Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

9.7.1 Gladman would in principle be supportive of the Local Plan providing for growth on the edge of Cambridge, outside of the Green Belt. Locations on the edge of Cambridge are likely to be situated on key transport routes leading into the city therefore providing sustainable transport opportunities in order to access jobs and key facilities and services. 9.7.2 Notwithstanding the support for this approach, it is recognised that the available land on the edge of Cambridge outside of the Green Belt is limited and should not be progressed as a strategy in isolation. The delivery of housing in other parts of the plan area will be necessary in order to meet housing needs.

9.8.1 As part of the process of preparing a new Local Plan, the Councils should undertake a detailed review of the Green Belt around Cambridge. In terms of directing growth to these areas, this would need to be dependent on the outcomes of the Green Belt review and also consideration of alternative options available within the plan area to deliver the necessary scale of growth. 9.8.2 Paragraph 136 of the NPPF (2019) states “Once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified, through the preparation or updating of plans. Strategic policies should establish the need for any changes to Green Belt boundaries, having regard to their intended permanence in the long term, so they can endure beyond the plan period…” 9.8.3 As part of plan preparation Gladman believe this option is something that should be given further consideration and that a robust Green Belt assessment will be needed to inform any strategy in relation to releasing land for the Green Belt for development. The Council will need to weigh up the potential release of Green Belt land against other reasonable alternatives available across the plan area in order to deliver the necessary scale of housing. 9.8.4 Paragraph 137 of the NPPF relates to the need to consider reasonable alternatives in relation to the exceptional circumstances to justify amending the Green Belt boundaries. Gladman note that this should not only take account of the overall levels of housing need but also where those needs are within Greater Cambridge. Expecting unrealistic options to meet these needs in order to avoid amending the Green Belt boundaries would not be an appropriate response. 9.8.5 Given the level of housing need across Greater Cambridge, Gladman consider it is likely that the exceptional circumstances will exist and that a degree of amendments to Green Belt boundaries will be required through the new Local Plan.

9.9.1 As outlined above, South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City have got a history of including new settlements as one key component of a balanced strategy and a number of these are currently delivering housing across the area. Gladman believe that moving forwards, given the scale of growth required across the plan area that new settlements should continue to play an important role in delivering much needed housing. Gladman remind the Council that although these types of sites can play a key role, it is critical that they form part of a strategy which offers a range of sites, both in terms of size and location across the whole plan area. The Council need to avoid an over reliance on delivery from this type of large-scale site. 9.9.2 It is important that through the plan preparation, the Councils have a detailed understanding of any potential new settlements and the specific site complexities that may impact on delivery. Ensuring the Plan is realistic in terms of scale and timeframes for delivery will be crucial for ensuring the effectiveness of the plan as a whole. 9.9.3 In principle, Gladman are supportive of a spatial strategy incorporating new settlements, provided the new settlement(s) is in the right location, the assumptions regarding delivery are realistic and that the approach is combined with other elements to ensure housing delivery across the plan area and over the plan period. For example, the plan would need to balance new settlements with growth to a range of settlements allowing small/ medium sized sites to come forward earlier in the plan period. 9.9.4 With regards to the points made above, Gladman refer to paragraph 72 of the NPPF (2019) which states: “The supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed, and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities. Working with the support of their communities, and with other authorities if appropriate, strategic policy-making authorities should identify suitable locations for such development where this can help to meet identified needs in a sustainable way…”

9.10.1 Gladman consider it essential that the new Local Plan directs meaningful growth to the villages, and that this needs to include not just the Main Rural Villages and Minor Rural Villages but also the Group Villages. The villages across Greater Cambridge offer a range of sustainable development opportunities and growth in these types of locations is needed in order to maintain their vitality and viability. 9.10.2 It is important to consider existing services and facilities in a settlement when assessing their suitability for accommodating new growth. Daily needs are particularly important with a primary school, shop and access to public transport being the key considerations. It must be recognised that there may be an ability, through new development, to improve some of these services and facilities, particularly access to public transport, that should be considered through any settlement hierarchy exercise as well as the role that new development can play in ensuring these facilities are maintained and not lost because of lack of support. 9.10.3 Whilst it is recognised that some of the villages across the plan area are small scale and consideration of setting and character of the settlement is important, these issues must be balanced against the needs of the local community for new housing, including affordable housing and the need to ensure the long term viability of services and facilities in the village. It should also be recognised that increasing the number of sites across the plan area with allocations for residential development will increase the rate of housing completions. 9.10.4 The inclusion of an element of dispersed growth to the villages within the new Local Plan, will provide a suite of sites that are capable of delivering in the short to medium term which would complement other elements of an overall growth strategy. 9.10.5 With regards to the above comments, Gladman refer to paragraph 78 of the NPPF which states: “To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to growth and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.

9.11.1 Gladman are supportive of the Councils siting an element of growth along key transport corridors due to the significant sustainability benefits that this would bring with it. Notwithstanding this support, Gladman recognise that it will not be possible or appropriate to direct all of the necessary growth to these locations and like the other approaches identified in the consultation document, a combination of elements is likely to be the most appropriate strategy. 9.11.2 Gladman also recognise the importance of maximising growth opportunities in close proximity to sustainable transport options. An example of this being directing a degree of growth to villages with train stations which offer regular services to higher order settlements.

No choices made

Response to Question 42 9.5.1 Overall Gladman submit that the Greater Cambridge Local Plan will need a balanced strategy, including a variety of different elements to ensure delivery over the course of the plan period and to meet the varying needs across the plan area. It will be important that the Councils do not place an over reliance on just one type of approach as this could hinder delivery of much needed housing. 9.5.2 In this regard, Gladman refer to the CPIER Final report and reference made within this to the blended spatial strategy. This document states “what is clear is that none of these approaches on their own are likely to work – there is a need for balance and flexibility to ensure that urban form best meets the needs of residents, businesses and the environment.”4 The CPIER report provides clear support for a balanced spatial strategy which includes a number of elements in combination to ensure needs are met and delivery occurs over the course of the plan period rather than an over reliance on one approach. 9.5.3 In allocating sites the Councils should be mindful that to maximize housing supply the widest possible range of sites, by size and market location are required so that house builders of all types and sizes have access to suitable land in order to offer the widest possible range of products. The key to increased housing supply is the number of sales outlets. Whilst some SUEs may have multiple outlets, in general increasing the number of sales outlets available means increasing the number of housing sites. The maximum delivery is achieved not just because there are more sales outlets but because the widest possible range of products and locations are available to meet the widest possible range of demand. In summary a wider variety of sites in the widest possible range of locations ensures all types of house builder have access to suitable land which in turn increases housing delivery. 9.5.4 Whilst maximising delivery in a growth location such as this is of fundamental importance this will also need to be balanced against ensuring that the locations and types of growth proposed are sustainable. The distribution of development should not be a politically driven decision, but rather one based on robust evidence and consideration of a number of factors.