Question 6. Do you agree with the potential big themes for the Local Plan?
Only in part. The net zero carbon theme is an aspirational target for a timeframe well beyond the life of the Plan. The Plan area faces serious challenges now, in terms of transport and affordable housing and the priority should be to address those immediate issues rather than such long-term aspirations. The achievement of net zero carbon will be influenced to a far greater degree by national legislation and fiscal measures rather than Local Plan policy. The four themes do not adequately affect housing affordability in Greater Cambridge which is a major issue for the population and for employers seeking to recruit new staff in that area.
No uploaded files for public display
Pigeon broadly agree with the big themes identified. However, it is considered that these themes need to be expanded to include and / or more clearly link to jobs, homes and infrastructure. The provision of the jobs, homes and infrastructure to meet identified needs is a fundamental requirement of Plan Making as set out in Section 2 of the NPPF. There is a risk that by describing and placing the focus on the four big themes currently set out, that the hard realities of delivering homes, jobs and infrastructure will be overlooked by some who are less supportive of the principles of growth in the area. The cover picture on the consultation document highlights the four big themes clearly, whilst the more fundamental drivers for change – jobs, homes, infrastructure growth are illustrated as being below ground level. This could lead many to engage with the important ‘green’ agenda in an aspirational way, without due attention to the ’growth’ agenda and appreciating the requirement for the Plan to meet the needs for new homes, jobs and infrastructure that are fundamental requirements of a ‘sound’ Local Plan. We consider that the conversation needs to be managed positively to make sure that those engaging in the process understand the integrated ‘push and pull’ of the growth and green agendas.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Local Energy production should be another big theme
No uploaded files for public display
At the top of this section sustainable development is mentioned as being split into three strands- social, economic and environmental. None of the outlined potential big themes include any aspect of economics and affordability in them. A lot of the well being and social inclusion issues are rooted in economic aspects and affordability of housing.
No uploaded files for public display
Disagree. The four potential big themes are related to the social and environmental objectives of sustainable development and are supported. However, there is no economic theme, despite the fact that the Cambridge and Peterborough Devolution Deal commits the authorities in the area to planning to double economic output by 2040 and Greater Cambridge will have a significant role in delivering that commitment. It is requested that there emerging GCLP must include a specific economic theme. It is requested that the relationship between the big themes and the overarching theme of sustainable development is however further explained in the emerging GCLP. It is also suggested that additional issues are referred to under the well-being and social inclusion theme. Paragraph 8 of the NPPF identifies the three overarching objectives of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental), and notes that these objectives are interdependent and suggests that they need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways. The NPPF is clearly framed such that sustainable development is the overarching theme of the planning system to which all other themes relate. It is requested that sustainable development is identified as the overarching theme, to be consistent with the approach in Paragraph 8 of the NPPF, and in order to avoid one of the identified big themes (and the requested additional economic theme) being give greater importance than another; in the response to Question 7 it is suggested that the big themes are not prioritised. It is noted that the social strand of sustainable development (contained in Paragraph 8 of the NPPF) specifically relates meeting housing needs with strong, vibrant and healthy communities. There are substantial affordability issues in Greater Cambridge associated with the high cost of buying and renting housing, and those that cannot afford to live in Cambridge or South Cambridgeshire close to employment opportunities having to endure longer and unsustainable commuting. Therefore, it is requested that meeting housing and affordable housing needs in a sustainable manner is specifically referred to in the well-being and social inclusion theme.
No uploaded files for public display
There is another vital theme that has not been given enough attention, namely: limits to growth. Many local residents believe that growth has been too fast, and poorly planned. The local economy cannot go on expanding exponentially, or the reasons why we like living here will be destroyed. I propose that no increase in land use for private housing or employment, beyond that already agreed, should be permitted unless: 1. There is a comprehensive plan for net zero carbon in Greater Cambridge by the end of the plan period (I propose 2035). 2. Current shortages in the provision of public services (including transportation systems and social housing) are remedied, and new provision is planned and delivered in proportion to population growth. 3. The objectives of the existing four big themes proposed in the consultation document will also be achieved. At the Big Debate, the Chief Planning Officer said that the impacts of different levels or growth was being studied. This information is vital in taking a view of what level of growth is acceptable. When will it be published?
