Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

5.4 The increased focus on climate change is welcomed. Climate change policy and good practice is changing quickly, and the plan will need to build in suitable flexibility to accommodate these changes within the lifetime of the plan. Climate change scenarios predict extensive changes by 2050, much of which is dependent on government and human action so there is substantial uncertainty over outcomes. 5.5 A needlessly stringent policy may inadvertently impede progress towards later years in the plan, or undermine results by not allowing for site-specific refinement. For example, policy for electric vehicle charging points should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate that quickly changing technology, as well the current grid challenges in implemented EV charging places. Energy policies should include flexibility for changing legislation, and technology, as well as the opportunity to refine a plan-wide policy for site specifics. As the Zero Carbon Futures Symposium Report (2019) submitted within the evidence base notes on page 10: where targets are too limited, and without consideration of project contexts, policy can drive dysfunctional behaviour such as photovoltaic solar panels being installed on North facing roofs merely to achieve policy compliance not to produce effective carbon reductions. 5.6 Allowing for changing technologies and approaches should also help with viability as technology and approaches improve and are more widely adopted, thereby reducing costs. Escalating targets and policies may be able to accommodate these changes, while providing clarity to developers on the costs of development over time. 5.7 The local plan Sustainability Appraisal (SA) should address variable climate change scenarios, as we would expect that different climate change scenarios will be of interest at examination. Lack of rigorous assessment of these scenarios in the SA could lead to the plan being found unsound. 5.8 The site is also located in a sustainable location, whereby future residents would not be reliant on the private car for their daily needs. Impington and Histon is one of the largest villages in the District. It is one of the most sustainable settlements combined having a wide range of services and facilities within walking and cycling distance of the site and the proposals look to enhance pedestrian connectivity into the centre of the village.

Greater Cambridge is a leading local authority on climate change policy, as demonstrated by the early declaration of a climate change emergency and also the newly adopted Sustainable Development SPD. This leadership should continue, as it is central to the sustainable development of Cambridge, leading to better outcomes for people, the environment, and for economic development. It should be borne in mind that Cambridge's knowledge economy demands increasingly high sustainability standards: with health and wellbeing, informed by this need to minimise climate change, as a key focus for its continuing economic development. This should remain a priority as part of a policy framework that recognises climate change as a key part of sustainable development across social, environmental and economic objectives.

Nothing chosen

A policy approach with multiple options for delivering net zero carbon is likely to be most effective in delivering development, in addition to carbon neutrality. A multi-pronged approach should allow different solutions for different developments, reflecting context. For example, for some developments, Passivhaus energy standards may be achievable (going well above and beyond minimums set out in the Building Regulations), but for others, Building Regulations may need to be followed but an offset solution, such as a green bond or offset fund, could be used to achieve a net carbon reduction. Possible options need to be worked up in more detail as the Plan progresses and must build in flexibility.

To form a flexible policy framework, so as not to stifle the benefits of new technology or modern methods of construction.

5.12 This Local Plan must deliver effective policy which protects and enhances natural capital. We support delivery of net gain for new development. Such policy must be flexible enough to enable creative and cost-effective solutions for the delivery of net gain and support the Vision for the Natural Future of Cambridgeshire in 2050 as outlined by Natural Cambridgeshire and affiliated organisations. An off-site net gain solution should be clearly allowed for by policy. While it is a Local Plan priority as a part of one of the four big themes, the Local Plan policy must allow for a planning judgement and balanced decision to allow for site and development specific issues to be taken into account. 5.13 The site provides an opportunity to help improve the natural environment and to also protect existing ecological features within the surrounding area. The proposals will incorporate and enhance the existing boundary planting which defines the site and provides screening of views, whilst creating an appropriate settlement edge. Further vegetation and tree planting are also proposed which will increase habitat opportunities within the site, connecting with existing linear boundary vegetation and trees.

5.14 This should come through from an up-to-date base assessment of Greater Cambridge assets, which leads to a Local Plan wide (and beyond) strategy. Development proposals can then be shaped around the identified priorities. As part of a policy framework that allows for off-site mitigation and off-site net gain enhancements can be used to improve the wider green space network.

5.15 The new Local Plan must ensure that policy in this matter is sufficiently flexible to accommodate the required biodiversity net gain in the most effective and efficient way for each development, with both on-site and off-site solutions possible. 5.16 Land to the rear of Woodcock Close and St George’s Way presents an opportunity to deliver biodiversity net gains. This can be achieved through a sensitively landscape-led designed approach retaining and improving existing ecological features.

Nothing chosen

5.17 Yes. With the right trees, in the right areas. A policy framework to increase tree cover, but which allows for a planning balance within decision-making to enable the benefits and impacts of each development to be assessed is necessary. 5.18 This could be part of an on-site/off-site solution, which could generate notable s106 funds to achieve significant, meaningful and long-term planted and ecological areas. Ecological outcomes rather than an unconditional focus on native species should be considered in new planting.

5.19 Policies should highlight wellbeing and social inclusion as a key priority for new developments. 5.20 Good growth that promotes wellbeing (including health) should be inclusive and take account of anti-poverty measures such as: ● Energy efficient homes and employment space that deliver low energy and water bills; ● Access and walkability to local services and facilities ● Allow for a wide range of social infrastructure and open space in new developments that provide pathways to free (i.e. no charge to the user) opportunities for improved health outcomes; ● Promotion of low-cost housing proportionate to income in the area; ● Promotion of ‘fully accessible’ social housing, within active travel of employment;

5.21 The Local Plan could help enable communities to shape new development proposals through creating policies and procedures that encourage meaningful consultation and require developers to demonstrate how schemes have been influenced by local communities. 5.22 This can be achieved from meaningful engagement with the local community to gain their input into the design of the proposed development, including the site layout, house types and provision of specific local infrastructure or contributions towards this.