Draft Greater Cambridge Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document Consultation

The HBF is concerned about the use of this SPD to introduce additional financial burdens on a planning application. It should be noted that PPG (ID: 61-008) states that ‘Supplementary planning documents (SPDs) should build upon and provide more detailed advice or guidance on policies in an adopted local plan. As they do not form part of the development plan, they cannot introduce new planning policies into the development plan. They are however a material consideration in decision-making. They should not add unnecessarily to the financial burdens on development.’

The HBF is also concerned that this SPD is being introduced without the full consultation and examination that would have been given during the examination process, as would be befitting a new policy approach as is set out in this note. The HBF do not consider that this is appropriate and do not consider that the SPD should be taken forward at this time. The PPG is clear that it is not appropriate for plan-makers to set out new formulaic approaches to planning obligations in supplementary planning documents or supporting evidence base documents, as these would not be subject to examination.

The HBF notes that the SPD covers a significant number of potential planning obligations, and that cumulatively, they could have a significant impact on the deliverability and viability of development. Whilst introducing a significant level of additional evidence and strategies to support applications, which will not only add additional cost, but also significant time resource for both the applicant and those involved in the determination of the application. The HBF considers that greater flexibility should be included within the SPD, this may include in relation to viability, scale of evidence required, or in relation to which elements are provided on-site or off-site.

This section of the SPD explains the Council’s approach to the delivery of affordable housing and expands on the policies in the Cambridge City Local Plan (Policy 45) and the South Cambridgeshire Local plan (Policy H10 and H11). The HBF notes that the SPD states that the affordable housing policies will apply to schemes for specialist housing (such as extra care, retirement homes, residential and / or nursing care, care suites, or smaller group homes. It also states that the affordable housing policies apply to Build to Rent schemes. The HBF considers that the viability of these requirements should be evidenced and ensured.

The SPD notes that the Local Plan policies do not set out an expected tenure split, however, the SPD will seek a tenure split that sees 75% of the 40% affordable housing requirement to be Affordable / Social Rent. And on sites above 15 homes at least 10% of that 75% is expected to be allocated for Social Rent. The HBF considers that it will be important to ensure that this proposed tenure split is viable and developable. It will also be important for the Councils to work closely with local registered providers to ensure that these requirements are in line with their plans in the area.

With regard to phased development paragraph 4.30 states “The Councils may require phased developments to submit a viability assessment if during any phase of the development, the amount of affordable housing being delivered during that phase decreases…” HBF do not disagree, but additional guidance should be added for completeness to address phased developments which provide increased affordable housing in an earlier phase to allow for a reduction in another.

The SPD suggests that the Council’s expectations on the affordable housing mix by bedrooms as a starting point, is set out in Tables 2 & 3 of Annex 2 of the Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy 2024-2029. The suggested mix is not included in the SPD, and it is not apparent how it will be kept up to date should new evidence from monitoring or a housing needs assessment indicates that these are no longer correct. HBF suggest a new paragraph is introduced stating that the suggested mix in Annex 2 of the Cambridge Housing Strategy will apply unless sufficient evidence demonstrates a different appropriate mix should be provided and that the mix will be agreed in consultation with the Local Planning Authority (LPA).

The draft SPD states in paragraph 6.4 that best practice indicates that there is an aspiration policy to achieve a 20% BNG and in paragraph 6.9 that the Council will encourage applicants to achieve 20%. Whilst recognising this is not framed as a requirement HBF would suggest that it is made clear that development achieving 10% will be considered as providing a positive contribution to biodiversity and will be supported by the Council.

Paragraph 6.8 lists some of the exemptions for BNG on new developments. If the Council are to set out exemptions, then the full list set out in legislation should be included in the SPD.

With regard to the form in which obligations can be made the Council place significant emphasis on the use of S106 agreements as a means of securing BNG. Whilst we recognise that this is a planning obligations SPD, we do consider it necessary to include more information on the use of conservation covenants as a means of discharging BNG and more clearly state their use will mean that a S106 agreement is not required for BNG in those instances. In particular the Council should amend paragraph 6.24 which suggests that without a S106 agreement is in place BNG conditions will not be discharged. Clearly if a conservation covenant is in place than a S106 agreement is not required in order to discharge that condition.

This section of the SPD is based on Policy 85 of the Cambridge Local Plan and Policy SC/4 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. The SPD states that all new residential developments are to make provision for community facilities to meet the needs arising from the development proposal. It goes on to state that proposals for sites of 200 or more dwellings are required to provide detailed assessments and strategies regarding community needs and how they will be met. It states for smaller developments where facilities are not delivered on-site, contributions may be required to address the needs generated by a new development. The SPD then sets out a contribution cost per dwelling from £789.63 for 1-bed dwellings to £2,092.84 for 4-bed+ dwellings. Finally, the SPD suggests that extra care housing and residential nursing homes will not normally be required to contribute towards community facilities, but this will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that applications comprising retirement accommodation will be required to pay contributions in full.

