Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Question 45. What do you think about developing around the edge of Cambridge in the Green Belt? As part of the preparation of the Local Plan, a review of the Green Belt should be undertaken to assess whether land currently within the Cambridge Green Belt still serves the five purposes of the Green Belt as set out in paragraph 134 of the NPPF. Where land does not serve these five purposes or the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy, which is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open (NPPF paragraph 133), the Green Belt boundaries should be altered in the next Local Plan accordingly. Furthermore, Green Belt land that no longer serves the five purposes and is in locations which facilitate more sustainable patterns of development, for example, land within close proximity to public transport corridors or adjacent to some of the larger villages in the District, should be released. The established purposes of the Cambridge Green Belt are to: preserve the unique character of Cambridge as a compact, dynamic city with a thriving historic centre; maintain and enhance the quality of its setting; and prevent communities in the environs of Cambridge from merging into one another and with the city (para 2.30 of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018). The land at Thorpe, Huntingdon Road is currently located in the Cambridge Green Belt but no longer serves a Green Belt purpose (as outlined in Paragraph 134 of the NPPF), nor the three purposes of the Cambridge Green Belt outlined above. The reasoning for this is discussed below via addressing each purpose of the Green Belt. NPPF Five Green Belt Purposes a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; The Site is contained by existing and committed development; the site abuts the settlement framework for Girton to the west and north, and North West Cambridge development to the south. The land to the north-west of the site is not located in the Green Belt and is characterised as large residential plots which are also located off Huntingdon Road. This is shown on the plan at Appendix 1. The Site no longer serves this purpose. b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; The Site abuts the existing settlement framework of Girton to the west, and the new North West Cambridge development. Outline consent for this development was granted in February 2013 (REF: S/1886/11), which sought the development of up to 3,000 dwellings, 2,000 student bedspaces, 100,000m2 employment floorspace and other community facilities, including a Primary School (an amended version of the approved Masterplan can be found in Appendix 3, which located the land at Thorpe in relation to the North West Cambridge development). Following the granting of the outline consent, a series of Reserved Matters Applications have been submitted and approved for Phase 1 of the development, with the construction of this Phase now almost complete. 2.8 The Site therefore no longer serves this purpose. c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; 2.9 The site no longer assists in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. As mentioned above, the land to the south which previously constituted a countryside location is now to comprise a major, mixed use but residential-led development. To the east, west and north (beyond Huntingdon Road) lies existing residential development. Therefore, there is no surrounding countryside in which the land at Thorpe can protect from encroachment. As a result, the site fails to meet this Green Belt purpose. d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; 2.10 It can also be demonstrated that the site does not preserve the setting and special character of historic towns. The supporting text to adopted South Cambridgeshire Policy S/4 states that one of the established purposes of the Cambridge Green Belt is to ‘preserve the unique character of Cambridge as a compact, dynamic city with a thriving historic centre’. The text continues that there are a number of factors which define the special character of Cambridge and its setting, which include the following: ● Key views of Cambridge from the surrounding countryside; ● A soft green edge to the city; ● A distinctive urban edge; ● Green corridors penetrating into the city; ● Designated sites and other features contributing positively to the character of the landscape setting; ● The distribution, physical separation, setting, scale and character of Green Belt villages; and ● A landscape that retains a strong rural character. 2.11 It is considered that the land at Thorpe fails to meet the majority of the above factors which contribute to the special historic character of Cambridge. For example, given that the site is heavily screened by dense vegetation, no key views of Cambridge can be observed from the land. Meanwhile, the land does not form part of the distinctive urban edge to Cambridge, considering the residential development and open space associated with the North West Cambridge development which lies between the site and the built-up edge of Cambridge. There are also no green corridors within the vicinity of the site and, while the site itself could be viewed as having a rural character when one considers the mature vegetation on-site, the surrounding residential land (with a particular regard to the settlement of Girton to the west and north, as well as the North West Cambridge development to the south) significantly urbanises this part of the landscape. For all of these reasons, it is reasonable to deduce that the site does little to preserve the setting and special character of Cambridge. 2.12 All the above points are reinforced by the findings of the Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council Inner Green Belt Boundary Study (2012), which indicate that development of the site would have an insignificant impact on the Green Belt. 2.13 Green Belt land which facilitates more sustainable patterns of development should be released in order to make a positive contribution towards reducing climate impacts. Indeed, the land at Thorpe benefits from being located within 15m from a bus stop which is served by both the Citi 5 and 6 bus services, which in turn provide regular journeys to Cambridge, the boundary of which is less than 500 metres from the Site. In addition, Cambridge can be easily accessed via bicycle and on foot from this location, due to segregated cycle paths and footpaths running along Huntingdon Road through to Castle Street. As it is evident that the land at Thorpe is situated in a location which benefits from access to regular public transport and thus its development would result in a more sustainable pattern of development, it would be logical to release the site from the Green Belt, especially when one also considers how the site fails to meet the purposes of the Green Belt. 2.14 Notwithstanding the underlying purposes of the Green Belt (Para. 134 of the NPPF), where it can be demonstrated that appropriate development can be brought forward in the Green Belt, sites should be considered within the context of their individual circumstances. Applications should be considered in the context of Para. 136 of the NPPF including an assessment as to whether it can be demonstrated that a proposed development would bring substantial benefits, outweighing the loss of Green Belt land and thereby demonstrate exceptional circumstances needed to justify Green Belt release. In accordance with Para. 138, Green Belt boundaries should be reviewed to reflect the need to promote sustainable patterns of development. If the release of Green Belt can facilitate more sustainable patterns of development, particularly if the land has been previously developed or is well-served by public transport, there should be policy provision to allow for a consideration of this in order to determine Green Belt planning applications within the emerging Local Plan. 2.15 Although it has been demonstrated that the land at Thorpe does not serve a Green Belt purpose, it is important to note that no single solution will deliver a sound Local Plan; rather, a combination of approaches to the distribution of spatial growth will be necessary in order to establish the appropriate locations of new housing and employment development in the district. A hybrid approach will be required, but underpinned with a focus on transport corridors and accessible areas, such as the Land at Thorpe. 2.16 Notwithstanding the above, the NPPF is clear at paragraphs 136 and 137 that Green Belt boundaries should only be amended in exceptional circumstances once it has been established that all other reasonable options for meeting identified needs have been examined. Key to these considerations is that only reasonable options for meeting needs should be considered. This should not only take account of the level of needs but where those needs are within the Greater Cambridge area. It should be reminded, for example, that the CPIER (2018) report recommends that it may be necessary to deliver between 6,000 to 8,000 dwellings annually over the next 20 years (albeit this is across the whole of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough) in order to combat the potential negative local and national economic impacts associated with a constrained housing supply. Given, however, Cambridge’s potential economic growth it would be logical to site the bulk of this housing need within the Greater Cambridge Authority Area. 2.17 Given the potential level of need in the Greater Cambridge area, it is evident that there are exceptional circumstances that will require the Council to amend Green Belt boundaries in order to meet its housing need. 2.18 It is suggested that a diverse approach to delivering new development, including amendment of Green Belt boundaries, would potentially provide for the most sustainable patterns of development and be consistent with paragraph 138 of the NPPF. 2.19 For all of the above reasons, it has been demonstrated that the land at Thorpe should be released from the Green Belt due to it no longer contributing to the five Green Belt Purposes and comprising a location where, if developed, would facilitate a more sustainable pattern of development. An illustration of how this could look in the emerging Proposals Map is provided in Appendix 4, which is based on the Adopted Inset Map for Girton (Number 38).