road, retaining the facades and erecting 44no. serviced apartments. We objected to this application because of the loss of a building of local interest, the impact on the conservation area and the overdevelopment of the site. Application for new dwelling at White Hill Farm, Great Shelford. We objected to this new dwelling in the Green Belt. Application for removal of boundary wall and replacement with timber fence at 138 Tenison Road. We objected to the loss of this gault brick wall which contributes to the character of the conservation area. Application for a garage and extension to the Conservators House, Horningsea. This listed building has a strong architectural character and we raised concerns over the impact of the extension and garage on this lovely building. Consultation on Little Shelford Village Design Statement SPD. This SPD is welcomed and supported. Consultation on development of three sites at Sidney Street / Hobson Street, Cambridge City Centre. We favour options which retain the building facades and do not significantly increase the height of the buildings. We consider that uses other than offices should be considered for this site. Application to convert and extend 3-4 Market Hill Cambridge to provide seven flats. We welcome the proposals in principle but raise some points to ensure all the historic features are protected. Consultation by the Government on the Oxford-Cambridge Arc Spatial Framework Vision. We have submitted a response to the Government asking for a rethink of the Framework to put nature and the environment first, objecting to the excessive growth beyond environmental capacity and looking for joined up working of Government with building regulation reforms, water management, education, farming reforms, health and social care. Consultation by Greater Cambridge Partnership on Foxton Travel Hub. We reiterated our questions from the 2019 consultation about the relationship between the Foxton Hub and the South West Travel hub and if both go ahead is the scale proposed still required. We highlighted that the scheme would introduce an urban feel to a small village and the appropriate mitigation of landscaping, biodiversity gain and minimising light pollution is required. Consultation by Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Services on a Supplementary Planning Document on SPD. We welcome the document but make a number of recommendations on how it could be strengthened to ensure development mitigates, compensates and increases biodiversity. Consultation by Anglian Water on their latest plans for a new sewage treatment works for Cambridge. We are disappointed by the preferred location and have concerns about the impact on the landscape of industrial towers and road access. We would welcome the creation of new habitat and public access. Consultation by Greater Cambridge Partnership on how to spend an extra £20m on cycling in Cambridge. We highlighted the lack of a strategy for cyclists crossing the city centre and feel that investment should be used to address this problem as a priority. Application by Network Rail to build a new "Cambridge South" railway station. We support the station in principle as a means of reducing traffic to the Biomedical Campus, however there are still some aspects of the scheme where temporary and permanent impacts on Hobson's Park could be avoided or more adequately mitigated and it is these that we object to and which we wish to see revised through the planning process. Our response to the Cambridge Market Square Project. Proposed Vision and Concept Design. Application for a new commercial building including opening Coldham's Lakes in Cambridge for public use. In principle we support better use of the lakes but we have concerns about the resources required to achieve this. We raise an objection because the commercial building is on a wildlife site, the value of which has not been adequately recognised by the developer. Application to expand Babraham Road Park & Ride, Cambridge. We object to this application from Greater Cambridge Partnership on two points of principle. Firstly, the application is to provide car parking spaces rather than to function as a Park & Ride and, secondly, the proposals for achieving biodiversity net gain do not align with the landowner's (County Council) stated commitments to improve biodiversity. Consultation to convert Dernford reservoir (Stapleford) and surrounding area into a caravan and water park. We question whether a nature park might be more appropriate and highlight some of the impacts that the proposals could have on biodiversity. Application to build a new business park on the edge of the green belt near Fulbourn. We object to this application because the heights and design mean it will cause harm to views from the Gog Magog Hills. Consultation on route options for a new East West Railway. We raise concerns about the negative impacts on landscape and ecology of some of the options being considered. Application to demolish a building and build a new one at 60 Mill Road. We object to this application because the new building is unsympathetic to the Mill Road Conservation Area. Response to future plans for three buildings at Sidney Street in central Cambridge. Application to demolish a grand Victorian house (formerly the Felix Hotel) in Cambridge. We object to this application because the house is a local heritage asset and in perfectly useable condition. Application to demolish a house and replace it with 5 new ones in Chesterton Conservation Area. We object to this application because it will cut down 12 trees and harm the setting of a listed building in a significant location within the Conservation Area. Our response to proposals for an Environmental Impact Assessment for a development next to Coldham's Lakes in Cambridge. Proposals by government for changes to the National Planning Policy Framework and a new National Model Design Code. We are supportive of some of the proposals but strongly object to the proposed changes to Article 4 Directions which would take decisions on the planning our area out of local hands. Application for redevelopment of car park at Cambridge Station. We object to this application because the massing and design of the new car park and aparthotel will have a negative impact on the adjacent Conservation Area and the bland architectural style lacks the