Question 33. What kind of housing do you think we should provide?

University staff access to housing markets in Greater Cambridge continues to be affected by the high cost of housing in the area, both for sale and for rent. This leads to harmful impacts to the University relating to recruitment, retention and productivity, and to our staff in relation to increased commuting distances and time, health and wellbeing, and the work-life balance. The housing needs of the various staff groups – academic, academic-related (professional services), research, support – can be grouped broadly into two areas: - those who are willing and able to travel into Cambridge for work: we estimate that 55% of University staff (more than 6,000 workers) commute into Cambridge for work; the proportion is increasing over time. People need housing that is affordable and which is located on transport corridors. - those that need a Cambridge location, the largest such group being post-doc researchers It’s stated in the consultation report that South Cambridgeshire District Council is exploring whether businesses should be helped to provide homes for their workers and whether there are specific requirements to provide essential local worker accommodation as part of the overall mix of housing. As indicated above, employer/key worker housing needs relate to Cambridge as much as they do to South Cambridgeshire, and related policy in the new Plan should apply to both local authority areas. The collegiate University is considering how the size and shape of the student body might change over the next 10 years. There is likely to be some appetite for growth; this may not be very significant in total numbers, but could result in localised growth for one or two colleges. We will feed in to the Plan as our thinking develops.

Greater Cambridge should seek to provide the full range of housing as informed by the forthcoming Strategic Housing Market Assessment to ensure that the needs of all types of residents are met. If a particular group’s needs are not met this is likely to increase pressure for suitable accommodation in the surrounding districts. Policy support should be given to ensure sufficient adaptable and accessible housing is provided within the more rural parts of Greater Cambridge.

As suggested in the Issues and Options document, there is a need to plan for a balance of tenure types and we agree with this statement. As set out at the infographic on page 59 of the Issues and Options document, the lower quartile house price to income ratio is 14.3 against the national average of 7.3 and whilst the Councils accept the lack of supply have created affordability issues, it is clear the emerging Local Plan must address this. Whilst it is important to ensure affordable housing is delivered, the wider housing strategy must be varied. This will ensure a range of housing is provided creating choice and enabling suitable properties to be delivered allowing residents to downsize without leaving villages for example.

A mix of different tenures and products should be offered to cater the needs of all in Cambridge. Trumpington South has the potential to deliver an innovative, bespoke housing solution with supporting community and work facilities to meet the specific needs of Southern Cambridge, the establishing Cambridge Biomedical Campus and beyond. This would include a diverse mix of housing types and tenures which are accessible to a wide range of local people, with houses and apartments which are affordable to buy, rent or share. Grosvenor and USS would seek to work with major employers – creating a pathway to the right housing for all levels of staff – in a location that removes the need to own a car. We would welcome further discussions with the Councils as to the type of housing that could be provided in this location.

There should be a much higher (>> 40%) proportion of truly affordable and social homes. Developers will whinge that they cannot deliver this, but look at the profits they make. Cambridge has the greatest inequality of all cities in the country! A more social balance of new housing would help to address this. Include care homes. As a community ages it needs to be able to care for its vulnerable aging members within that community. As an example, the southern fringe of 4000 new homes has no provision for people needing special care who can no longer cope in their own home! Moving someone to a care home away from their family and community reduces visiting opportunities and increases the environmental impact of any longer journeys made to visit. The wellbeing of the person suffers, as does the climate.

Truly affordable!!!! The plan should also provide more council housing. There could also be temporary accommodation with a range of sizes and design for the homeless to help those vulnerable sleeping on our streets. They should be more involved in the housing process rather than retrospectively providing for their needs.

The Authorities must provide not only a broad range of sizes, types and tenures needed to meet the needs of different groups within the community, as required by NPPF Paragraph 61, but it must also ensure that a sufficient amount and variety of land can come forward (NPPF Para 59) to ensure flexibility and continuity in supply. Provision of housing on small and medium sized sites (NPPF Para 68) makes an important contribution to this supply, being more easily and quickly delivered than larger sites. A mix of housing in sustainable locations, close to employment, e.g. villages such as Linton that are already in close proximity to the various tech-campuses such as Granta Park and The Babraham Institute.

A mixture of sizes, styles and tenures of housing is required in order to meet the aims of creating socially inclusive communities. Care must be taken to ensure that sufficient housing is provided and that some of it remains affordable so as not to create social disintegration and the ghettoisation of some areas.

We need more council housing. So many developers build housing that is really expensive which no-one local can afford. We also need much more community lead housing, like the award winning Marmalade Lane.

