It seems that the Mill Road "Ironworks" development is not the only place where Hills/CIP are getting away with ignoring planning guidance. There was a long and detailed letter from Sonia Spinks of Friends of St.Albans Road Rec, "Our green space is not up for grabs" in the 09/10/19 edition of the Cambridge Independent. [No link to letters page, but a number of article including this.] So I had to write a comment:
"It was good to see the long and detailed letter from Sonia Spinks (Friends of
St.Albans Road Rec, Our green space is not up for grabs) detailing the
contradictions between the local plans and supplementary planning guidance and
the projects submitted and approved by the Cambridge/South Cambridgeshire
planning department. I could write an equally long tale about the 2018 Local
Plan, the consultation process, the agreed SPD (all at 167 dwellings), the
phase 1 planning application (182 dwellings) and the subsequent planning
approval (231 dwellings) for the over development of the Mill Road Depot site. [Planning slip on Mill Road Depot has featured at length in previous blogs!]
The City Council has asked us to comment on the "Making Space for People" SPD and is now asking us to engage in the development of the next Local Plan. If developers are allowed to ride roughshod over both the local plan and any subsequent Planning Guidance, it is difficult to understand the purpose of these consultations. Until Cambridge/South Cambridgeshire has a planning department that is able to understand its own planning guidance and stand up to pressure from developers, we can only anticipate people becoming more and more disillusioned with the planning process and more unhappy about the developments that are being forced on them. If Cambridge residents do not think the councils are engaging in these consultation exercises in good faith then the responses will we limited and local democracy will suffer. "
The City Council has asked us to comment on the "Making Space for People" SPD and is now asking us to engage in the development of the next Local Plan. If developers are allowed to ride roughshod over both the local plan and any subsequent Planning Guidance, it is difficult to understand the purpose of these consultations. Until Cambridge/South Cambridgeshire has a planning department that is able to understand its own planning guidance and stand up to pressure from developers, we can only anticipate people becoming more and more disillusioned with the planning process and more unhappy about the developments that are being forced on them. If Cambridge residents do not think the councils are engaging in these consultation exercises in good faith then the responses will we limited and local democracy will suffer. "
