Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Nothing chosen

Yes, particularly within Rural Centres and Minor Rural Centres where the indicative maxima number of dwellings for sites should be removed to allow the assessment of appropriate densities to take place on a site-by-site basis. This will ensure the most efficient use of land can be made, as is appropriate to the sites context, in line with the requirements of the NPPF. The boundaries of village frameworks should also be re-assessed to allow sustainable sites abutting the existing village boundaries to come forward where appropriate. This will open up a large new supply of small and medium sized housing sites which can be delivered immediately as the necessary infrastructure and services to serve the new resident already exist.

No choices made

No single solution will deliver a sound Local Plan or spatial strategy. A flexible and mixed approach is required to provide a robust supply of housing and to deliver new housing and employment development in the appropriate locations across the district. However, as directed by the NPPF, the first approach should be to consider sites outside of the Green Belt. Therefore, sites within or well related to existing sustainable settlements outside the Green Belt provide the most logical place to consider for new development and to provide a varied spatial delivery of growth.

If the correct mechanisms are not in place to ensure that new settlements are delivered as intended during the Plan period, then reliance on such allocations for meeting housing need would not be effective or sound in meeting housing and job needs. In recent years, a number of Local Authorities have been criticised, and Local Plans have failed at Examination, due to relying on such limited approaches. The most recent being the St Albans Local Plan Examination in January 2020 where the Planning Inspector cancelled the remaining hearings after the first week. This decision was made following discussions focusing on the proposed allocation of a Garden Village to provide 2,300 new homes and the significant concerns about delivering the allocation as the site also benefitted from planning permission for a rail interchange. New settlements can contribute significantly to meeting housing need but cannot be relied upon as the sole solution. The above demonstrates that there are real risks associated with simply relying on large urban extensions or any single solution to delivering housing need and that a range of sites must be allocated in order to provide a robust supply of housing.

South Cambridgeshire Local Plan Policy S/5 set a target for 19,500 new homes between 2011-2031. Some of this target had already been completed/committed at the time of adoption but the remainder of housing delivery supply relied on three major strategic site allocations which were anticipated to provide a further 13,700 (70%) of these homes. As stated within the response to Question 46, a move away from simply relying a small number of large allocations is needed. Smaller and medium sized sites must also be considered to ensure that a robust supply of sites are allocated which delivers growth in the right locations across the district throughout the entire Plan period. Furthermore, the reference within Policy S/6 to limiting residential development and redevelopment to up 30 dwellings in Minor Rural Centres should be removed. It would be more appropriate to consider housing numbers and densities on a case-by-case basis taking into account the local context and need for housing. This is particularly the case as the range and number of services, facilities and employment vary amongst different rural centres. A more flexible policy approach should be taken to new development in or adjacent to these better serviced rural centres as they can deliver growth in sustainable locations and make best use of existing services, facilities and employment opportunities.

The next iteration of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) for the Local Plan must ensure that it considers a wide range of development scenarios and that these are all taken through the subsequent stages of the Local Plan-making process. This will help ensure that the Local Plan process and its SA support the Submission Local Plan, which is highly likely to contain a hybrid of development scenarios. Six different spatial growth options are considered within the SA and Issues and Option consultation but with only high-level options assessed at this stage, there is substantial uncertainty over the outcomes of these options. Additional assessment should take place at another local plan stage, with full assessments within the SA Framework, before any options are fully dismissed. Without a full consideration of all these options which considers substantive detail of deliverable sites as well as broader locations for growth, there is a risk of the plans’ selected approach not being properly justified, and the plan being found unsound at examination.