Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

6.13 Local Plan policies can require a high standard of design for new residential development, leading from Government policy and guidance. Appropriately worded design policies should require a high quality design for new dwellings. This could include sustainable design principles including measures to improve the energy efficiency of new homes, water saving measures, use of efficient insultation material and heating systems, the reduction and recycling of construction materials, provision of appropriate amenity space and accessibility. Policy should not be prescriptive for precisely how it will be accomplished, it can set a policy-level, but developers should be able to use a host of options to achieve the target. A high standard of housing can also be achieved through requiring Health Impact Assessments on developments of a scale that can deliver meaningful health improvements to the built environment. 6.14 M Scott Properties Ltd has experience of working with the local community and Local Planning Authorities in preparing design briefs and design codes for Sites to agree the design principles prior to a more detailed scheme coming forward. M Scott Properties Ltd would be keen to explore the potential for this approach to be taken in respect of the emerging development proposals at Land at Frog End, Shepreth.

7.1 National Planning Policy advises (paragraph 102) that transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of plan-making and development proposals so that: a) the potential impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed; b) opportunities from existing or proposed transport infrastructure, and changing transport technology and usage, are realised – for example in relation to the scale, location or density of development that can be accommodated; c) opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use are identified and pursued; d) the environmental impacts of traffic and transport infrastructure can be identified, assessed and taken into account – including appropriate opportunities for avoiding and mitigating any adverse effects, and for net environmental gains; and e) patterns of movement, streets, parking and other transport considerations are integral to the design of schemes, and contribute to making high quality places. 7.2 The NPPF continues, at paragraph 103, in stating that the planning system should actively manage patterns of growth in support of the above objectives. “Significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes. This can help to reduce congestion and emissions, and improve air quality and public health.” 7.3 It is therefore important for the Local Plan to ensure developments create an environment where accessibility to day to day services and other facilities is easy and a choice of transport modes is available. This will enable the local community to choose the more socially inclusive and sustainable methods of travel. New developments need to be designed so that this can happen from first occupation when habits start to form. 7.4 Land at Frog End is an ideal example of a site that has the opportunities to accommodate additional growth and encourage a shift away from car use and towards more sustainable modes of transport. Further detail is provided in Section 2 of these representations and in the supporting Transport Appraisal prepared by Cannon Consulting Engineers.

Nothing chosen

8.1 The presumption in favour of sustainable development is recognised, however there should be a degree of flexibility in terms of allowing appropriate development outside of the settlement boundaries of villages, in particular, if development meets a particular local business or community need as set out within Para. 84 of the NPPF. 8.2 Sustainable development in rural areas is also supported under Para 78. of the NPPF, which requires planning policies to identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services.

Nothing chosen

8.3 There should be more flexibility when considering the scale and size of developments that are permitted within village boundaries. The Local Plan currently restricts the amount of development that is permitted in Minor Rural Centres (Policy S/9) to 30 dwellings; in Group Villages (Policy S10) to eight dwellings and in exceptional circumstances to 15 dwellings; and in Infill Villages (Policy S/11) to two dwellings and in exceptional circumstances to eight dwellings. These policies should not restrict development to a certain number of dwellings and should instead encourage an appropriate density depending on the context of the site that is being considered for development. Some sites might be capable of accommodating higher density development which can enable a more sustainable distribution of growth, particularly in the case of some villages within the district which are well connected in terms of being located on key transport corridors with access to rail, bus and cycleway links, thereby making them sustainable locations for development. A more flexible approach towards considering development in villages should therefore be used when allocating development sites and in the determination of planning applications. 8.4 There should also be more flexibility in terms of considering applications which are located outside village boundaries, provided the site is suitable in other terms including its access to transport and village services and provided it is not overly constrained in terms of other environmental designations.

8.6 The principle of spreading some growth (new homes and jobs) out to the villages is supported. The NPPF advises, at paragraph 78, that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. It adds that planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow 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. 8.7 The ability of new development to support rural communities is especially important given the loss of rural services experienced in recent years. The impact of these service losses on rural communities is accentuated when considering pre-existing low service levels compared to better served, urban areas. The ‘Dispersal: Villages’ option therefore presents an opportunity for sustainability enhancements within rural communities. 8.8 The approach of directing some growth to the villages should also take account of existing and proposed public transport improvements. With reference to Shepreth, whilst it is a relatively small village, it benefits from a railway station and being within the A10 corridor, plus close proximity to further facilities and services available in nearby villages.

8.9 Development is best suited to being located along transport corridors to promote sustainable development and transport issues should be considered from the earliest in accordance with Para. 102 of the NPPF. 8.10 M Scott Properties Ltd support the principle of siting development along transport corridors, in accordance with national planning policy and guidance which encourages development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes. 8.11 Land at Frog End, Shepreth is located within a key public transport corridor, being within easy walking distance of Shepreth railway station providing direct links to Cambridge (a journey time of just 12 minutes), excellent cycle connections by dedicated cycle paths to Melbourn and Cambridge and the A10 running to the east of the village where numerous transport improvements are planned to deliver high quality public transport infrastructure. It is in a highly sustainable location for growth.

