Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Search representations
Results for Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group search
New searchSupport
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Homes
Representation ID: 203410
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
We support these policies.
We support these policies.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/AH: Affordable housing
Representation ID: 203418
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
We strongly support the affordable homes policy and note that it is very important that these come forward as part of every relevant development. Developers should be expected to assess viability as part of the purchase of the site and at least 40% affordable is a key part of this.
We strongly support the affordable homes policy and note that it is very important that these come forward as part of every relevant development. Developers should be expected to assess viability as part of the purchase of the site and at least 40% affordable is a key part of this.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/GL: Garden land and subdivision of existing plots
Representation ID: 203422
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
The respondent supports the policy but suggests strengthening the section on residential annexes, which currently allows for ancillary use. They express concern about the conversion of these annexes to short term lets or new dwellings, particularly when access is available to the road.
The respondent recommends considering how to strengthen the policy to clarify that there should be a presumption against converting annexes to separate residences when the original permission was granted based on ancillary use.
We support this policy but would like to strengthen the section about residential annexes as this currently provides for ancillary use, which is supported. However, we have seen these being built with the ancillary use restriction, but then a new application comes in for conversion to a short term let or a new dwelling which is hard to resist if the access is on to the road, for example. It would be helpful to consider how this might be strengthened either under this policy or in another policy about housing which could make clear that the presumption is against conversion to a separate residence if the permission is based on ancillary use.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/SS: Residential space standards and accessible homes
Representation ID: 203431
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
The respondent supports the policy but raises concerns about Table 00 allowing one person one bed houses, suggesting it should be reviewed.
The respondent recommends that Co-Living should have minimum space standards to prevent circumvention of existing space regulations, especially when units contain mini fridges and kitchens which would in effect allow residents to avoid use of the shared facilities.
The respondent welcomes the inclusion of a requirement for wheelchair adaptable M4 (3) a or b standards as mentioned in paragraph 8.
We support this policy. However, table 00 still allows for a one person one bed house, when in fact, these inevitably have a double bedroom and obviously, once built, we cannot enforce a single person/single bed arrangement on which it was constructed at the smaller 37m size. Should the one person/one bed option be reviewed?
We think that Co-Living should also have minimum space standards to avoid these becoming, in effect, a way of avoiding the space standards, particularly where units have mini fridges and kitchens, which would suggest that they could be used as separate dwellings without reliance on the shared amenities in the block.
We welcome para 8 which brings in a requirement for wheelchair adaptable M4 (3) a or b standards.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/CB: Self and custom build homes
Representation ID: 203441
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
We support this, but also would like a condition and a monitoring process to ensure that the initial occupants who were involved in the design do live there for a minimum period. This is important as currently the BNG requirements for this type of build are less rigorous and it is important that the LPA can require this to be reinstated if it is no longer occupied as planned and in effect, becomes a standard build.
We support this, but also would like a condition and a monitoring process to ensure that the initial occupants who were involved in the design do live there for a minimum period. This is important as currently the BNG requirements for this type of build are less rigorous and it is important that the LPA can require this to be reinstated if it is no longer occupied as planned and in effect, becomes a standard build.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/BR: Build to rent homes
Representation ID: 203445
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
We support this but it is important that management fees remain reasonable.
We support this but it is important that management fees remain reasonable.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/CL: Co-living
Representation ID: 203448
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
Support for the introduction of a co-living policy, but highlights the need for a policy on minimum space standards to ensure quality living conditions.
Notes that existing policies for HMOs include minimum space standards, suggesting that similar requirements should be clearly outlined to avoid poor quality developments.
Recommends amending Paragraph 9.85 to mandate compliance with bedroom standards rather than merely considering them.
It is very good to see a policy coming forward on co-living. However, a policy on minimum space standards is required (as we mentioned in the section on space standards). This is particularly important for units where a minifridge and kitchenette are included as this could result in residents not using the shared facilities and in effect, living in the unit, but without the necessary space standards. Even without this risk, a minimum size is needed to avoid poor quality developments coming forward. HMOs have minimum space standards for rooms and if these are not clearly required by policy, we risk substandard builds coming forward in such a competitive rental markets where residents are often forced to pay over the odds for tiny rooms. Para 9.85 should be amended to require these to meet the bedroom standards rather than just to consider them.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/MO: Houses in multiple occupation (HMOs)
Representation ID: 203454
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
The respondent supports the policy but requests the removal of references to C4 and Sui Generis to allow for automatic inclusion of smaller HMOs if Permitted Development regulations change or an Article 4 directive is implemented.
The respondent suggests that the text in paragraph 1 should be amended to read: 'Proposals for HMOs that require planning permission will be supported, where:'
Similar amendments are requested for paragraphs 3 and 9.95 to align with the proposed changes.
The respondent advocates for further work on this policy before Regulation 19 to establish an evidence base regarding the impact of converting smaller dwellings, ensuring the policy remains robust against potential national policy changes.
We support this policy but we would like to remove the reference to C4 and Sui Generis as this would mean that, were Permitted Development regulations removed or updated, or an Article 4 directive put in place, this policy would automatically include smaller HMOs. The text at 1 should therefore read "Proposals for HMOs that require planning permission will be supported, where: "
and the same at para 3 and para 9.95.
As we have commented earlier under the policy on visitor accommodation, we would welcome further work on this policy before Regulation 19 to ensure that an evidence base of the impact of conversion of smaller dwellings is brought forward and to ensure that the policy is robust if national policy on this changes.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy H/SA: Student accommodation
Representation ID: 203457
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
The respondent supports the policy but requests a distinction between student accommodation and staff accommodation.
Staff accommodation should adhere to housing standards, including meeting space standards and access to private amenity space.
Allowing 25% of the development for staff housing with smaller room sizes and limited amenities may lead to poor living conditions.
We welcome the commitment to affordable housing para 9.106.
A definition of acceptable use for staff accommodation during term breaks is needed, as some universities have extended breaks.
If staff accommodation is rented out as short-term visitor accommodation unrelated to the university, it should comply with policy J/VA.
We support this policy but would like to separate out student accommodation from staff accommodation. Staff accommodation should be treated as any other housing in the plan - meeting space standards and with access to private amenity space. Allowing 25% of the development to include staff housing where someone could live permanently for up to 3 years (para 3.b) but with the much smaller room sizes and lack of amenity would result in poor quality living accommodation for staff. It would also be helpful to define what is an acceptable use out of term time (which is for some Universities, more than half of the year). If these are rented out as short term visitor accommodation unrelated to the University, this should comply with our policy J/VA.
We welcome the commitment to affordable housing para 9.106.
Support
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Infrastructure
Representation ID: 203606
Received: 29/01/2026
Respondent: Cambridge City Council Liberal Democrat Group
We support this but would like it to be made clearer in the introduction the critical need for infrastructure to come forward as agreed, and early on in the development process. We suggest amending the sentence under What our infrastructure policies do, 3rd from the end, as follows:
"Require developers to contribute towards infrastructure delivery, in a timely manner and ensuring that this is available when agreed by the relevant condition timescales, to meet the requirements arising from new developments."
We support this but would like it to be made clearer in the introduction the critical need for infrastructure to come forward as agreed, and early on in the development process. We suggest amending the sentence under What our infrastructure policies do, 3rd from the end, as follows:
"Require developers to contribute towards infrastructure delivery, in a timely manner and ensuring that this is available when agreed by the relevant condition timescales, to meet the requirements arising from new developments."