distinctiveness and character that we would want to see in such a prominent location as part of a welcome to a world class city. Application for a building extension at 2 Barrow Road, Cambridge. We objected to this application because it would not preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area and therefore does not comply with Local Plan policies. Application to install a telecommunications mast on Jesus Green, Cambridge. We objected to this application to move a telecoms mast from the roof of Park Street Car Park into the middle of Jesus Green, which is one of the most significant public open spaces in the city and is enjoyed by 100,000s of people every year. The proposed location is very visible and will negatively impact on the appearance and enjoyment of the park and also on the Conservation Area. Proposals to extend permitted development rights by national government. We oppose proposals by government to extend permitted development rights because of the harm that it would do to high streets and town centres and also Conservation Areas if they are included. Application for student flats on St Matthew's Piece. We strongly object to this application as it is contrary to local planning policy and the height and massing of the student flats would result in harm to the Conservation Area and the amenity of the local park. We also raise concerns about the impact on the magnificent trees and also the danger that they might pose. We also object in principle to building on land that was originally given to the people of Cambridge as open space. An application to demolish Lockton House (offices) and build new offices. We object to the demolition of a perfectly sound building, which we believe would be much better converted into flats, thus saving the carbon embedded in the building and also providing much needed housing. 2020 Responses Greater Cambridge Partnership consultation on proposals for transport schemes to the east of Cambridge. We have objected strongly to plans to create a new park and ride in the greenbelt next to an important and sensitive wildlife refuge. Greater Cambridge Partnership consultation on a proposed bus road between Waterbeach and Cambridge. We have questioned whether this is necessary given that there is already a rail station and proposals for two cycle routes. We have also raised our concerns about the cumulative impact of several transport schemes in this area of the green belt. Greater Cambridge Partnership consultation on a proposed bus road and park/ride between Cambridge and Babraham to the south of the city. We do not support this scheme because of the impact to the open countryside when there are less damaging alternatives. We also provide detailed responses in relation to environmental impact. Application for significant alteration to properties in Symonds Lane, Grantchester. We object to this application which we consider is not sensitive to its setting and would harm the Conservation Area. Proposals for a new Cambridge South train station. Our response to a public consultation by Network Rail on proposals for station access, construction compounds and indicative designs. We support the principle of a new station and the location selected. We are pleased with principles for landscape and biodiversity mitigation but encourage Network Rail to appoint a quality architectural practice. Application to create new Park & Ride car park next to M11 between Trumpington and Hauxton. Following objections from a number of organisations, including CambridgePPF, the Greater Cambridge Partnership made a response and some changes and we were asked to comment. They have not addressed our concerns and we continue to object to this application. Environmental Impact Assessment scoping for South East Cambridge Busway. Our response to the Department for Transport on the way in which the EIA for this proposed scheme will be carried out. We raised our concerns about the prematurity of the EIA given that we believe an alternative and less-damaging option should be considered first. Application to build a new police station in the green belt near Milton. We objected to this planning application by the constabulary because it is contrary to planning policy: It is in the green belt, there is no evidence that there will be a gain in biodiversity, the development is predicated on car travel and there is excessive car parking and unsympathetic high security landscaping. Proposals for a radical reform of the planning system. Our response to a public consultation by the government for reforms to the planning system in England. We have serious concerns about these reforms because instead of solving the housing crisis they will result in a less democratic system, with less community involvement and therefore less desirable outcomes. We are concerned about the capacity of community groups to engage in a more intense Local Plan process and of the resources available for already over-stretched planning departments - and that the term "Protected areas" is misleading because they are not actually protected! Plans for a new urban centre in north east Cambridge. Our response to a public consultation by City and South Cambs Councils on a draft Area Action Plan to create a significant high density development. We do not have confidence that the market can deliver the welcome aspirations for this development and we stress the need to establish a local delivery vehicle to achieve the vision. We raise concerns about the lack of a large green space, building heights and impacts on views, the overall density proposed and the overly ambitious car reduction targets for the science park. The Action Plan was developed prior to Covid-19 and we question whether some of the assumptions used are now valid. Proposals to relocate Cambridge Sewage Works. Our response to a public consultation by Anglia Water to relocate the works into the green belt to enable the creation of a new urban district in north east Cambridge. We highlight the need to consider the impact on the green belt, landscape and ecology and of the opportunity to create a state-of-the art environmental recycling centre. 