No uploaded files for public display
I would like you to protect trees far more robustly than you do at the moment. Not only are you demolishing trees to put in new busways, but you are taking away the trees that are so vitally needed to protect communities from pollution. This does not fit with modern ways of thinking, and they need far greater protection, particularly when the plans relate to adding more pollutants to the atmosphere. Secondly I'd like to see planning policies that make it compulsory for builders to set aside a certain amount of each development for trees and greenspace in the same way that they are required to build a certain ratio of social housing. Currently they squeeze as many properties onto a site as possible, with no consideration for green space.
No uploaded files for public display
It's not quite clear how the 4 big themes fit with the 3 needs in the diagram. We should consider carefully how much expansion in these we really need and in what timescale. There's a feeling that things are moving too fast and that other areas might be left further behind. What's essential is that infrastructure is ready before the homes and jobs start to be filled. Sites where this is not ready should be ruled out! If not, it's likely that communities will not be cohesive and that there will be excessive travel by unsustainable means.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
I agree with these although I don't think great places is well named, it doesn't immediately make it clear what it relates to. I agree that current places should be protected.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
I strongly agree with the themes Climate change & Biodiversity and green spaces. I agree with the theme Wellbeing and social inclusion, but would like to see it extended to how the plan can help distribute more fairly the benefits of existing wealth (rather than merely how the plan can help spread the benefits of new growth). The theme of Great places sounds, well, great! But what does “great” mean? I would like to see a tighter definition of this theme because “great” is so subjective. Section 4.4 about Great places, claims “we have a track record as a place where contemporary design and the historic environment co-exist in harmony” which indicates complacency in a city where we have recently been subjected to eyesores such as the hideous Marque building on Hills Road (shortlisted for the Carbuncle Cup - should have won) and those ridiculous neoclassical columns outside the University Arms hotel neither of which are in harmony with any city building in the public realm that I can think of.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
I agree with the themes chosen but transport is also a big theme.
No uploaded files for public display
Yes the themes are broadly appropriate but they are not equally balanced. The themes of Wellbeing and Social Inclusion risk being de-prioritised because there is no equivalent "end target" akin to the "zero-carbon" for Climate Change. This should ideally be managed through setting equivalent targets for the other objectives but that is difficult - therefore in the alternative it is necessary to assure that Climate Change and Biodiversity do not "drive" the plan.
No uploaded files for public display
No. The net zero carbon theme is an aspirational target for a timeframe beyond the life of the new Local Plan. The Local Plan area faces serious challenges at present in terms of transport and affordable housing for example therefore the priority should be to address those immediate issues rather than such long-term aspirations. The achievement of net zero carbon will be influenced to a far greater degree by national legislation and fiscal measures rather than local plan policy. Secondly, the four themes do not adequately affect housing affordability in Cambridgeshire which is a major issue for the population and for employers seeking to recruit new staff in the Cambridge area close to key business/research locations.
No uploaded files for public display
The Trumpington Residents’ Association 'agrees' with the four themes, with the proviso that more attention should have been given to the climate change and biodiversity themes. In addition, growth and the consequences of growth should have been treated as a theme in its own right. There should have been be a fuller discussion about the options that we have for the overall level of growth, which should now be a priority in the next stages of consultation. See also our response to questions 24 and 31.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
The correct term is Climate Crisis. You declared an emergency, remember! Climate crisis and biodiversity are the most important things, along with water security, air pollution and all other environmental issues that are not covered under those 2 categories. Failing to tackle these issues will absolutely DESTROY everyone's wellbeing, to the point of killing them, particularly vulnerable groups, so this also solves the important issues of wellbeing/inclusion. "Great Places" are not nearly such a priority at all. We need to be in survival mode now, not worrying about aesthetics or whatever. Like in wartime, when everyone blacked out their windows and dug up their gardens. This is an emergency.
