Question 46. What do you think about creating planned new settlements?

Please see section 8.0 of the accompanying representations document.

49. New settlements can contribute significantly to meeting housing need but should not be relied upon as the sole solution. In recent years, a number of Local Authorities have been criticised, and Local Plan Examinations have failed, due to relying on a small number of large allocations. The most recent being the St Albans Local Plan Examination in January 2020 where the Planning Inspector cancelled the remaining hearings after the first week due to concerns about delivering a new garden village. 50. The above demonstrates that a range of sites and growth options should be progressed to deliver housing need. This should include allocating small, medium and large scales site in various locations to provide a robust supply of housing. This also reiterates the need to exceed minimum housing targets. 51. An alternative solution to planning for further new settlements is to expand existing new settlements. Extension of existing new settlements, such as Cambourne, can provide a level of certainty as the required infrastructure and investment has already been put in place which removes a significant barrier for future delivery. This is particularly the case for Cambourne which is due to benefit from significant road, rail and metro investments and infrastructure over the plan period. Expanding the provision of housing, jobs and other growth in this location would make more efficient use of this investment and prevent the Authority starting from scratch in generating this level of investment and infrastructure.

5.7 New settlements have an important role to play in achieving ‘good growth’ for the Greater Cambridge area. This is advocated in national planning policy, with paragraph 72 of the 2019 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stating that: “the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed, and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities.” 5.8 It states that strategic policy-making authorities should identify suitable locations by considering the opportunities presented by existing or planned investment in infrastructure, the area’s economic potential and the scope for net environmental gains. 5.9 New settlements also offer the opportunity to comprehensively plan a new community achieving excellence in sustainable development and healthier living. New settlements can also provide new infrastructure, employment and services, a variety of homes to meet the needs of different groups in the community, and a greater scope to deliver a significant network of green infrastructure and biodiversity net gain on site. 5.10 In particular, smaller scale new settlements (circa 1000-2000 new homes) which can take advantage of and build upon existing sustainable transport infrastructure represent a sustainable growth option. 5.11 Some of these benefits are reflected in the Issues and Options Sustainability Appraisal December 2019 prepared by LUC on behalf of the Councils’. For example, it correctly acknowledges that Option 4 (Dispersal – New Settlements) provides “an opportunity for significant new infrastructure to be delivered, such as schools, health facilities, local centres and green spaces”. 5.12 Although, wrongly assumes that all new settlements mean “starting from scratch. The creation of new settlements would also likely require supporting transport infrastructure that connected it to Cambridge, which would require large-scale investment and time to implement” (paragraph 3.39). 5.13 Station Fields is on a key transport corridor and benefits from existing infrastructure due to its proximity to Foxton Rail Station, the A10 and the Melbourn Greenway. 5.14 Station Fields is appropriate in size and location will support a sustainable community, with sufficient access to services and employment opportunities within the development itself (without expecting an unrealistic level of self-containment), or in larger towns to which there is good access. 5.15 The scale of development of new villages also offers the opportunity to create a cluster of villages and bring benefits for the existing community and make a significant contribution to the long term development needs of the Cambridge area.

A. Reliance of a small number of larger allocations can be significantly flawed if the correct mechanisms are not in place to ensure there are no barrier to their full delivery within the current Plan period. B. This is an issue that has been the downfall of a number of Local Authorities and Local Plan Examinations in recent years. The most topical of these is St Albans Local Plan, where in January 2020 the Planning Inspector cancelled the remaining Local Plan examination hearings after just one week of initial discussions which had mostly centred around the proposed allocation a Garden Village for 2,300 new homes. Significant concerns were raised about delivering the allocation due to it benefiting from an extant permission for another use. C. This highlights the dangers of relying on large urban extension or a single solution to delivering housing and reiterates the need to ensure that a range of sites are allocated as part of the supply. New settlements can contribute effectively to meeting housing need but cannot be relied upon as the sole solution.

7.1 As stated in paragraph 72 of the NPPF, the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through large scale developments, such as new settlements, provided they are well located and designed and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities. The Site put forward by Gallagher Development Groups Limited is of sufficient scale and location to meet this objective and support the delivery of a sustainable new settlement. 7.2 Paragraph 104 of the NPPF requires planning policies to support an appropriate mix of uses across an area and within larger scale sites to minimize the number and length of journeys needed for employment, shopping, leisure, education and other activities. It requires the planning system to actively manage patterns of growth and direct significant development to locations which are or can be made sustainable. 7.3 Large, strategic sites located within transport corridors have huge potential to meet the objectives set out in paragraphs 72 and 104 of the NPPF and promote a transition towards low/zero carbon lifestyles in line with the core objectives of Greater Cambridge. 7.4 New settlements also make a significant contribution to the Councils’ 5 year housing supply. Once planning permission has been obtained, such sites can deliver quickly and obtain consistent high build out rates that often endure throughout the plan period. 7.5 The incorporation of Garden City principles in new settlements creates an opportunity to deliver high quality places that are holistically planned and sustainable in both economic, social and environmental terms in line with the NPPF.

2.85 See response to Q42.

Please see section 8.0 of the accompanying representations document.