Nothing chosen

The Greater Cambridge Planning Authority’s ambition is to submit a new Local Plan for examination by 2022. Given the complexities of the planning issues associated with Greater Cambridge and its future development, it is reasonable to assume that the examination process will not be straightforward. The original Local Plans were submitted in 2014 and were not adopted until 2018 and even then, were subject to a commitment to an immediate review. While the new Local Plan will be based on a lot of the adopted Local Plan work, a pragmatic time table for adoption from submission would be a minimum two year period resulting in adoption in 2024 at the earliest rather than 2023 as suggested. Paragraph 67 of the NPPF requires planning policies to identify specific deliverable sites for the first five years of the plan period and specific, developable sites (or broad locations for growth) for years 6 to 10 and where possible for years 11 to 15 of the plan period. The plan should therefore cover a minimum period of 15 years from adoption, if future development is to be based on a genuinely plan lead approach. While the currently adopted Local Plans may provide some certainty, subject to housing delivery and five year housing land supply issues, for the first five years, i.e. 2018 to 2023, the new Local Plans should follow on for the next 15 years, i.e. up to 2038 as a minimum. If as set out above the reality is that the new Local Plan is not adopted until at least 2024, 15 years on would take it to 2039. It is therefore concluded that a plan period to 2040 is an appropriate plan period, in particular having regard to climate change and the imperative to take action now. However, the plan needs to be visionary looking forward beyond 2040 in particular having regard to the Greater Cambridgeshire non statutory plan which covers the period to 2050 and the Government’s commitment to reach Net Zero Carbon by 2050. The plan needs to understand what the implications of Net Zero Carbon will be, and develop an appropriate strategy to ensure that this will be achievable within the plan area. Summary of Comments: We agree that the plan period to 2040 is appropriate although the plans vision should be beyond 2050.

According to the NPPF, the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) and the Planning Inspector’s Report on the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2018), the Greater Cambridge Local Plan should meet housing needs through the development of a range of housing sites. While the existing strategic allocations and new settlements are an important component of housing delivery, paragraph 68 of the NPPF advises that “Small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution to meeting the housing requirement of an area, and are often built-out relatively quickly.” The existing planning strategy places a significant reliance on the strategic allocations around the City and also the development of new settlements which the local plan inspectors raised concerns about. The new local plan should significantly increase the allocation of small to medium sized sites in the rural areas, helping to speed up the delivery of homes and allowing more flexibility. It is important that the rural areas are not left behind but allowed to prosper and thrive. It will be necessary for the new local plan to identify at least 10% of the housing allocations on sites no larger than one hectare (NPPF para 68 (a)). This coupled with medium sized allocations will provide greater potential to deliver a more diverse range of sites, better suited to local need, and better able to respond to market conditions. It will ensure that not all the growth is focused on the City but also supports the parallel growth of the rural economy. In terms of housing numbers the Cambridge & Peterborough Independent Economic Review identified that the recent growth in employment has not been matched by corresponding house-building and that ‘We are rapidly approaching the point where even high-value businesses may decide that being based in Cambridge is no longer attractive. If nothing is done, the damage to society from the continuing drift away of less well-paid workers may become irreparable’. To support the job growth, around 2,900 homes would need to be built each year to deliver a total of 66,700 homes between 2017 – 2040 rather than the 1,800 homes per year using the Government’s standard methodology. The PPG (paragraph 10) makes it clear that the standard method is only a minimum starting point. This higher level of growth is supported and necessary to help deliver the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough vision of doubling the total economic output of the area over 25 years. If the high target of 66,700 dwellings is used, then small sites of 1 hectare or less will need to deliver 6,670 dwellings. Given the rural nature of the plan area if 25 dwellings to the hectare were applied, this would equate to 266 sites. While it may be possible to identify some sites in and arround the City, it is likely the majority of the smaller sites will need to be found in and around the settlements covered in by polivies S/8, S/9, S/10 and S/11 of the existing South Cambridgeshire Local Plan which total 106 settlements. If these were to allocated proportionately it would equate to at least two sites per settlement. Obviously, if a larger proportion of sites are smaller than 1 hectare the total number of sites will be increased. Increased allocations on small and medium sized sites will increase delivery and help improve affordability through increased supply. A wider range of sites will also allow more flexibility in the mix, type and tenure of homes delivered. It will be important to take a flexible approach to development proposals designed to meet the needs of an aging population, a growing demographic group who’s needs will need to be accommodated over the plan period. The allocation of Scott properties site in Kneesworth would fulfil all the above objectives and while the sites individual contribution to the total housing need referred to above would be modest, it would make an effective and proportionate contribution to a specific need at the local level. Summary of Comments: The new Local Plan will need to allocate a significant number of new small and medium sized sites, to support prosperous rural economy.