In general the principle that there is a need for all types of tenures is supported. It is paramount in both rural an urban communities the whole spectrum of homes is provided. In serviced villages such as Bourn the effect on social inclusion, well being and a thriving local economy is not just for the young and old but those able to provide homes in small bespoke developments and by custom builders. (As referred to in the Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy for South Cambridgeshire, ensuring its villages remain vibrant and sustainable, and working with local businesses to ensure homes are affordable and available to local workers) Entry to this market needs to be encouraged with the right supply and quatum of land in the serviced villages within the District. The impact of house prices is a major contributing factor on the size and tenures being delivered. Again, providing the negative effect for those in housing need not having the ability to access a decent home. To ensure the right tenure profile can be delivered, particulalry in rural settlements, the location and size of the proposed sites are exceptionally important. As such more sites should be made avialable for SME type developments of between 1 to 30 dwellings (or 1-2 hectares) or custom build plot clusters identified for up to 4-6 dwellings Opportunities could be provided in the rural settlements for schemes that could deliver more diverse tenures to meet local housing need and social inclusion. Scheme sizes of up to 50 dwellings that have no single tenure greater than 25%-50% of the total would give a platform for all the different types of occupancy including social/affordable rent, shared ownership and downsizing homes for the elderly cheek by jowel with homes for sale. The final dwelling types could be related to the specific rural settlement housing assessment.

See comments above re; • affordable housing and CLTs at 2 above • resource efficiency at 8 above

We believe that the construction of student accommodation to allow the University to fulfil its growth objectives can be an important driver of a flourishing future for the region. The policy of permissive development on the main residential sites of Colleges is an important catalyst in delivering modern, sustainable student accommodation with good access to the educational, social, sporting and welfare facilities which Colleges provide. As such, the location of growth in student accommodation on existing College sites is an important contributor to student welfare, as well as releasing outlying sites for other residential development. A working group comprising representatives from both the University and the Colleges is currently reviewing plans for the future size and shape of the Collegiate University and their findings will be fed into the planning process as soon as they are available. In terms of other accommodation, the Colleges, as major local employers, believe that the lack of affordable housing in sustainable transport locations is a major planning issue which could impact the future prosperity of the City if it continues not to be addressed. We would therefore wish to see more affordable housing built in areas accessible to the City centre via public transport, cycling or walking.

The Local Plan should focus on provision of 1 and 2 bed homes in communities as discussed until the homeless and affordability issues have been resolved with sensitive single bedroom extensions allowed to accommodate proven family needs.

More land should be allocated for cooperative self build community projects such as K1.

There is clearly a need for more affordable housing. The adopted Local Plans stipulate 40% affordable housing on new developments. Although ratios have improved since the early years of the decade, in only one year (2017-18) was this figure reached across the Greater Cambridge Area. Typically, percentages fall in the low 30s. Whilst percentages need to be ambitious, they should also be realistic and reflect the housing needs assessment. There is therefore a case for continuing the 40% policy in the revised plan. Due to current legislation restricting housing benefit to need, there is a shortage of single bed or bedsit units, which the Local Plan should address. Consideration should be given to designing bedsit units so that they could potentially be combined to make larger units should needs or legislation change. There is also a need for small market 'starter' units to ease first time purchasers onto the housing ladder. Need for smaller affordable and market dwellings.

Sustainably built houses (see above responses) to meet local needs rather than luxury or affordable houses.

I think the plan should be focusing on sustainable/ eco housing.

Focus on making the market price of housing affordable to as many people as possible, rather than sucking all the value out of new development by insisting on very high % levels of below market priced housing to be rationed and allocated by the Councils. This should enable more of the planning gain to be taxed and used to provide high quality sustainable transport that everyone will benefit from and that is required to meet carbon neutral goals. Some traditional affordable housing is clearly needed, but more affordable housing is best delivered by just building a lot more housing in the area.

The Plan should aim for a variety of housing types to provide for all ages and integrate social housing within developments to avoid creating ghettos.

Paragraph 61 of NPPF expects the size, type and tenure of housing needs of the community to be assessed and reflected in planning policies, including for example those with an affordable housing need, students, renters and self-builders. It is noted that the existing and planned new settlements in South Cambridgeshire and some of the strategic sites are not delivering policy compliant levels of affordable housing. As such, it is considered that emerging GCLP should seek to allocate sites which are capable of delivering policy compliant levels of affordable housing. The promoted development at land north of Common Lane in Swaston would deliver housing and affordable housing, and provide a mix of dwelling types and sizes. The promoted development would provide affordable housing to meet local needs of the village; in 2018 there was an identified need for 169 affordable dwellings in Sawston for those with a local connection to the village – see South Cambridgeshire District Council's 'Housing Statistical Information Leaflet' (December 2018).