No uploaded files for public display
Climate change, biodiversity and green space, wellbeing and social exclusion and great places are all important themes, but are not comprehensive - the objectives as defined in the NPPF are more appropriate for the local plan: "Achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways (so that opportunities can be taken to secure net gains across each of the different objectives): a) an economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and by identifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure; b) a social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering a well-designed and safe built environment, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being; and c) an environmental objective – to contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, helping to improve biodiversity, using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy." How will the Councils demonstrate to Planning Inspectors that the plan is sound, and applies a presumption in favour of sustainable development, unless social and environmental objectives are balanced with those for economic development? The Plan should be employment-led and contain an economic development theme: - The success of Cambridge’s economy is in the national interest. - The Councils have already agreed a goal to double the total economic output of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough area over 25 years (measured as Gross Value Added) as part of the 2015 Devolution Agreement with government that created the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority. - The 2018 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Independent Economic Review (CPIER) identified that recent employment growth has been faster than anticipated. It considered future scenarios regarding continuation of that growth, including those that achieve the target to double GVA over 25 years. - The Councils should be ambitious - CPIER considered that: " - ‘the aim of doubling GVA in this area by 2040 is realistic, and will be achieved in part by attracting knowledge-intensive businesses which would not locate elsewhere in the UK. Success here is of national significance. But it will only be attained if there is more ambition with regard to the development of new housing, and a careful prioritisation of infrastructure projects.’ (CPIER Final Report, September 2018, Preface) - Cambridge is at a decisive moment in its history where it must choose whether it wants to once again reshape itself for growth, or let itself stagnate and potentially wither. We believe the latter would be disastrous for its people and the UK economy. Therefore, we conclude that improvements in infrastructure, and further development, must start in and around Cambridge. (Executive Summary, Page 9) - The UK Government should adopt a ‘Cambridge or overseas’ mentality towards knowledge-intensive (KI) business in this area, recognising that in an era of international connectivity and footloose labour, many high-value companies will need to relocate abroad if this area no longer meets their needs. Ensuring that Cambridge continues to deliver for KI businesses should be considered a nationally strategic priority. (KEY RECOMMENDATION #3)" The Councils should not lose sight of the Vision for Cambridge set out in recent Local Plans, for Cambridge to continue to develop as a centre of excellence and world leader in the fields of higher education and research, and to foster the dynamism, prosperity and further expansion of the knowledge-based economy.
No uploaded files for public display
(1) ‘Connectivity and movement’ is missing. Should be a major theme as transport will significantly affect other ‘Big Themes’. (2) Needs to be recognition of the draft Cambridge and Peterborough Local Transport Plan 2019 (LTP) and how all new major developments should be planned around the transport network. (3) The mistakes of the previous SC Local Plan were that new settlements at Cambourne and Northstowe were planned and built without commensurate, adequate public transport networks and hubs. In both cases the new settlements were left with insufficient transport infrastructure to cope with the resultant travel patterns, especially daily commuting in Cambridge. The retrofitted solutions such as the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway have proven to be woefully inadequate for dual tasks of transporting large numbers of commuters and initiating modal change away from the private car. (4) Cambourne, a commuter settlement for Cambridge, has no railway station leaving residents reliant on road transport to commute into Cambridge. The solutions on offer, namely a second guided busway (C2C) or CAM cannot provide sufficient capacity or a fast enough service into the city to meet unmet demand for public transport, or instigate modal change away from the private car. The Plan should recognise the PRA by EWR for Option E through Cambourne, which makes the C2C and CAM proposals for Cambourne redundant (albeit EWR arriving at the wrong point in Cambridge, Cambridge South/Addenbrookes Station). (5) Better still, EWR should exercise their own proposal to consider an entry into Cambridge from the north, such as proposed by CamBedRailRoad (CBRR: see map attached), arriving at Cambridge North Station. If adopted, even a light rail system sharing the heavy rails of CBRR’s route would have passenger capacity an order of magnitude greater than C2C/CAM, C2C and CAM proposals for both Cambourne and Northstowe redundant. (6) Cambridge and its hinterland suffer from some of the worse traffic congestion in the country, a problem exacerbated by strategic sites at Northstowe, Bourn Airfield, Waterbeach and Cambourne were built without adequate transport infrastructure. The new, combined Local Plan will only repeat these mistakes if transport and land use planning are once again divorced from each other. (7) Strategic planning in England’s greatest failure has been its inability to plan and provide interconnected, multi-modal networks of private and public transportation with major new development. This failure has resulted in congestion, pollution, loss of productivity and adverse consequences for human health and well being. (8) This problem is particularly acute in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire due to it being the fastest growing area of the country. It is essential that the first Greater Cambridge Local Plan champions integrated transport and land use planning. Leaving transport planning as an after-thought will exacerbate the very problems that the local planning authorities wish to ameliorate by having a joint development plan.
