Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

The policy should not exclude tall buildings on other sites where they can be justified on a site by site bases through submitted evidence.

While the principle is to be supported the policy is still subject to full justification. However, in London, affordable workspace policies don’t work and usually the evidence base doesn’t justify them on viability grounds. If this policy is to evolve it must set out clear and realistic targets based on Cambridge evidence and include ‘subject to viability’ within any policy to allow for market variations throughout the plan period.

This policy is to be supported. The type and amount of space should be assessed on site by site basis.

The University would like to see a more proportionate and economically grounded approach, rather than the stringent economic test currently proposed, which would better reflect present conditions and support the delivery of much-needed homes and/or student accommodation as an alternative to any existing visitor accommodation.

The University would challenge the proposed test for assessing the loss of visitor accommodation, which may benefit from reconsideration in light of current housing pressures. Given Greater Cambridge’s sustained and exceptional growth trajectory, there is a strong case for facilitating the conversion of visitor accommodation to residential use or student accommodation through planning policy where appropriate. A more proportionate and economically grounded approach, rather than the stringent economic test currently proposed, would better reflect present conditions and support the delivery of much-needed homes and/or student accommodation.

The University supports the proposed policy which aligns with the principles embedded within our Strategic Estate Framework to make the most effective use of land, including a mix of uses on the larger sites as well as taking reasonable steps to improve the public realm, provide active frontages and reduce car parking where possible.

You will note our comments elsewhere with regard to Old Press/Mill Lane and New Museums Site. It should be made clearer that other sites that sit outside the City Centre, but equally don’t fall within the strategic University Sites listed in para 5 of the policy, would also be appropriate for the uses in para 1 - these are sites such as Centre for Mathematical Sciences and Homerton. If the intention is that para 6 picks up these additional sites then this could be made clearer.

Student Accommodation: We note that these policies place a financial affordable housing obligation for 40% of the units built on developments of 10 or more units that are not either i) redevelopments of existing university or college owned PBSA or ii) within an existing university or college campus site.

Many Colleges have significant accommodation at the fringe of their site or nearby. There is some ambiguity relating to the phrase “within an existing university or college campus site” when the real world layout of many colleges is considered. Students would consider themselves on a core college site if accommodated in a nearby unit and for purposes of estate management and planning these sites are considered to be absolutely “core” to Colleges. In many cases conservation constraints place limits on development potential within the core College site as well in which case nearby properties are the most appropriate location for student accommodation. We would therefore request that the words “or nearby” are inserted in paragraph 10. (a) and in line 1 of policy 9.10.

In line with Government policy, the University of Cambridge is increasing the range of part-time courses and making increased provision to accommodate part-time students. As all students on part-time degree courses are members of Colleges, and because Colleges are the principal providers of accommodation and related services, there is an expectation on Colleges to house more part-time students. These efforts will be limited to core College sites and existing student accommodation under this policy which is likely to place a significant constraint on the extent to which the collegiate university can expand part-time student provision for those unable to live at home. For some courses, which often recruit students from overseas and across the UK, part-time study at the University involves block periods of intensive teaching with mandatory requirements to reside in Cambridge.

We therefore propose that clauses 1 and 8 of policy H/SA allow for part-time student accommodation where there is a residential requirement of more than two days per week.

The University supports the general approach to this policy. There is a need to ensure new development is integrated into the existing facilities and services as well as seamless connectivity to the existing transport and community networks. Public Transport contributions need to be used effectively and have a long term impact on the connectivity of place.

Reference to LTN 1/20 for cycling infrastructure but needs reference to LTN 1/24 which gives guidance for bus infrastructure design.

Should references to e-scooters should be tweaked to saying e-scooters that are part of a DfT approved scheme e.g. Voi?

Since any sort of hub would need a maintenance and management plan, the policy should require inclusion of details about how they are managed and by whom.

Provision at such sites should include EV charging for bus services and driver rest facilities and interchange between 'normal buses' and park and ride services.

The policy is not clear within the wording what the standards are. The development led approach for cycle parking and car parking is supported but guidance within the policy as a starting point for car parking (which can then be varied through site by site factors) would make the policy requirements clearer. This seems to be the approach for cycle parking and it is suggested that a similar approach is provided for car parking also.

The University fully supports that a site-wide electric vehicle charging strategy be provided for large-scale major sites detailing the location and phasing of the charge point installations, and grid capacity. The University is finding that the need for charging in association with staff parking spaces is declining as home charging increases (as it is cheaper) and battery performance is improving as technology advances. A strategy that best fits the needs of any site (perhaps not just major sites) should allow applicants to approach the best provision that suits them. This may mean fewer spaces are provided with EV charging, but more Rapid/Fast Charge spaces are provided on a site.