New planned settlements are key to meeting the housing need across the planning period and should be encouraged where a sustainable settlement is proposed. This can principally be achieved through locating new development in locations which have good access to sustainable modes of transport. New development should be located to take advantage of existing or planned transport infrastructure and should be designed in a manner which encourages the take up of active modes of travel. After three decades of focusing new development in and around existing settlements, it is now recognised by the Government that a different approach is needed to meet future development requirements. The redevelopment of brownfield land has been hugely successful and, while large areas of brownfield are still available, their distribution across England is uneven. Some large conurbations still have sufficient brownfield land to meet their needs; but areas under particular development pressures and rural areas that had little brownfield land supply to start with, must now look to greenfield sites. The question therefore is what greenfield sites might be most suitable for development. Many existing settlements are not suitable for further extension. Urban extensions upon urban extensions can lead to issues if they are not properly integrated. In particular, the distribution of services can become ad-hoc. In certain areas, therefore, where demand for development space is high and is expected to continue to be high for the foreseeable future, a new settlement might be appropriate. New settlements have the benefit of starting from scratch. They allow the core areas to be suitably sized to meet the future anticipated needs and ensure that transport infrastructure is sufficient. The Government has recognised that new settlements are likely to be an essential tool in meeting future housing and employment needs. To date, the Government has identified 14 locally-led new settlements across the Country. Many others are being pursued through private funding in close collaboration with local authorities. The published Government White Paper ‘Fixing Our Broken Housing Market’ (February 2017) reaffirms the Government’s intention to continue to promote new settlements. Paragraph A.57 of the White Paper seeks to support the delivery of existing and future garden communities and the Government’s commitment to: ● Ensure that decisions on infrastructure investment take better account of the opportunities t0 support new and existing communities; ● Legislate to enable the creation of locally accountable New Town Development Corporations, enabling local areas to use them as the delivery vehicle if they wish to. This can strengthen local representation and accountability, and increase opportunities for communities to benefit from land value capture; and ● Following the previous consultation on changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, amend policy to encourage a more proactive approach by authorities to bringing forward new settlements in their plans, as one means by which housing requirements can be addressed.” For the reasons given in Question 2 and as outlined in the accompanying Concept Vision, a planled new community at Six Mile Bottom will allow East Cambridgeshire and the combined Greater Cambridge Authorities to achieve a sustainable form of development by planning for jobs, homes and supporting infrastructure (transport, utilities, services and facilities) in the right places, alongside protecting and enhancing the environment. The scheme can deliver circa 8,500 new homes, jobs, essential central services such as secondary and primary schools, community hubs and medical facilities as well as local retail space and will provide the important elements to allow a new community to thrive.

If the correct mechanisms are not in place to ensure that new settlements are delivered as intended during the Plan period, then reliance on such allocations for meeting housing need would not be effective or sound in meeting housing and job needs. In recent years, a number of Local Authorities have been criticised, and Local Plans have failed at Examination, due to relying on such limited approaches. The most recent being the St Albans Local Plan Examination in January 2020 where the Planning Inspector cancelled the remaining hearings after the first week. This decision was made following discussions focusing on the proposed allocation of a Garden Village to provide 2,300 new homes and the significant concerns about delivering the allocation as the site also benefitted from planning permission for a rail interchange. New settlements can contribute significantly to meeting housing need but cannot be relied upon as the sole solution. The above demonstrates that there are real risks associated with simply relying on large urban extensions or any single solution to delivering housing need and that a range of sites must be allocated in order to provide a robust supply of housing.

7.1 As stated in paragraph 72 of the NPPF, the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through large scale developments, such as new settlements, provided they are well located and designed and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities. The Site put forward by Gallagher Development Groups Limited is of sufficient scale and location to meet this objective and support the delivery of a sustainable new settlement. 7.2 Paragraph 104 of the NPPF requires planning policies to support an appropriate mix of uses across an area and within larger scale sites to minimize the number and length of journeys needed for employment, shopping, leisure, education and other activities. It requires the planning system to actively manage patterns of growth and direct significant development to locations which are or can be made sustainable. 7.3 Large, strategic sites located within transport corridors have huge potential to meet the objectives set out in paragraphs 72 and 104 of the NPPF and promote a transition towards low/zero carbon lifestyles in line with the core objectives of Greater Cambridge. 7.4 New settlements also make a significant contribution to the Councils’ 5 year housing supply. Once planning permission has been obtained, such sites can deliver quickly and obtain consistent high build out rates that often endure throughout the plan period. 7.5 The incorporation of Garden City principles in new settlements creates an opportunity to deliver high quality places that are holistically planned and sustainable in both economic, social and environmental terms in line with the NPPF.

52. New settlements can contribute significantly to meeting housing need but should not be relied upon as the sole solution. In recent years, several Local Authorities have been criticised, and Local Plan Examinations have failed, due to relying on a small number of large allocations. The most recent being the St Albans Local Plan Examination in January 2020 where the Planning Inspector cancelled the remaining hearings after the first week due to concerns about delivering a new garden village. 53. The above demonstrates that a range of sites and growth options should be progressed to deliver housing need. This should include allocating small, medium and large scales site in various locations to provide a robust supply of housing. This also reiterates the need to exceed minimum housing targets. 54. An alternative solution to planning for further new settlements is to expand existing new settlements. Extension of existing new settlements, such as Cambourne, can provide a level of certainty as the required infrastructure and investment has already been put in place which removes a significant barrier for future delivery. This is particularly the case for Cambourne which is due to benefit from significant road, rail and metro investments and infrastructure over the plan period. Expanding the provision of housing, jobs and other growth in this location would make more efficient use of this investment and prevent the Authority starting from scratch in generating this level of investment and infrastructure.

In summary it is expected that the proposed spatial strategy will be an amalgamation of all of the options. However for the reasons stated above, Wallace strongly urges the Councils not to weight the spatial strategy too heavily in favour of the fourth growth option (creation of new settlements). Wallace does not object in principle to the inclusion of a new settlement as part of the development strategy. However, it should also be recognised that due to the significant infrastructure requirements and lead in times associated with new settlements and strategic sites, it is critical that a range of smaller and medium sized sites, such as land off Shelford Road, Fulbourn, are brought into the spatial mix of the Plan.