14-17 Regent's Terrace (Parker's Piece), Cambridge. We object to an application for a new block of flats which we consider to be out of character and well short of the quality that should be acceptable for a prominent location next to one of the city's main green spaces and in a Conservation Area. Conversion of offices to flats in northwest Cambridge. This is one of the worst development proposals we have ever seen and we have objected to the conversion of the poor quality 1960s office/laboratory extension to the NIAB building into 95 undersized flats, all of which fail to meet minimum standards in almost every respect. 29 High Street, Chesterton. We objected to an application to demolish buildings and build new ones in a Cambridge Conservation Area. Stapleford Retirement village. We object to an application to build a retirement village on green belt countryside because it is a speculative proposal that is not in the Local Plan and is contrary to national and local planning policy. We also raise concerns about the viability of the proposed countryside park that is part of this application. East Cambridge future transport. Our response to a public consultation by the Greater Cambridge Partnership about improving transport on the eastern side of the city. We stress the importance of green corridors and Wilbraham Fen SSSI and the need to protect them. We highlight the opportunities presented by the under-used rail line. Cambridge-Waterbeach future transport. Our response to a public consultation by the Greater Cambridge Partnership about improving transport between Cambridge and Waterbeach. We stress the importance of the wildlife corridor alongside the River Cam and the need to protect this. We highlight that there are so many proposals that they are competing with each, potentially wasting public funds and that their cumulative impact on the green belt countryside would be significant. Consultation on new Police Station near Milton. We highlight that the proposed location will harm the green belt, has a giant car park and could be better designed to be much greener. Park & Ride car park between Trumpington and Hauxton. We object because this is the wrong scheme in the wrong place. It is a short-term solution that will create a long-term impact. It will result in building over the green belt countryside in order to create a giant car park and associated roads and other intrusive infrastructure. Even the council admits that “it is estimated the use of the Travel Hub would result in an increase of carbon emissions over the next 60 years.” We note that it will be at least 15 years before new trees/hedges grow sufficiently to mitigate the visual impacts of this scheme on the landscape. Cambridge Metro policy. Our response to a public consultation by the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority on a new policy for a future Cambridge Metro. We raised concerns about whether the huge costs of such a scheme can ever be met and the lack of a Plan B if that proves to be the case. We also highlight that the environmental aspects of the proposed policy should be significantly improved. A10 Corridor Transport/Road Dualling. Our response to a public consultation by the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority on their ideas for reducing journey times on the A10 between Cambridge and Ely. We feel that building new roads during a climate and biodiversity emergency is not the right solution and instead we would like to see investment in cycling, public transport and junction improvements. Northstowe New Town Phase 3. We put forward a number of ideas to ensure that this new town becomes a sustainable community. Kings Road, Hardwick. We object in principle to a proposal to demolish farm barns and build an office and car park because the development is in the green belt, in a Conservation Area and outside the Village Development Framework. Lilac Court, Cambridge. We raise a number of concerns about plans to build new houses in a residential area, including the impact on trees, over-development, loss of cycle parking and impact on the amenity of residents. St Matthew's Piece, Cambridge. We object in principle to a proposal put forward by Federated Hermes to construct a block of student flats adjacent to a Cambridge park. In our view the best scenario for the long-term future of St Matthew’s Piece is to remove the current building when it reaches the end of its life and expand the park into a green square in order to better serve the community. We also raise concerns about the design of the flats. St Mary's School, Bateman Street, Cambridge. We raise some concerns about the school's plans to construct a new 4-storey arts building in a Conservation Area and adjacent to Cambridge Botanical Gardens. Netherhall Farm GB1, Wort's Causeway. We raise a number of concerns and objections to proposals to build 200 new homes on former greenbelt land on the south side of Cambridge. Including impacts on views, the landscape and nature and also the failure to develop a scheme that will create a new community rather than a suburban extension. Conversion of Anstey Hall, Trumpington, into residential home and 87 new flats. Anstey Hall is a significant building and grounds, whilst we are not opposed in principle to the proposals put forward, this application clearly needs further work before it could be approved. We note several objections from council officers due to inadequate information. There is no consideration of the ecological impacts. We recommend that it is withdrawn in order for further work to be carried out and to re-think some of the designs. Demolition and construction of nine tiny flats 355 Newmarket Road Cambridge. We have no objection in principle to the redevelopment of this site from office to residential use, however we don't believe that cramming 9 single bed flats into this site in a low quality environment is the way to address our city's affordable housing crisis. Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM) Consultation seeking the views on whether a CAM was needed and on initial proposals for underground sections in Cambridge. We raised concerns about whether the huge costs of such a scheme can ever be met and the lack of a Plan B if that proves to be the case. The consultation is lacking sufficient information to provide informed responses. We raise concerns about this scheme leading to higher levels of development and the impact of the CAM itself on heritage, environment and communities. East Cambridgeshire Natural Environment Supplementary Planning Document. We strongly support this document which sets out how developers in East Cambs District will be expected to protect nature and achieve an overall gain for biodiversity. Erection of 6 flats to the rear of The Seven Stars Public House, Newmarket Road, Cambridge. We commented on the outline application to erect 6 studio flats on a scrap of land at the rear of The Seven Stars Public House. The proposed dwellings are just 13.2sqm in size falling far below the government standard of 37sqm for a 1 bedroom flat. We suggested that the Council should not be supporting the over development of scraps of land to provide inadequate housing. Greater Cambridge Local Plan - First Conversation. This consultation by Cambridge and South Cambs Councils posed 50 questions to identify the main issues and opportunities that a new Local Plan will need to address. This was not a small task and took us two months to consider. Our responses cover the full breadth of the planning spectrum: levels of growth, spatial patterns of development, the environment, heritage, place making and well-being. In our response we challenge the high levels of growth suggested and we outline a proposal for a Cambridge Landscapes Nature Recovery Network as a solution for the Local Plan to tackle the biodiversity emergency and improve well-being. We have also published a series of blogs about some of the issues raised by the Local Plan consultation. South Cambridge Station Consultation by Network Rail. In principle we support the new station and our main concerns are to ensure that the new station does not negatively impact the adjacent country park, its wildlife and users and that any impacts on Nine Wells Nature Reserve, Hobson’s Brook and an ancient monument are minimised. Our secondary concern is that the new station should essentially be “car free” and does not become a magnet for London commuters’ cars. Therefore it must be supported by excellent walking, cycling and public transport links. Redevelopment of "Spicers" site at Sawston by Huawei ref S/0158/20/FL. We objected to this application because of the negative impact that building heights would have on the surrounding landscape and views and also because of the significant water use that the factory would have in our already water stressed area. Downing Street Junction Consultation. We commented on the proposed changes to the busy Downing Street Junction in Cambridge by recommending that due care and consideration is given to street signage, street furniture and road markings to respect the conservation area, adjacent listed buildings and positive street views. Fernleigh Farm Teversham redevelopment proposals. The proposals are for redevelopment of the site to expand current use. In principle we do not object to this proposal but have commented on two areas of concern: transport, and the need to upgrade the cycle route that accesses the site, and landscaping to enhance the setting and biodiversity of the site. 32 St Andrew's Street change of use to a public house. The site was previously occupied by Cambridge Building Society and occupies a prominent site at the corner of St Andrew's Street and Downing Street. We have objected to this application on the grounds that it will cause further congestion for pedestrians, deliveries to the site will cause disruption to traffic, cycle and pedestrian routes and it will increase the concentration of public houses and eating establishments in this area. Overall the proposed change appears ill-conceived for such a busy and prominent location and will not contribute positively to the Central Cambridge Conservation Area. Climate Change & Environmental Strategy (DRAFT) of Cambridgeshire County Council. We welcome this strategy from the County Council and suggest some ways that their strategy could be improved. In particular we highlight the need to include land owned by the County Council that it wishes to develop through its property company This Land. These developments provide an opportunity to be exemplars of the County Council’s Climate Change & Environment Strategy by building housing to the highest carbon neutral standards, by achieving high levels of net-biodiversity gain and providing green infrastructure, climate mitigation through tree planting and flood mitigation. They should also be exemplars of housing design which support cycling, walking and public transport. Such developments would provide leadership and set hight standards for the private sector to follow. We would like to see a clear statement in this document that this is its aspiration for This Land and the development of County Council land. Hill Trees, Babraham Road an application for change of use from public house car park to car sales. This is the former public house on the hill between Babraham Road roundabout at Great Shelford and the MaGog Hills. It has not been a public house for almost 20 years and yet the application is to simply change the use from a pub car park to a lot for car sales. We have serious concerns about the lack of sufficient information included in the application as well as the impact both to biodiversity and visually. Barnwell Junction House- new fencing proposal immediately adjacent to the Cambridge Leper Chapel. We feel that security fencing is inappropriate given its context and proximity to the Grade I listed Chapel. Meadows and Buchan area redevelopment in Arbury application for redevelopment of the existing community centre and open space provision, including new social housing. Application follows two public consultations, both of which we responded to. Concerns include quantum of development, heights of buildings, loss of protected open space and lack of sufficient parking plans. Emmanuel College, 1 Park Terrace redevelopment of site including new building on Park Terrace adjacent to listed buildings, within conservation area and across from Parker's Piece. Sensitive location and proposal poor quality design for new build and blocks Furness Lodge views. Royston to Granta Park transport study public consultation our response to the initial and basic consultation from Granta Park to Royston looking at the transport and traffic corridor. We highlight need to consider potential develop along the A1301 as well as the area around Bassingbourn and ask to include environmental issues and biodiversity. Minerals and Waste Local Plan Para 6.13 Policy 19, Minerals and Waste Local Plan Para 6 Policy 15, Minerals and Waste Local Plan Para 6 Policy 23 our response to the second and final round of consultation on the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Local Plan draft document. We have focused on transport and traffic issues around the sites as well as enhancements to the sites around biodiversity and ecology. 