The HBF generally supports the retention, enhancement and provision of community facilities to support local community and residents of new homes. However, it is important that the Council has robust evidence to demonstrate that the contributions proposed in this SPD are necessary, directly related to the development and reasonably related in scale to the development. The HBF considers that in order for this policy to function it will be important that the Council has detailed evidence about the community facilities that are already available in the Greater Cambridge area, and their current capacity to meet local community needs. The HBF also considers that if provision is provided on-site, for one form of community facility that the Council will not seek provision for further facilities.

This section of the SPD is based on Policy 85 of the Cambridge Local Plan and Policy TI/8 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. The SPD states that all new residential development, are to make adequate provision for health care, community and social facilities. It goes on to state that proposals for sites of 200 or more dwellings are required to provide detailed assessments and strategies regarding community needs and how they will be met. The SPD suggests that the need for services and facilities arising from new development will be considered on a case-by-case basis, but the services that typically may be required include provision of specialist accommodation; community buildings and sports facilities; and formal and informal spaces and offices.

The HBF is generally supportive of creating resilient communities. However, as above the HBF considers that the onus is on the Council to demonstrate that new development will create a need for these services and to provide evidence that there is an issue of capacity that will need to be addressed to serve the needs of the new development. The HBF considers that where a need is identified it will be crucial that this is discussed with the developer of the site affected at the earliest possible time to ensure that this can be built into costs associated with the development. The HBF considers that without further information in relation to potential costs for this requirement that there is potential for this to significant impacts on the viability of development, including in terms of land use and other impacts, not just direct financial costs.

20. This section of the SPD is based on Policy 85 of the Cambridge Local Plan and Policy SC/4 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. The SPD states that all new residential development are to meet the developments needs for new library provision. It suggests that applicants should set out the details of the number of dwellings or expected population arising from the new development. In then suggests that the Cambridgeshire County Council Planning Obligations Strategy sets the County’s approach to securing contributions. This information is not actually set out in the SPD, and it is not evident whether these figures are to be updated or indexed, or what justification there is, that these are still appropriate. Based on the link in the SPD the contributions appear to range from £28.92 per head of population increase to £97, and are based on the consultation draft Planning Obligations Strategy from 2016. The HBF considers that it is appropriate for the Council to want to facilitate life-long learning. The HBF would question if it is appropriate for this to be funded through residential development.

This section of the SPD is based on Cambridge Local Plan Policy 74 and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan policy TI/8. This SPD states that all major developments resulting in a child yield will be required to make provision for education services. It goes on to state that education impact will be assessed using Cambridgeshire County Council’s approved Child Yield Detailed Multipliers, and will then be assessed against the school catchment capacities, taking into account other planned developments. The SPD does also state that residential development for age restricted development or people living in care homes or assisted living will be exempt from education contributions.

The HBF notes that the PPG and GOV.UK provided guidance on how residential development can support education. The HBF questions whether there is any need for this section of the SPD particularly as it doesn’t actually contain the calculation information, and this has to be drawn from other documents and evidence. The SPD also doesn’t contain any up-to-date information as to the Council’s consideration of existing or planned school capacity.

This section of the SPD is based on Policy 85 of the Cambridge Local Plan and Policy SC/4 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan. The SPD suggests that planning obligations will be sought from residential development. It suggests that proposals for over 200 dwellings should be accompanied by assessments of need and strategies regarding how the need will be addressed. It also provides a contribution to cost per dwelling based on number of bedrooms, these range from £139.26 for a 1-bed dwelling to £369.10 for a 4+bed dwelling.

The HBF is concerned that the viability of these costs has not be considered, and whilst the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan includes a reference to burial space the same cannot be said for Cambridge Local Plan, therefore this policy requirement has not been test and examined in public as required by the NPPF and PPG.

This section of the SPD is based on Policy 68 of the Cambridge Local Plan and Policy SC/7 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan and the Open Space in New Developments SPD. This SPD suggests that obligations will be sought from residential developments, it sets out the costs by dwelling size including capital costs and maintenance costs, these are slightly different for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire.

The home building industry are used to providing public open space as part of development or as contributions where appropriate. However, it will be important to ensure that these requirements are viable and deliverable and do not prevent or stall delivery of homes.

This section of the SPD is based on Cambridge Local Plan Policy 68 and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan Policy SC/4. This SPD suggests that planning obligations will be sought from all residential development, it suggests that on-site provision is only likely to be required in the largest forms of development. Off-site contributions will be guided by the Sports England Facilities Calculator, and the SPD sets out a contribution per house based on the number of bedrooms, with slightly differing costs in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire but ranging from £276.75 to £769.36 for swimming contributions and £227.55 to £726.98 for Indoors Sports Hall contributions.