A mix of housing types should be provided across Greater Cambridge. Alongside open market sale housing this should include affordable rent, social rent, starter homes and rent to buy. The role of the private rented sector should be considered. In addition the Local Plan should consider the role that co-housing could play in contributing to inclusive communities.

Paragraph 91 of the NPPF seeks to deliver healthy, inclusive and safe places, and identifies a number of approaches to support healthy lifestyles. It promotes social interaction through mixed-use developments, strong neighbourhood centres, street layouts that include pedestrian and cycle connections, and active street frontages for example. It enables and supports healthy lifestyles, by providing green infrastructure, sports facilities, local shops, access to healthier food, allotments, and layouts that encourage walking and cycling for example. NHS England Healthy Towns Initiatives identified ten principles to deliver healthy places, which relate to the provision of health services, meeting local and community health needs, and development design matters. In terms of design matters it is suggested that compact neighbourhoods, active travel, healthy eating opportunities, play and leisure facilities would contribute towards the delivery of healthy places. It is considered that the promoted development at land off Leaden Hill in Orwell would be consistent with guidance and initiatives to support healthy lifestyles. The promoted development is accessible to the services and facilities within Orwell by walking and cycling. There are outdoor play and recreation facilities at Town Green Road, which is within walking distance of the site.

It is important that a wide range of housing types are provided in the new Plan which is facilitated both by additional allocations and by an appropriate policy framework in the new Local Plan. There is a general need for both market and affordable housing, but it is also important that the new Local Plan provides for other types of housing. The Consultation sets out the need for a diverse range of housing, including housing for older people. It is considered that this type of provision is key to ensuring that older people are able to downsize into appropriate accommodation in the right locations, such as in the villages, either within South Cambridgeshire or adjoining its boundaries. This would in turn release housing stock for other households in other areas. With regards to the Site at Ickleton Road, Great Chesterford, the development of the site would provide an opportunity to deliver conventional family homes and more diverse housing given the availability of nearby public transport. This could be either in combination with market and affordable housing or as an allocation in its own right.

All housing types as required by the NPPF paragraph 61.

33. What kind of housing do you think we should provide? Smaller homes. More space for self build. When I was in my 20s I would have been very happy living in a ‘tiny house’ like a trailer I wouldn’t have been subject to the vagaries of private rental and could have had my own space. Is there a demand for this can we do this here, it could change the face of housing for those in their 20s not being forced into an overheated private rental market. The co housing at Marmalade Lane in orchard Park is wonderful (but as they admit still bloody expensive houses) can we have more of this where it is affordable the principles are certainly that this type of housing should be more affordable. Social housing is needed but should be integrated within other parts of the community. Can we get pension funds to invest in this here and stimulate this, could the partnership set up a pension investment scheme to pay for social housing here.

Cambridge’s objectively assessed housing need identifies the type, scale, mix and range of housing required in the area. Providing a mix of different tenures and products will contribute to catering for the needs of all in Cambridge.

As set out in the response to Qu.31, it is requested that the need and demand for purpose-built private rented accommodation is assessed for emerging GCLP, which is consistent with the advice in Paragraph 61 of the NPPF. Marchingdale Developments Ltd is promoting the buildings and land at NIAB Headquarters on Huntingdon Road for a Build to Rent scheme, and it is requested that this site is specifically allocated for this use in emerging GCLP. Marchingdale Developments Ltd commissioned a report on a Build to Rent scheme on this site. The Benefits & Opportunities of Build to Rent Development at Huntingdon Road Report (Iceni Projects Limited – October 2019) is submitted with these representations. In summary, the Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy (April 2019) recognises the need for purpose-built private rented sector accommodation in Cambridge. Build to Rent schemes have a number of benefits, including longer-term tenancies, providing a higher standard of rented accommodation, meeting housing needs, and retaining employees that would otherwise be unable to afford to live locally. In summary, the benefits of a Build to Rent scheme at the NIAB Headquarters site are as follows: socio-economic benefits including construction jobs and support for the local economy; meet the demand for purpose-built private rented sector accommodation; meet the housing needs of younger households and those that cannot afford to buy a house; provide a mix of dwelling sizes, including studios, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom accommodation; and, provide affordable private rented accommodation – fixed at 80% of market rent. For all these reasons it is requested that the buildings and land at the NIAB Headquarters site on Huntingdon Road is allocated for a Build to Rent scheme in emerging GCLP. As outlined above, the two reports that accompany these representations are commercially sensitive and should not be made publicly available.