104-112 Hills Road 2nd public consultation second round of public consultation on the redevelopment of 104-112 Hills Road. The Flying Pub has been apparently saved, but what be built around it? We comment on concerns about heights and density within the context, especially against the backdrop of the designated Botanical Gardens. 2019 Responses Great Shelford Parochial Charities provision of 21 Almshouses this is a challenging application. The site is within the green belt and outside the village framework- which go against our development principles. However, the proposal is for 21 new homes for local residents at less than market rates, which is laudable. Proposal for a new Retirement Village in Stapleford we attended the public consultation for a new retirement village in Stapleford within the green belt, outside the village framework and possibly adjacent to the proposed new guided bus from Haverhill to Cambridge. We have highlighted numerous concerns. Bourn Airfield Environmental Impact Assessment request our response to the need for the developer to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the site concluding that they do in fact require one. Rupert Brooke pub, Grantchester the pub has built a new low wall to create an outside garden area, but it does not accord with the approved plans in height or materials. We have raised this concern due to its visual impact on the setting and character of the conservation area. Conversion of Bolton's Warehouse a building that our Heritage Watch group put forward and got designated as a Building of Local Interest (BLI). Proposal to convert from business space to single residence. Our main concern is for the retention of the building and its historic fabric. Read how we feel turning it into a single residential dwelling might actually be positive for the building and its setting. Barrington Cement Works EIA a major development at the former cement works in Barrington. We argue that an environmental impact assessment is required. Carpenters Arms pub, Great Wilbraham our response to the demolition of the existing extension and building a new larger extension. The proposed new extension will have a larger footprint and seek to physically connect the listed outbuilding to the listed pub building. In doing so, it will result in the loss of historic context and relationship of the buildings to each other and the site. In addition, we have serious concerns about the feasibility of the proposed extension in structural terms. Cambridge South East Busway Consultation Greater Cambridge Partnership consultation on a proposed busway and park/ride between Cambridge and the A11 to the south of the city. We do not support these proposals for numerous reasons, including harm and impact to the open countryside as well as failure to serve the villages the route goes through due to the distance to the stop from the centre of the village. Netherhall Farm, land north of Worts Causeway EIA Scoping Opinion our response to an application for an Environment Impact Assessment on the proposed development of land north of Wort's Causeway. There was an application earlier in the year for a Screening Opinion and the Council's conclusion was that they needed an EIA. However, instead of submitting one, they have asked for another opinion. It is unclear why and we have raised this as suspicious. In addition, the documents fail to include net gain on biodiversity, climate change, etc. 15-16_Emmmanuel_Road, Cambridge our response to the demolition of Buildings of Local Interest, mainly on the grounds of lack of maintenance and neglect. We object to the demolition on these grounds and without any attempt to try and incorporate the existing buildings into the scheme. In addition, we object to the pastiche replacement proposed for such a prominent site - in a Conservation Area and adjacent to numerous heritage assets. Renovating the existing toilet facilities at Silver Street bridge this is an application to upgrade and improve the existing toilet provisions at the Silver Street Bridge in Cambridge. Since the toilets are located within the bridge (except for the disabled toilet) there have been problems with flooding and drainage. This is an opportunity to enhance the facilities and hopefully enhance the street level public realm. GCP Bottisham/Swaffham/Horningsea Greenways public consultation In principle we support the concept of Greenways in order to increase the number of journeys made by cyclists and pedestrians in order to benefit the environment and public health and as a means of reducing traffic congestion. The location and design of these routes must consider their impact on the natural and built environment and on the local landscape – especially if they are to be able to proceed through the planning system. We object to one of the options due to ecological impact. Developers consultation on phase 2/3 of housing development at Darwin Green, northwest Cambridge we have been involved with this development since before the last local plan and attended the event to start the next phases. Whilst the information was limited, we still shared our comments on these final phases. Public consultation Meadows Centre and Buchan Street recreation grounds redevelopment CambridgePPF responded to the first consultation for redeveloping the recreation ground and community centre at Meadows and Buchan in the Arbury area. This second consultation does show the Council is listening, but we still have concerns about the quantum of development and reduction in amenity to existing residents in an area with lower than average open space. Newbury Farm outline application on GB2 (land south of Wort's Causeway) We acknowledge the land was removed from the green belt during the last round of local plans so can now be developed upon, however, we are very concerned about the quality of this outline application that only addresses access into the site. CambridgePPF met with the developers for both GB1 and GB2 