Question 4. Do you agree that planning to 2040 is an appropriate date in the future to plan for? If not, what would be a more appropriate date and why?
The date is too distant, many things such as the built environment needs changes now and we cannot understand how technology will be in 20 years.
No uploaded files for public display
The timeline should be as short as possible while adhering to NPPF
No uploaded files for public display
The reasoning for 2040 seems sensible, but tying into 2050 net zero goals might also make sense, as climate change is one of the big ideas. Would mean carbon emission targets could be aligned
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new local plan, as required by NPPF. If that is what the two planning authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take 5 years for a new plan to be adopted? We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out in the next stage of the Local Plan.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new local plan. If that is what the two planning authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take 5 years for a new plan to be adopted?
No uploaded files for public display
2040 Is very short term given the climate emergency we face. However it is important that much shorter targets for carbon neutrality are set.
No uploaded files for public display
2040 is too far in the future. Climate change will certainly, and government shift of resources northwards will probably, render a lot of this work obsolete before then.
No uploaded files for public display
Government advice states that a 15 year time period for a Local Plan is optimal. From a start date of 2017 this would take the Plan period to 2032. Although there is a statutory requirement to review a Local Plan every 5 years to take it forward to 2040 now would be an excessively long Plan period that may precipitate housing delivery based largely on large strategic sites (and a stepped trajectory that does nothing to solve housing requirements in the short term).
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
There is a need to ensure that appropriate review mechanisms are put in place to ensure that shortfalls in housing delivery can be quickly addressed and to allow the plan to deal with economic changes
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new Plan. If that is what the authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take five years for a new Plan to be adopted. We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out at the next consultation.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Savills (UK) Ltd are instructed by Dean & Dean to make representations to the current Issues and Options consultation stage of the new Greater Cambridge Local Plan. Dean & Dean have land interests in and around the City and consequently feel it is important to make their necessary representations to guide and shape the future planning policies and proposals that will emerge with the new Local Plan covering both administrative area. It is the case that our client strongly supports the need for a new Greater Cambridge Local Plan covering the districts of South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City. For a number of years, there were clear political differences between the two authorities and the presence of an administrative boundary tightly drawn around the edge of Cambridge meant that the planning policies guiding the growth of the urban area were effectively controlled by another authority in terms of peripheral growth. The move to create one Local Plan for the urban area and the rural area surrounding it makes common sense in the circumstances where the character of home, work and commuting have no relevance to local authority boundaries . The whole geographical area operates as one unit and is entirely appropriate that planning policies are formulated to address a development strategy that copes with growth in and out of the city. The need for a new Local Plan in any case is set out within the 2018 Local Plans for both the City and the district and places the onus on them to provide a Submission version of the plan by summer 2022. A Call for Sites consultation period was undertaken in 2019 to which our clients made submissions in terms of promoting land south of High Street in Balsham. We hope the Council will be in a position to critically analyse all of the submissions with regards to setting out a framework for a new development strategy to cope with growth in and around the Cambridge area. In terms of the end date of the Local Plan, the combined authorities non-spatial strategy end date is for 2050 which is some 30 years from now and where in our view, significant changes to national and planning policies are bound to have taken place which will affect significant parts of any new spatial strategy. Certainly the experiences of planning in and around the Cambridge area which have moved from policies of dispersal in the early 1990’s to ones of more sustainable concentration on the edge of Cambridge and removal of the Green Belt reflects the changing needs, demands and circumstances which have fluctuated in a much shorter period of time. Consequently there is concern that moving the Local Plan period out to 2050 provides no realistic strategic direction having regard to these external factors. Consequently, we support an end date of 2040 which is consistent with National Planning Policy which states that development plans should look ahead at least 15 years from the point of adoption.
No uploaded files for public display
It is good to see plans for 20 years into the future but I have every intention of living at least another 20 years, I don't feel the protection is sufficient. Previous experience appears to support this; the land around Addenbrookes hospital was part of the Green Belt until 2012 (?) and is now virtually all built over. Any legal restrictions on development would appear to be only temporary, once Green Belt land is lost to development it will never be restored.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new Plan. If that is what the authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take five years for a new Plan to be adopted. We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out at the next consultation.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new Plan. If that is what the authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take five years for a new Plan to be adopted. We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out at the next consultation.
