Question 10. Do you think we should require extra climate adaptation and resilience features to new developments?
We are in a climate crisis. The time to wholly prevent climate change has passed. We will suffer its consequences. It would be negligent to allow developers to build without making design considerations for the potential of extreme weather events. Housing must be incredibly energy efficient but must also be able to withstand severe floods, droughts and heatwaves. We must decarbonise millions of homes by 2050. Why should we have ANY patience for developers still installing carbon based heating systems? New builds are an excellent opportunity to get the transition moving now, so that the requirements of 2050 do not have to be met at the last minute.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Yes. There may be opportunities to incorporate additional climate adaptation and resilience features into new development, but it is more likely that those opportunities will emerge at detailed design stage and on a site by site basis. It is also likely that new solutions and good practice examples will emerge during the plan period for emerging GCLP.
No uploaded files for public display
Water-saving techniques such as grey water and rainwater harvesting would be helpful.
No uploaded files for public display
Of course!!!
No uploaded files for public display
Absolutely! There is no excuse not to make this a requirement!
No uploaded files for public display
A future climate scenario must be clearly defined to inform extent of resilience and adaptation measures required. For example ‘Medium’ or ‘High’ Emissions Scenario defined by Met Office UKCP09. A clear statement is needed that acoustic standards must not override the ability to naturally ventilate in both secure and rapid ventilation modes. Current acoustic guidance causes confusion.
No uploaded files for public display
Passive house standards GREY WATER RECYCLING, RAINWATER HARVESTING, PERMEABLE PAVING. We are in the driest part of the country and our rivers are drying up. See https://camvalleyforum.uk/water/
No uploaded files for public display
The adopted Local Plan already contains policy objectives concerning this. There needs to be a recognition that such initiatives will add to the cost of new development (both housing and employment space) and that, ultimately, such initiatives will feed into higher house prices and employment rents/values. That may be deemed acceptable, but its effects do need to be considered so overall development viability must be assessed. It is not possible for the planning authorities to insist on high levels of affordable housing provision (e.g. 40%) and to now also weigh new development with additional costs associated with climate adaptation and resilience features. There will be a financial impact if policy requires such matters. Low carbon energy generation should be encouraged but should not be mandatory
No uploaded files for public display
The Trumpington Residents’ Association 'strongly agrees' with the need for higher standards and that these standards must be monitored and enforced. One area where we believe there needs to be effective action is in the case water management, including care for the health of our groundwater and Hobson's Brook and the River Cam; and action to persuade residents to reduce consumption and conserve water, including the more extensive use of grey water in housing developments.
No uploaded files for public display
Homes and business buildings that are protected against solar gain and flooding but which are carbon neutral e.g. designed in, shutters on windows, direction of building, materials that don't absorb heat, natural ventilation rather than mechanical
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Obviously!!!! This question is like some kind of sick joke. Do you want everyone to die of thirst or be washed away in a flood?
No uploaded files for public display
The University of Cambridge has identified climate change as a significant institutional risk; in particular vulnerabilities to overheating, flooding and wind damage. We note that the Sustainable Design & Construction Supplementary Planning Document recommends use of future climate scenarios but does not define them. To manage the risk effectively we propose the following definition for the future climate in order to define the extent of resilience to be built in: • The ‘High Emissions Scenario’ for 2050 as defined by UK Met Office Climate Projections 2009 (UKCP09). We note the UK Met Office Climate Projections were up-dated in 2018 to conform with IPCC Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). ‘RCP6.0’ 50th percentile is considered to be the closest equivalent to the UKCP09 ‘High Emissions Scenario’. This definition assumes a short term failure by the international community to meet the targets in the 2016 Paris Agreement. This cautious approach is justifiable as even with a slower rate of climate change this level of resilience is still likely to be necessary by 2080 (see Met Office projections for East Anglia for a range of scenarios here): https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/approach/collaboration/ukcp/land-projection-maps. To reflect increased uncertainty beyond 2050 it is proposed that resilience measures to address a High Emissions Scenario for 2080 should be submitted in the form of a plan that shows that additional resilience measures can be retrofitted without disproportionate cost and disruption.