to encourage them to create a masterplan for both sites to ensure cohesion, cross working and enable the community to understand the totality of development - to date this has not happened. CambridgePPF response to Making Space for People public consultation the City Council held a public consultation on assessing the wider public realm in and around the city centre, including some of Hills Road and Mill Lane. It will inform an SPD - or supplementary planning document - which planning officers will use when assessing applications. We are supportive of this work but we queried the document's 'vision' and challenged the City to be braver in their aspirations and aims. GCP Foxton Travel Hub park and rail public consultation Our response to a public consultation for a 750 space car park adjacent to the Foxton train station. It is unclear if this is to be a park and rail site or if, as we recommend, the GCP could consider a wider scope for the site to include buses, cycles, etc. This may also take the pressure off of a proposed new park and ride at Junction 11 M11. In addition, we query the rationale behind the proposal and challenge the financial case. Sustainable Design & Construction Supplementary Planning Document for City and South Cambs CambridgePPF strongly supports this document and its provisions to encourage more sustainable forms of development. We provided some comments regarding water usage, biodiversity and sustainable drainage. Proposed new Greenway between Cambridge and Royston, serving Sawston and Melbourn In principle we support the concept of Greenways in order to increase the number of journeys made by cyclists and pedestrians in order to benefit the environment and public health and as a means of reducing traffic congestion. The location and design of these routes must consider their impact on the natural and built environment and on the local landscape – especially if they are to be able to proceed through the planning system. We have raised concerns about the overly “centric” nature of some of the proposed routes and the need for Greenways to better connect with employment centres. We are therefore pleased to see two routes come forward that will connect with Cambridge Biomedical Campus (CBC). Cambridegshire & Peterborough Local_Transport_Plan_Consultation In our view the LTP is too focused on large public transport engineering schemes. These schemes will be expensive to deliver and to operate and will have significant impacts on local communities, the environment and heritage. The entire plan for Greater Cambridge hinges on a Cambridge Metro, without any ‘Plan B’. Park Street Car Park redevelopment, Cambriddge ref 191159FUL in principle we are supportive of the redevelopment of this site as it is of no architectural or historic significance. However, being located within a Conservation Area and adjacent to numerous listed buildings, we raised some concerns, including the height proposed and amount of underground car parking. Chesterton Mill redevelopment, Cambridge our response to the reworking of the mill buildings off of Frenchs Road. Overall, bringing this jumble of buildings into the 21st century presents a variety of challenges for the architects and developer. We judge this to be a well-considered set of proposals which should breathe new life into this currently run-down complex. 104-112 Hills Road, Cambridge comments on the consultation to alter the original planning consent for the area adjacent to the Botanic Gardens and the Mills and Reeve building. One of the main issues is the retention of the Flying Pig Pub, in its current historic building and with its current pub use. In addition, there are opportunities to create an imaginative and creative mixed use site and we suggest touring the area to see what developments have been successful and examples of what not to do. 25 Portugal Place, Cambridge our response to the proposals to make alterations to a listed building within a conservation area. The application is lacking sufficient information to properly assess it and the information it does contain shows a lack of understanding towards working with a historically built structure, its needs and the implications of doing works to it. Whittlesford Parkway Station redevelopment proposal by Greater Cambridge Partnership our response to the initial consultation reviewing significant changes to the Whittlesford Train Station area. We highlighted the two heritage assets within the site and cited that this is an opportunity to preserve, enhance and improve the setting and character of the Duxford Chapel and Red Lion Pub. We are supportive of most of the proposed improvements, however, there are several concerns about the impact to the assets and recommendations on how to address them. Response to Lilac Court redevelopment Cherry Hinton residents contacted us to support them in raising concerns about this development. It would result in loss of amenity and play space, the height proposed is imposing and would impact neighbours, etc. There has been a lot of issues with this proposal and many have responded sharing their thoughts, including Cllr Lewis Herbert, leader of the City Council. Netherhall Farm, Wort's Causeway GB1 our response to a consultation by the developer on their plans for a new housing estate on former Greenbelt land on the south of Cambridge. We object to their plans to build on a meadow and we offered advice on how their plans could be revised in order to improve their development for ecology, landscape and community. CambridgePPF_resp_Spicers_S-2122-19-FL.pdf the redevelopment of the Spicers site in Sawston, which is considered a brownfield site, is in principle supported. However, there is insufficient information in the application to properly assess it and there are serious concerns about the impact to the adjacent Green Belt, ecology and Scheduled Ancient Monument. There is also a serious flood risk as they propose two below ground levels. CambridgePPF_resp_Guildhall_lav_windows.pdf the Guildhall in Market Square is a Listed Building and is within a Conservation Area. The proposal is small, but significant, as it seeks to replace original historic glass with modern and insert plastic air vents within the glass to improve the bathrooms within the building. We offer a more historically and sensitive solution to retain the