Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Enforced design codes. A presumption that developments must improve the overall quality of the built environment. Work collaboratively at all levels of planning decision-makers to ensure feedback is fully understood.

As we found with the Neighbourhood Plan there are many more buildings with a historical interest than those which are listed. Need a catalogue of each community (produced by the community) of the entire gamut locally and the relative importance and what needs preserving about each (i.e. that is not always everything but may be a view from a particular direction). Ensure there is interest and commitment to preserve them. Encourage new ideas to be considered on adaptation required. Reconsider and re-calibrate what we value and promote these values in society to balance our current focus on achieving the bottom line

Effective design panels, detailed design guides - and all before the developers are over-committed to their ideas. There are some great architects in our communities that deliver small/one-off developments - help them contribute to bigger ones. Make available information for people who are promoting and implementing new development. Decrease cost of best materials and carbon neutral materials, so that people feel able to make the best choices. Northstowe 2 and 3 demonstrates what can be done but Northstowe 1 and Orchard Park show the perils. Greater Cambridge needs to gather some best practice guidance and promulgate BEFORE the developers start producing their plans. Once they have invested in a design, they have financial imperatives to reduce costs of re-designing.

Somewhat important

Important in the sense that the requirement for new housing is driven by need to catch up with previous economic development and then match an ever increasing (Unrealistic given economic history?) high rate of growth. Nevertheless, where the jobs growth will occur should drive the location of development, as opposed to current Plan that have the major jobs growth to the South of Cambridge and major growth in housing (Darwin green, Sewage treatment works, Waterbeach, Northstowe, Wing Development and Cambridge airfield) necessitating travel to work through a city ill equipped and with an existing infrastructure deficit. Developers will not pay the cost of the more complicated infrastructure, so emphasis should be in the new plan on housing growth closer to the new jobs. Re-consider and re-collaborate what we value and promote these values at all levels other than just achieving a large wage pack and high levels of income. Consider the difference between happiness and joy as we possibly are at the stage where more time spent with families and working to promote our communities is more important than bottom line alone AND in fact may in the longer-term feed into a more sustainable bottom line

The anticipated growth in high and bio tech will need support from supply industries (e.g. Lab equipment supplies, data analysis, software) and the employees will need all the usual supply and support services for general living (garage services, shops, building supplies etc.) Both will be needed. Lower tech space also required as being employed/felt useful is critical to personal wellbeing - we need to ensure that those who have skills elsewhere than high tech have opportunities. As with many of the topics covered by all these questions a regular review of requirements should be undertaken to ensure the forecasted development align with actuals.

In Histon & Impington employment space was lost through 2005 to 2018 such that the number of local jobs (and those not requiring employees to fly a desk so offering choice and diversity). The developers underwent a “marketing” campaign to show no take up but there was no option to evaluate the campaign and its adequacy. A policy to require an agency nominated by the DC to properly market the site might provide some protection. Unfortunately, changing from employment to housing is too profitable for the developers. Maybe an SPD that includes a payment for each job lost on the site might reset the balance? Ensure that we are clear as to where demand for different types of industries should be located in the village by consulting with front-line Parish Council and residents. Local businesses should be encouraged to improve their carbon footprint under the Climate Emergency that has been called out by the local councils. Information and grants to allow this to happen should be made available and given transparency by Councillors and/or Climate Change experts attending local businesses and giving talks.

SCDC said a couple of years ago that a boy leaving school with few qualifications in this area has a lower life chance than a similar boy in Newcastle. The Plan MUST address this if it is to be on behalf of the existing population. At the same time the high-end requiring businesses need to be encouraged for the prosperity of the area. As ever, balance. Option of manufacturing offers wider choice for school leavers who are not going into high tech. More manufacturing would also create jobs. National ITB like solution can be supported by local initiatives. Cluster small groups of teams from the same company or even people from different organisations working together locally providing knowledge transfer and knowledge sharing of methodologies such as Agile/Lean. Offices to be served by Coaches and Subject Matter experts partnering together to share experiences and mentoring staff, encouraging them to embrace change and learning. As South Cambridge District Council has thriving science and business parks increasing expertise and knowledge in these fields could make this area a hub for that expertise. Every organisation has a community arm that encourages people to know and work in their community. By working in this way locally we can improve Net Zero Carbon and improve our communities and increase social inclusion

As was discovered by the consultants working on the economic plan for Northstowe, high tech businesses really want to cluster close together. Northstowe was found to be too distant from Cambridge. Zoning or other means of encouraging moving further out may more likely result in them going to other hubs. Having employment opportunities where people live (as well as facilitating increased working from home) will reduce infrastructure, increase costs and be a major plus for reducing carbon footprint.

Nothing chosen

Sustainability, environmental (travel) absolute issues. IF (and only if) those work, let’s be flexible. One special case could be retail. Protecting in local centres may reduce travel (and carbon) costs. There appears to be good frameworks in place including the Neighbourhood plan and the Village Design statement to provide a framework around the uses we allow. These documents along with the Local Plan should be used to confirm the changes that can be made, and they should be evolved as circumstances change our flexibility. The principles around net carbon zero, preserving our heritage and building for the future generations given the increase in population should all be front-loaded so we do not find ourselves making poor decisions due to the fact decisions are not made until we reach crisis point. Good Planning is needed. Continuous improvement is also a good tool around this topic.

Environmentally acceptable (train, coach) tourism, great - particularly if they want to stay to see more. Reducing capacity (e.g. coach parks and hotels) are possible measures. Beware encouraging the day tripper (whose coaches clog up, especially if they must go out and come back in again to park) who spends little here versus the overnight visitor. Some areas outside of the city could be better marketed which are currently run-down and we should look at a holistic approach to Tourism for our region of Greater Cambridgeshire Collect and use the data around numbers and requirements to identify our optimum number of tourists and manage this accordingly.