No uploaded files for public display
Given that a climate emergency has been declared by both the South Cambridgeshire District Council and the Cambridge City Council I urge them to take swift action to transition Cambridge away from over-reliance on carbon-heavy car transport which is a symptom of our land-use and transportation strategies. Local Plan strategies for cycling and public transportation (which include understanding where and how new developments should be located and designed) must assume a radical shift away from cars well before 2040. You should be building new homes on the green belt with access by sustainable transport only. There should be "green corridors" between areas of urbanisation which is accessible to all. A green belt idea is now outdated, it relies on cars and roads. We need cycle paths and electric buses. We should have cycle super highways and you should allow electric scooters.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new local plan, as advised by paragraph 22 of the NPPF. If that is what the two planning authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take 5 years for a new plan to be adopted? We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out in the next stage of the Local Plan. The plan should also include appropriate mechanisms to allow early reviews of the plan if there is a shortfall in housing delivery or significant economic changes.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new local plan, as advised by paragraph 22 of the NPPF. If that is what the two planning authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take 5 years for a new plan to be adopted? We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out in the next stage of the Local Plan. The plan should also include appropriate mechanisms to allow early reviews of the plan if there is a shortfall in housing delivery or significant economic changes.
No uploaded files for public display
The proposed Local Plan period up to 2040 is considered appropriate and to accord with the requirements set out within the NPPF for local authorities to identify a sufficient supply and mix of sites between years 1-15 of the plan (Para 67). As recognised, Greater Cambridge falls at the crossroads of a number of key economic corridors, including the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, London-Stansted Corridor and the Cambridge-Norwich tech corridor. The Oxford-Cambridge Arc in particular is a key economic priority as recognised by Central Government. Further work on the delivery of these initiatives will take place including the need for cooperation between authorities and stakeholders. It is imperative that the New Local Plan has flexibility to allow for additional growth to come forward to meet the needs of these important initiatives as they develop through cross boundary and national discussions, potentially within the early/mid stages of the plan period.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
I believe that in today's world with an uncertain future about our climate 2040 is too far out to plan for. Cambridge should be at the forefront of the fight against climate change and plans that might seem like a good idea in 2020 might not hold water in 5 or 10 years time.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new local plan, as required by paragraph 22 of NPPF. If that is what the two planning authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take 5 years for a new plan to be adopted? We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017, when the current local plans were not adopted until September 2018. This should be set out in the next stage of the Local Plan. The plan should also include appropriate mechanisms to allow early reviews of the plan if there is a shortfall in housing delivery or significant economic changes.
No uploaded files for public display
Need to speed up the response to the Climate emergency, also air pollution and congestion is still getting worse. Need to speed up the transport and planning solutions way before 2040, i.e. stop giving permission for new carparking / developments with increased car parking. Need to reallocate road space away from private motor cars to bicycles and buses.
No uploaded files for public display
4.1 Agree - The proposed Local Plan period up to 2040 is considered appropriate and to accord with the requirements set out within the NPPF for local authorities to identify a sufficient supply and mix of sites between years 1-15 of the plan (Para 67). 4.2 As recognised, Greater Cambridge falls at the crossroads of a number of key economic corridors, including the Oxford-Cambridge Arc, London-Stansted Corridor and the Cambridge-Norwich tech corridor. The Oxford-Cambridge Arc in particular is a key economic priority as recognised by Central Government. Further work on the delivery of these initiatives will take place including the need for cooperation between authorities and stakeholders. 4.3 It is imperative that the New Local Plan has flexibility to allow for additional growth to come forward to meet the needs of these important initiatives as they develop through cross boundary and national discussions, potentially within the early/mid stages of the plan period.
No uploaded files for public display
• Given that a climate emergency has been declared by both the South Cambridgeshire District Council and the Cambridge City Council we urge them to take swift action to transition the Cambridge region to sustainable transport including cycling. • Local Plan strategies for cycling and public transportation (which include understanding where and how new developments should be located and designed) must assume a radical shift away from cars well before 2040.
No uploaded files for public display
We would suggest a plan period of 15 years from the date of adoption of the new Plan. If that is what the authorities have in mind, then it is disappointing to note that it is expected to take five years for a new Plan to be adopted. We do not fully understand, and it is not explained, why the start date is 2017. This should be set out at the next consultation.
No uploaded files for public display
The logic behind the proposed end date of 2040 is broadly supported. However, given that the end date of the existing plans is 2031 and given the strategic context being provided by the Combined Authority’s Non-Statutory Spatial Framework to 2050 and the delivery timetable for currently envisaged infrastructure and employment/housing growth it is considered that a plan that only adds nine years to the current framework is perhaps failing to address the longer strategic context for this plan period. In addition, NPPF para 22 advises that strategic policies should look forward over a minimum of 15 years. The suggested program for adoption of the Joint Plan by September 2023 is challenging and any slippage could result in a plan that is already on the 15-year minimum at date of adoption. For this reason 2043 is suggested.
No uploaded files for public display
But since the world and the challenges change rapidly the next plan should overlap and start well before, perhaps as early as 2030..
No uploaded files for public display
Given that a climate emergency has been recognised, it is reasonable to plan for 2040 but it would be better if environmental planning goals were implemented and achieved (eg sustainable transport provision) well before 2040.
No uploaded files for public display