No comment.

ARU's mission has always been to transform lives through innovative, inclusive and entrepreneurial education and research. It continues to play a critical role in the educational, research and economic success of the Greater Cambridge area, and has ambitious but realistic plans to ensure that it can continue to make this vital contribution. There are currently just over 11,000 students studying on campus in Cambridge, up around 120 students on the previous year, with further intakes due in May. The year on year increase in numbers is driven by doubledigit growth in both EU and International students: - The EU student population has grown to 1539, a 12% increase on 2018/9 - The International student population has grown to 1962, a 27% increase on 2018/9. Undergraduates make up two-thirds of the population in 2019/20 but Postgraduate Taught student numbers are growing (up 14% on last year). The University has aspirations for further growth, in particular, relating to International, Degree Apprenticeship and Foundation Year courses, of between 5 to 10% over the next 3 years. Higher Education continues to change, making detailed planning for the life of the new Local Plan very difficult. The University would very much welcome the opportunity to discuss its plans in more detail as the Local Plan process continues. Support for University development To ensure that the University of Cambridge and ARU can continue to modernise and maximise their contributions to the educational, research and economic success of the Greater Cambridge area, it is important that the new Local Plan recognises and makes provision for the planned growth. To do this, policies in the new Local Plan need to positively support University development. Policy 43 in the Cambridge Local Plan 2018 states that University Development in the City Centre will be permitted subject to criteria whereas University Development outside the City Centre will be treated on their merits. East Road marks the city centre boundary in that Plan with land to the northwest of the road being inside and land to the southeast of the road being outside the city centre. The Local Plan 2018 acknowledges that the East Road site and area remain the most sustainable location for ARU and the University is keen to continue to concentrate its provision in this area, but the consequence of the spatial differentiation in policy 43 means that development on the University’s East Road campus, which is adjacent to but outside the city centre, and its site at Young Street site will be judged on their merits rather than being permitted (subject to criteria). The new Local Plan needs to include explicit support for modernised and enhanced provision on ARU’s East Road site and area. Student Accommodation It is important that the new Local Plan recognises, is consistent and makes provision for the expected growth in student numbers and need for accommodation. Paragraph 5.28 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018 refers to catering for growth in student numbers (at ARU) whilst paragraph 6.14 contradicts this by stating that ARU has confirmed that it has no growth aspirations to 2026. It is acknowledged that the increasing demand for accommodation from students can put pressure on the general housing market. The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 requires sufficient land to come forward to meet the housing needs of different groups, and makes specific reference to students in this regard (paragraph 61). The implications of the wording of Policy 46 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018 will unduly limit the opportunities to make the required provision for additional student accommodation. The policy states that “Permanent purpose built student accommodation will not be supported on sites allocated for housing, or with an extant planning permission for residential development, or sites identified as potential housing sites within the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment”. Such a wide ranging exclusion together with policies that seek to protect other land uses, unduly limits the opportunities to provide student accommodation. Rather than unduly limit opportunities to provide the required provision for additional student accommodation, the new Local Plan needs to ensure that it provides for sufficient land to meet all the housing needs, including Student accommodation. Masterplan The University is preparing a masterplan for its East Road campus and is keen to ensure that it has a clear, recognised standing as a material planning consideration in the determination of subsequent planning applications. We are keen to continue discussions on how this might be achieved, which could include being a supplementary planning document to a policy hook in the new Local Plan.

There should be flexibility within the Local Plan to respond to changing housing needs over the Local Plan period. Consideration of individual site circumstances and the circumstances of a local area should be taken into account to determine the appropriate type of housing for development sites. Separate housing needs assessments should be used to inform the appropriate size, type and tenure of housing needed for different sections of the community, as set out within the Greater Cambridge Housing Strategy 2019-2023. 7.6 Flexibility will be key to a successful Local Plan; through market housing, low-cost and affordable housing. 7.7 Land to the west of Cambridge Road, Melbourn has the potential to deliver up to 300 homes across both phases and would comprise both market and affordable housing of a range of size, type and tenures, increasing the supply of low cost housing to meet the needs of not only Melbourn but the wider district. The proposals could also deliver an element of build to rent, helping to increase accessibility to housing for different sections of the community. 1 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Industrial Strategy 2019, p13