No uploaded files for public display
Definitely building to be kept cool - no more glass buildings without mitigation against summer solar gain. Definitely water consumption measures.
No uploaded files for public display
I didn’t find this question clear. The adaptations and resilience measures you list are all sensible, but should we do extra beyond that? Certainly not at the expense of mitigation. We should not use extreme adaptation in the face of nature. For example, building on a flood plain with expensive flood barriers would be Adaptation Gone Mad. Perhaps we should talk explicitly about rainwater, as both a problem (flooding) and a solution (for irrigation of summer crops, loo flushing, washing machines). With more frequent extreme rain events likely, every way we can store rainwater for later use is good. This could mean on-farm reservoirs or water butts and underground storage tanks in residential areas. Smart management of storage would maximise the protective effect: when extreme rainfall is forecast, empty the water butts and reservoirs during the week before.
No uploaded files for public display
It is unclear what the question means by including “extra” measures. Resilience to climate change already features strongly in the design of new buildings and they will be much more resilient to climate change than existing buildings. As new buildings are resilient, then what “extra” measures are required? Adding further measures, and hence costs to new development should not take the place of tackling existing stock, or that will fail society and would run counter to the “polluter pays” principle. A major issue for society is how can existing buildings be made more resilient as the vast majority were built under regulations which are far less stringent than those of today, and many were built in locations in which development would no longer be permitted, for example, as it is vulnerable to flooding.
No uploaded files for public display
Huntingdonshire District Council would encourage incorporation of extra climate adaptation and resilience features into new developments as this could boost the acceptance amongst developers of these approaches and improve market demand for them hence potentially boosting their viability for application across Huntingdonshire.
No uploaded files for public display
Absolutely no building on flood plains! Real powers to planners to help stop inappropriate developments re impact on envt. All developments even small extensions should feed into measuring how much land we're building on, so we know how much extra concrete/loss of green space is happening. Infill never seems to be considered, wrt impact on envt and public services/infrastructure, but should be.
No uploaded files for public display
Absolutely need to legislate on this because otherwise developers will go for lowest cost options at the expense of the environment/future proofing. There is a need for: - Requiring new homes to be built without gas boilers, using alternate technologies like heat pumps. A strategy for retrofitting these in existing homes would also be valuable. - Possibly also requiring homes to have solar panels fitted. - Requiring developments to have excellent cycle links and good public transport links - preferably rail as well as bus - with dedicated bus lanes/busways. Making sure developments are not centred around car ownership. Proximity to local infrastructure (shops/schools/cafes etc) vital to reducing the need for cars. However consideration should also be given for enabling to-home deliveries - e.g. home delivered groceries. - Ensuring green spaces are not just lawns - that they're biodiverse spaces with trees. Encourage provision of local allotments in each development. - Ideally also encourage water re-use solutions in new developments - rain water harvesting and plumbing that allows that to be used for grey water needs - e.g. for toilet flushing.
No uploaded files for public display
Yes, we particularly need to look at risk of flooding including the placement of new developments and land-use around them which may affect run-off. The dying of local chalk streams is also an issue - we not only need to ensure enough water resources for human use, but also to protect the unique local biodiversity.
No uploaded files for public display
New developments can respond and adapt to climate change through a range of indicators. These include but are not limited to a centralised parking strategy within new developments to enable a pedestrian scale environment and a shift away from car usage, sustainable water management such as grey water recycling and permeable external surfaces and low energy environmental strategies including ground source heat bumps and solar thermal panels. Trumpington South would incorporate extra climate adaptation features and would carefully recognise and adhere to the recommendations provided by Cambridge Country Council in the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.
No uploaded files for public display
It is worth bearing in mind and referencing in the plan, the ways in which trees can help with climate change adaptation. Trees can provide shade and evaporative cooling which can help to reduce urban temperatures significantly on hot summer days. Trees can also help alleviate surface water flooding which can happen as a result of the increased frequency of heavy rainfall caused by climate change.