fabric. CambridgePPF_resp_M11_J11_0719.pdf our response to the GCP proposal to build a new park and ride west of the M11 at Junction 11, which is located in the Green Belt. We raise numerous concerns about the impact to the environment and ecology and raise the issue that the land take has increased significantly compared to the initial proposals. CambridgePPF_resp_to_relocation_of_police_station_090719.pdf response to the proposal to relocate the Cambridge Police Station out into the green belt adjacent to the Milton Park and Ride. We met with the Police Commissioner directly to find out more before we responded to their proposals. CambridgePPF_resp_42_Rathmore_Road.pdf our response to an application to raise the ridge height on a house in the middle of a 19th Century terrace where very little has changed over time. This proposal would interrupt the continuous roof line and change the uniformity. The buildings are not listed, nor are they in a conservation area. However, they are undesignated heritage assets and this proposal could result in harm to the visual appearance and local distinctive character. CambridgePPF_resp_Foxton_S-1616-19.pdf our response to the proposal to redevelop the former school house and former chapel site in Foxton within the conservation area CambridgePPF_resp_to_open_space_development.pdf our response concerning proposals to provide housing in the middle of two public green spaces in Arbury, not in the local plan CambridgePPF_resp_EIA_Worts_Causeway_190770SCRE.pdf our response to the Environmental Impact Assessment for the CEG proposals to develop at GB1. CambridgePPF_resp_Cambridge_Rugby_lights.pdf the Rugby Club wants to alter their pitches and upgrade their lighting. CambridgePPF_resp_Stapleford__Great_Shelford_Neighbourhood_Plan_2019a.pdf our response to the village neighbourhood plans, which had to be submitted online, so this is a copy of our comments from the online form. CambridgePPF_resp_23_Barrow_Road.pdf our response to a proposal that conflicts with the requirements to comply with development within the conservation area. CambridgePPF_resp_48-50_High_St_Chesterton.pdf our response to the proposed works to partially demolish the site and add four- 1 bed flats. We considered it over-development and supported the comments made by the Conservation Team at the City. CambridgePPF_response_19-0560-FUL_New_Square.pdf our response to the demolition of the existing garages and replacement with new homes in a very sensitive location. CambridgePPF_response_19-0242-FUL_18_Chesterton_Rd.pdf we are supportive of the principle in general, but query the materials and their appropriateness. CambridgePPF_resp_amend_Wellcome_resp_280519.pdf our response to the amendments to the outline application to expand the campus across the A1301. We are supportive of the adjacent Parish Council responses as well. CambridgePPF_resp_Village_Design_Statements.pdf our comments on the various Village Design Statements proposed in several villages in South Cambs. We are very supportive of the principle and hope that the natural environment benefits as well. CambridgePPF_response_Newbury_Farm_GB2_proposal.pdf our comments on the recent consultation for the development of GB2- the section of green belt released in the latest local plan. Proposal for new housing development. CambridgePPF_resp_54-56_High_St_Trumpington.pdf our response regarding the demolition of buildings that are of no architectural or historic interest and its replacement. The principle of replacing the buildings is supported, but the proposed design and materials have been questioned, especially in relation to the adjacent thatched listed building. CambridgePPF_response_Cambourne-Cambridge_Phase_2_consultation.pdf our response to consultation on Phase 2 of Cambourne-Cambridge busway. We have strongly objected to proposals to build a car park on a valuable ecological site on top of one of the few hills in Cambridge. We support those options that are least damaging to ecology and landscape. CambridgePPF_response_190340FUL_Honda_Garage_redevelopment_April19.pdf our response to a planning application to redevelop the Honda Garage on Newmarket Road into student flats. We are concerned about the impact on the setting of the Grade 1 listed Leper Chapel which is nearby. CPPF response Waste & Minerals Plan consultation April19.pdf our response to the latest consultation on the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Waste & Minerals Plan. CPPF_response_former_Ridgeons_Site_April19.pdf our response to a planning application to redevelop the former Ridgeons site in the Romsey area of Cambridge. We were disappointed with the level of affordable housing and the bland nature of the architecture. 2018-19 Responses CambridgePPF_resp_East_West_Rail_consult_Mar19.pdf our response to the East-West Rail consultation for the Bedford to Cambridge section of the Arc. CambridgePPF_resp_EIA_Worts_Causeway.pdf our response to whether or not the proposal for 260 homes on former green belt land requires an Environmental Impact Assessment to review and assess the potential for harm from the development. CambridgePPF_resp_Kings_Parade_paving.pdf response to the repaving works, relocation of listed post box and upgrading of services to King's College entrance. CambridgePPF_resp_Kings_Parade_barrier_proposal.pdf our letter to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Cambridge City Joint Area Committee in advance of their meeting to discuss the proposed trial of a terrorism style barrier on King's Parade. CambridgePPF_resp_19_0057_LBC_and_19_0068_FUL.pdf application for works to Ridley Hall CambridgePPF_resp_India_House_amend_250319.pdf our response to the amendments submitted on India House at Newnham Mill CambridgePPF_resp_to_Hauxton_House_redev.pdf the first application to bring back the mill and its buildings into a new use. The Old Mill House was converted into offices in 1975 from residential. The proposal is to keep it offices, but introduce two new clean lab spaces. CambridgePPF_resp_Mill_Lane_Pembroke_app_080219.pdf the response is to the first applications for the Old Press Mill Lane redevelopment site (both listed building and planning). Focusing on the South side, this development will increase the size of Pembroke College. It is about heritage, context, listed buildings, conservation areas, transport and more. CambridgePPF_resp_to_Clerk_Maxwell_Rd.pdf