Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

No specific comments but it is our experience that the Design Review Panel is not effective. Firstly, the process does not work well for outline planning applications. Secondly, the Panel is generally negative in their stance and seldom promote positive messages. The system needs to be reviewed to bring in far more positive and encouraging approaches rather than vague criticism.

Very important

It is very important if the levels of growth contemplated are to be achieved, including the Combined Authority vision of doubling economic output. There is no point in planning for high levels of job growth and economic if there is not a related high levels of new housebuilding Furthermore, and as set out under various other questions, we consider that key rural villages such as Whittlesford, due to its proximity to major employment and on a public transport corridor, should play a role in accommodating some of the future housing and economic growth through appropriate land residential allocations.

All types.

Yes, in appropriate circumstances – including where the site is specifically allocated for employment - but not if the business is defunct, the premises unsuitable for current needs or the site area very small.

The area south of Cambridge continues to be attractive to certain employment sectors and that will continue so there will be pressure for such further development. It is therefore better to properly plan for this with an appropriate level of new housing based around existing settlements, in close proximity to existing employment sites and with appropriate non-car means of transport.

We have no specific comments, but the more consultation that is carried out and the greater detail that it is undertaken in, then the longer the consultation process.

There is a limit as to how much a Local Plan can achieve (as opposed to legislative or fiscal measures) but we suggest the Plan should concentrate on the following themes: • Locating new residential developments of any scale close to existing and proposed employment areas; • Locating development close to Cambridge and in key village settlements, such as Histon; • Locating development in existing and proposed transport corridors; • Encouraging new tree planting in all new developments.

No, somewhat disagree

The adopted Local Plan already contains policy objectives relating to such matters. There needs to be a recognition that such initiatives will add to the cost of new development (both housing and commercial) and that, ultimately, such initiatives will feed into higher house prices and employment rents/values. That may be fine, but its effects do need to be considered so overall development viability must be assessed. It is not possible for the planning authorities to insist on high levels of affordable housing provision (i.e. 40%) and also weigh new development with additional costs associated with climate adaptation and resilience features. There will be a financial impact if policy requires such matters.

On the assumption that there will be enhanced public transport services in the future, then more consideration could be given to car-free developments or residential schemes with lower parking standards in suitable locations. New tree planting should be positively encouraged in all developments and there should be an ambitious Plan-wide network of longer distance footpath/cycleways linking villages to Cambridge and key employment areas Low carbon energy generation should be encouraged but should not be mandatory.

The Plan should continue as per the current situation – protect important natural areas and, where appropriate, encourage the provision of new greenspace associated with large scale development. Cambridge itself would benefit from further large-scale greenspace on its periphery - i.e. areas large enough to serve the whole population. There are potential opportunities to achieve major new green infrastructure associated with Green Belt release.