No uploaded files for public display
Sustainable development is about achieving social, economic and environmental gains, pursued together. Environmental objectives will not be achieved if social and economic objectives are not also achieved. For example, providing insufficient homes in Greater Cambridge would result in housing needs being exported elsewhere, resulting in commuting, much of it by private car, resulting in negative climate change effects. There would also be negative social effects as house prices increase, forcing more people into need of affordable housing. In addition, places where such housing is exported to will experience growing demand for homes, forcing houses prices up, and hence worsening affordability. The economic, environmental and social issues must all be seen as inter-related.
No uploaded files for public display
We do not believe that issues can be compartmentalised in a way that expresses favour for some over others. We are unable to answer Q7 as the box does not allow comment and requires a ranking which we consider it not possible nor appropriate to make. Such a ranking is the antithesis of the government objective of sustainable development. Environmental objectives will not be achieved if social and economic objectives are not also achieved. For example, providing insufficient homes in Greater Cambridge would result in housing needs being exported elsewhere, resulting in commuting, much of it by private car, resulting in negative climate change effects. There would also be negative social effects as house prices increase, forcing more people into need of affordable housing. In addition, places where such housing is exported to will experience growing demand for homes, forcing houses prices up, and hence worsening affordability. The economic, environmental and social issues must all be seen as inter-related.
No uploaded files for public display
But... there seems to be little or no discussion on the wider impact of Cambridge growing so quickly - the impact on residents and agriculture. The City simply cannot be turned into a huge sprawling city without massive impact. The government is making noises about 'leveling up' the country, how about the North absorb some of the growth instead of concreting over Cambridgeshire?
No uploaded files for public display
The big themes should more directly address the implications on the local economy of the goal of doubling the total economic output of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough area over 25 years. The well-being and social inclusion big theme acknowledges the need to help spread the benefits of growth. It will be essential for Greater Cambridge to liaise carefully with other local authorities within Cambridgeshire and Peterborough through the duty to cooperate to work towards spreading the benefits of growth across the whole area. The amount and distribution of employment growth proposed through the Local Plan should recognise the need to strike a balance between economic growth within Greater Cambridge and the aspirations for boosting growth within surrounding market towns through the Combined Authority’s Prospectuses for Growth programme.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Whilst we agree with the big themes set out, we suggest a specific reference to an ‘Economic’ theme should be incorporated. This will then ensure the Local Plan is able to achieve the three objectives of sustainable development as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) (paragraph 8): Economic: help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy; Social: provide a sufficient number and range of homes; and Environmental: mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.
No uploaded files for public display
It is clear from the Sustainability Workshop Summary Report that the themes arise from local needs, the Councils’ priorities set out in the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District corporate plans, and by taking into account national and local planning priorities and requirements. Grosvenor is committed to making a lasting contribution to the places in which they are active and have developed ambitious sustainability commitments to help tackle the climate crisis. Grosvenor and USS strongly agree that the four themes identified by Greater Cambridge are important matters to consider when planning for future growth. Grosvenor and USS wish to support the Councils as they plan for sustainable growth across Greater Cambridge, by promoting development at Trumpington South which can address all four of the Local Plan themes, whilst contributing to housing need and supporting the major employment hubs in southern Cambridge by providing local homes for employees. Theme 1 – Trumpington South is committed to addressing climate change through delivering zero carbon homes in operation and promoting active and shared low carbon travel, alongside resilient spaces which integrate sustainable design strategies. Theme 2 – Trumpington South delivers growth in a location which is exceptionally well catered for in terms of access to multifunctional and connected green infrastructure, with the ability for the site to provide 23 Ha of publicly accessible new parkland and a 25%+ net biodiversity gain. It provides opportunities to further strengthen the existing network and enhance the setting and approach to Cambridge City. Theme 3 – Trumpington South will develop an inclusive sense of identity, promote healthy lifestyles and active public spaces, share existing facilities already established in the Trumpington Meadows community and provide access to new community facilities (including a new primary school and mobility hub) which would support a diverse demographic. Theme 4 – Trumpington South will draw on its location as a gateway to Cambridge City and the surrounding natural and historic landscape. It will draw on the positive change taking place in South Cambridge as a highly accessible location to build on this identity and purpose, and be guided by high quality design principle to secure sustainable living.
No uploaded files for public display