Yes, strongly agree

The question asks whether or not the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service should plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government to provide flexibility and support the growing economy. The standard methodology indicates a need for 1,800 homes per year, or 40,900 homes for the suggested plan period of 2017-2040. However, as the draft Local Plan acknwoledges, the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Independent Economic Review (CPIER) 'showed that our recent growth has been faster than expected, and that growth is likely to continue. As a result, demand for new housing in this area has been exceptionally high and housebuilding has not kept up'. CPIER recommends that 'There should be a review of housing requirements based on the potential for higher growth in employment than currently forecast in the EEFM'. It states that 'No economy can achieve its potential without an adequate supply of housing, which must offer a range of types and price points for all society' and adds that it 'is concerned that Cambridgeshire & Peterborough is already runnning a very significant risk in this regard' and that risk is most acute in the Greater Cambridge area'. CPIER continues, stating that 'There has been insufficient housing development to meet demand. Average house prices and commuting have risen, choking labour supply while reducing the well-being of those forced to commute longer and longer distances [from more affordabe areas]'. CPIER concludes that 'we believe the accumulated deficit in Cambridgeshire & Peterborough is so acute that the local authorities should re-examine their assessments of housing need, setting higher numbers, which at least reflect previous under-delivery'. To support the job growth around 2,900 homes would need to be built each year to deliver a total of 66,700 homes between 2017 – 2040 rather than the 1,800 homes per year using the Government’s standard methodology. This higher level of growth is supported and necessary to help deliver the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough vision of doubling the total economic output of the area over 25 years. For these reasons, we strongly agrees that the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service 'should plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government, to provide flexibility to support the growing economy'. Summary of Comments: Strongly agree that 'we should plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required…, to provide flexibility…for the growing economy'.

The Plan acknowledges at paragraph 4.6.3 that the Plan must provide market and affordable homes that meet the varied needs of communities, including those who need specialist housing. It also recognises that providing suitable homes in the right locations for those looking to downsize will also enable family homes to be freed up, making best use of the housing that exists already. This approach is supported in both national policy and PPG. In particular the Housing for older and disabled people PPG, which was published after the adoption of the existing Local Plans, requires plan makers to consider the diverse needs of older people, including those approaching retirement. PPG also states that 'Plan-making authorities should set clear policies to address the housing needs of groups with particular needs such as older and disabled people' (Paragraph: 006 Reference ID: 63-006-20190626). We support the Plan's recognition of the need to provide suitable homes in the right locations. A lack of availability of suitable accommodation forces people to move away from friends and family to find a property more suited to their needs, or, to make costly adaptions to their own homes. In order to ensure an adequate provision of specialist housing, Scott Properties believe that as well as a housing mix policy to encourage a range of properties to suit a variety of needs, specific allocations should be made for specialist housing. This will ensure that a varied type of housing can come forward to meet the diverse needs of older people as set out in PPG and provide choice for those in later life, which can include: - Age-restricted general market housing - Retirement living or sheltered housing - Extra care housing or housing-with-care - Residential care homes and nursing homes To ensure a variety of the housing, as identified within PPG above is delivered within Greater Cambridge, the Plan should make specific allocations as opposed to just a generic housing mix policy that requires a diverse mix of housing. General housebuilders do not build specialist housing, and by providing housing that is deemed as suitable for older people that is also available to the general housing market does not address the varied and diverse needs of older people, or those with a disability. In addition, there are viability issues with providing specialist housing where the provision for market housing has been accepted, therefore this does not come forward on sites allocated for general purpose housing. We would draw attention to the recent interim findings of the Inspector following the examination of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan, which states: 'The Plan as submitted seeks to address the needs of older people through Policy SCLP5.8 Housing Mix. The Policy however, whilst supporting the provision of housing for older people, does not address clearly the significant need identified and would not be effective in delivering the market or affordable housing units for older people required. The Policy and supporting text should be amended to set out how the housing needs of older people will be addressed through the provision of housing and to boost the supply of this type of housing.' We would therefore encourage the Council to consider the merits of allocating specific sites for specialist accommodation within the Greater Cambridge Local Plan. This is particularly important given almost 22% of the population within Greater Cambridge will be aged 65 and over by 2035. It is vitally important that suitable housing is provided to meet the needs of an ageing population. c.25 single storey properties specifically designed for those aged 55 and over as well as those with or supporting someone with a disability are proposed on land to the south of the Causeway, Kneesworth. By providing this type of accommodation on an edge of village location, allows people wishing to move to a property better suited to their current or future needs, whilst remaining close to friends and family. Kneesworth is also an area with a defined need. As detailed in the Experian Demographic Report attached, there is a significant ageing population in Kneesworth and the immediate area, with 64% of the population growth in the local area in the next 5 years being in the 55 and over age category. The Site therefore presents an opportunity to make a modest, albeit required contribution to a locally defined housing need. Summary of Comments: The Plan should provide specialist housing allocations as well as a housing mix policy to ensure the needs of older and disabled people are met.