a new residential development on Clerk Maxwell Road on the former tennis club grounds, which is a designated protected open space. CambridgePPF_resp_to_Land_adj_to_Newnham_Mill.pdf a proposal for a new residential development in the car park behind the Listed Mill building. CambridgePPF_resp_to_Romsey_Labour_Club_310119.pdf the third attempt at partial demolition and new build no longer for students, but serviced apartments with some community provision. CambridgePPF_resp_India_House_app_240119.pdf the existing building destroyed by fire is to be demolished and there are concerns about the replacement building. CambridgePPF_resp_Housing_Strategy_240119.pdf we have reviewed and commented on the Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy draft document from 2019-2023. FINAL_CPPF_Hinxton_Hall_Wellcome_resp_230119sw.pdf our response to the proposed expansion of the Genome Campus for Wellcome Trust across the A1301 with an entire new mixed use campus. CambridgePPF_response_to_Croft_Garden_app220119.pdf our response to the redevelopment of the Croft Gardens site on Barton Road for Kings College. It has evolved over the last few years and the agent has listened to most of our concerns. FINAL_CambridgePPF_resp_M11J11_consult_Dec18sw.pdf response to the GCP consultation on either creating a new park and ride at the M11 junction 11 or increasing capacity at the existing Trumpington P&R. CambridgePPF_resp_Gonville_Hotel_exp.pdf response to the latest application to extend the Gonville Hotel further including new pool. CambridgePPF_resp_to_Ridgeons_redevelopment_Dec18.pdf response to the latest proposal for the former Ridgeon's site for new homes since site was bought by City Council. CambridgePPF_resp_Greenways_Comberton.pdf response to the proposed Greenways cycle and pedestrian path from Comberton to the City. CambridgePPF_resp_Greenways_Fulbourn_consult.pdf response to the proposed Greenways cycle and pedestrian path from Fulbourn to the city. CambridgePPF_resp_Greenways_Waterbeach1218.pdf response to the proposed Greenways cycle and pedestrian path from Waterbeach to the city. CambridgePPF_resp_East_House_S-4000-18-LB.pdf response to an application for a garden room extension to a listed building within Wandlebury. We worked with the owners and agreed details in advance. CambridgePPF_response_to_Croft_Garden_public_consult.pdf- our response to the public consultation for the redevelopment of the Croft Gardens site on Barton Road for King's College. CambridgePPF_response_to_Bourn_Airfieldjl.pdf- response to application for redevelopment of the former Bourn Airfield. It is included in the Local Plan. CambridgePPF_resp_158_homes_land_north_of_Babraham_Road.pdf- an application for 158 homes that will extend the village of Sawston heading towards Babraham. This is included in the recently adopted Local Plan, but it is outside the village framework and within the Green Belt, so we object to it on principle. CambridgePPF_resp_Pembroke_South_Mill_Lane_public_consult_171018.pdf- a response to the public consultation on the development for Pembroke College to expand over Trumpington Street into the Mill Lane site. CambridgePPF_response_Waterbeach_SPD_231018.pdf- our response to the Supplementary Planning Document outlining the Council's expectations for the new town at Waterbeach. Concerns about the timing as applications have already been received, when the SPD should be used to inform them prior to submission. App_development_in_walled_garden_Whittlesford.pdf- this is an application for several new homes within an existing walled garden adjacent to the Listed Church in Whittlesford. Concerns about lack of information over significance of walled garden and impact to setting and context. GCP_Greenways_consult_Barton_and_Haslingfield.pdf- our response to the GCP consultation for a Greenway in Barton and Haslingfield. Lion_Yard_demo_and_redevelopment_adj_St_Andrews_Church.pdf- application for demolition of existing structures and redevelopment of site around St Andrews Church, including new restaurants and entrance to Lion Yard. 103_Mill_Road_second_application.pdf- second application for the redevelopment of the former Mickey Flynn site Outline_app_RLW_Waterbeach_new_town_east.pdf- east side of new town at Waterbeach by developer RLW outline application Wellcome_Trust_Genome_Campus_environ_assessment_app.pdf- Wellcome Trust environment assessment of proposals to expand the campus across the A1301 prior to more formal application Cambs_Pboro_Minerals_Waste_Plan_consult.pdf- public consultation on the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste proposals Lion_Yard_change_of_use_to_hotel__new_nightclub.pdf- application for change of use from offices to budget hotel and relocation of nightclub to basement at Lion Yard. Amendments_to_UandC_application_New_Town_Waterbeach.pdf- Amendments were submitted to the original and still undecided outline application for the new town at Waterbeach west. Trumpington_PandR_extension_to_car_park.pdf- application for proposed extension to the existing park and ride at Trumpington. Consult_on_CPIER.pdf- consultation response to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Independent Economic Review. East_House_Wandlebury_gate_in_garden_wall.pdf- application for listed building consent to insert new gate/door in existing listed garden wall. Government_consult_NPPF_revisions.pdf- national consultation on proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework. Outline_application_Land_north_of_Cherry_Hinton.pdf- response to outline planning application for new development at land north of Cherry Hinton. 292_Hills_Road_demolition.pdf- proposed demolition of 292 Hills Road, unlisted building and not within a conservation area. GCP_Cambourne_to_Cambridge_public_consult.pdf- our response to GCP proposals for Cambourne to Cambridge bus way public consultation. Public_consult_Old_Press_Mill_Lane_redevelopment.pdf- our response to the public consultation on the redevelopment of the Old Press/Mill Lane area in Cambridge within a conservation area and containing several listed buildings. 103_Mill_Road_redevelopment.pdf- first application for the redevelopment of 103 Mill Road former Mickey Flynn site. GCP_A1307_corridor_proposals.pdf- our response to the GCP proposals for the A1307 corridor between Haverhill and Cambridge.