No uploaded files for public display
The emphasis should be on limiting climate change, rather than adapting to it. Having said that, we cannot avoid climate change, so clearly the answer to this question is ‘yes’. It is important that any measures to defend ourselves against adverse conditions are energy efficient. Energy hungry air conditioning should be avoided, for example. The listed actions are good. Water supply will become an increasing problem regardless of climate change if the population increases. Cambridge’s water supply comes largely from the aquifer. It is therefore essential that planning ensures that run-off water, which would have soaked into the ground, is fed back into the aquifer, and not channelled away into water courses and rivers. With increasingly dry summers, it will be unreasonable to prevent all use of water for agricultural or garden irrigation. Inclusion of rainwater harvesting in new developments would limit the pressure on the mains water supply for garden irrigation purposes. Likewise, grey water systems in new developments would help lessen demand for high quality treated mains water.
No uploaded files for public display
extreme weather succh as heat waves, droughts and floods are going to be ever more frequent and severe, so this will be importnat Ban building on flood plains Ensure urban treeplanting to reduce heat island effect. Ensure solar protection shielding in all new homes (S facing flats will be uninhabitable)
No uploaded files for public display
The push towards energy efficiency and reduced carbon emissions is the role of building regulations. The Local Plan should focus on the delivery of growth in the most sustainable locations and support investment in infrastructure links and open space that reduce the need to commute by car and help the population build healthy activities such as cycling and walking into their everyday routines. Drainage strategies already seek to ensure that a 40% uplift in capacity is built into new systems to account for anticipated change and this may well change again in the future.
No uploaded files for public display
Looking at how water resources (and related water quality) will be affected for the minimum lifetime of new properties is vital, as is considering the infrastructure needed to adapt existing properties. Making space for water to flood and be stored will be critical to long term adaptation. Building on the fringes of flood zones 2 and 3 means there are less options to create future flood storage. Planning to avoid future flood risk is therefore as much about creating storage as it is avoiding flooding to new properties.
No uploaded files for public display
The language in this section is much better than the mitigating section. The stronger we are at mitigating, the less adaptation we will be required to do. These all sound like good ideas regardless so we should be ensuring we have specific policies with specific design standards and the power to enforce these so that developers do implement these strategies.
No uploaded files for public display
Continuous and adequate water flow in Hobson’s Brook is crucial to its continued existence and purpose. In recent years this flow has been in serious decline. The situation was particularly concerning in the summer of 2019, when the Nine Wells springs almost dried up. The HCT is aware that the causes of this decline in water flow are multiple. One aspect of the situation is irregularity in the pattern and usefulness of rainfall in the catchment area of the springs, leading to a lowering of the aquifer. In order to maintain a healthy flow of water from Nine Wells springs action needs to be taken to prevent further decline in the level of water in the aquifer. One major factor contributing to this decline is certainly abstraction by Cambridge Water Company. We would urge the Greater Cambridge Local Plan to address the issues of water abstraction and the sustainable sourcing and use of water. We note that the responsible use of water is required in the 2018 Local Plan for Cambridge (Policy 31). The HCT is concerned that increased water abstraction (to cope with huge increases in water demand from new developments) would cause significant harm to the water flow in Hobson’s Brook (and other chalk streams in the Greater Cambridge area) through the lowering of the level of the underlying aquifer. There is increasing statistical and material evidence that supports our concern for the decline in flow. We were pleased to have had the opportunity to participate in the Water Forum organised by Cllr Katie Thornburrow at the Guildhall in November 2019 and we urge that the Report from the forum be duly noted and weighed in the preparation of the new Local Plan.
No uploaded files for public display
I think we need to think carefully about how we a) provide homes and b) as far as any authority is able, ensure there’ is a sustainable approach to water. That could mean adopting some design standards to better manage use. Given that our chalk streams are running dry, tackling this will be vital.
No uploaded files for public display