Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

The RSPB fully supports the explicit inclusion of the climate change and biodiversity & greenspaces key aims in the plan, and their inclusion front and centre in the presentation of these aims. Climate mitigation and adaption and a thriving ecosystem in Greater Cambridge are vital and integral to the health and wellbeing of its residents and the long term economic prosperity of the two districts.

Where further development is needed, we support locations which minimise impact on existing priority wildlife populations and habitats, and which are (or will be) connected via low carbon transport infrastructure and would not require further carbon-intensive, and biodiversity-fragmenting infrastructure upgrades. We are pleased that this is the case for many of the proposed major allocations. However, as the Integrated Water Management Study report made clear, the sustainable provision of public water supply (PWS) is already and will continue to be a fundamental environmental issue as to whether the development ambitions of Greater Cambridge can be met in the plan period without the further crossing of environmental limits. Therefore, we believe that the phasing and delivery of this new development must have regard to the availability of alternative PWS infrastructure and demand-side measures being developed by the relevant water companies. Failure to do so will lead to the failure of the plan’s aims to create development that is resilient to future…climate risks and leaving the natural environment in a better state than it was before.

The RSPB was very pleased to see that the Biodiversity Net Gain provision in the submission draft of the NE Cambridge Action Plan has been increased to 20% in line with Greater Cambridge’s ambitions under the OxCamArc Environment Principles. Although the new biodiversity policy BG/BG will set out a 20% target, it would be worth cross referencing this requirement in any supporting text. In addition, although this is dealt with in more detail in the action plan, we believe that there should also be headline targets or objectives within the allocation policy related to water demand, green infrastructure and sustainable urban drainage, or appropriate references to requirements set out in the associated climate change and great places policies.

Although we have no opinion on the allocation of the Abbey stadium as an opportunity site, we would have significant concerns regarding any relocation of the stadium to a site near the A14 J.35 with regards to potential adverse impacts on Little Wilbraham Fen SSSI and its sensitive priority spp. (including rare breeding birds). We are pleased to see that there is no such allocation proposed within the First Proposals document.

Although the new biodiversity policy BG/BG will set out a 20% target, it would be worth cross referencing this requirement in any supporting text. In addition, although this is likely to be dealt with in more detail in a subsequent action plan, we believe that there should also be headline targets or objectives within the allocation policy related to water demand, green infrastructure and sustainable urban drainage, or appropriate references to requirements set out in the associated climate change and great places policies.

As with our general comments on how much development and where, we believe it is vital that major new settlements are served by low carbon transport options and existing major road networks so as to meet plan aims on climate change and to minimise biodiversity impact from new transport infrastructure.

Any new allocations (in additions to the existing West Cambourne West) will need to be well integrated with the new E/W rail station location and vice versa so that the new station is integral with the development of the town. As part of this, the RSPB would have concerns about significant development north of the A428, which might put recreational pressure on SSSIs like Overhall Grove and Elsworth Wood. Any new development would need adequate green infrastructure provided on site to provide Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANGs).

The new plan will set out significant requirements for Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity Net Gain and environmental design, which need to be reflected in the requirements placed on those elements of existing allocations which have yet not received planning permission. For example, the need for Northstowe to potentially support GI infrastructure in the Great Ouse Fenland Arc.

The RSPB supports the approach set out to climate change and the role the local plan can make in reducing carbon emissions within the Greater Cambridge area. It is imperative that new development that will be in place for decades or even hundreds of years embodies net zero design, in locations which will enable non-fossil fuel transport provision. We fully agree that new development also needs to be fit for purpose to deal with the climatic conditions that will be present in its lifetime and to not be at risk of, or exacerbate, future flooding. Nature-based solutions, where habitat creation and retention helps mitigate carbon emissions are also an important element, which highlights the overlap between the climate change and biodiversity policies in the plan.

RSPB fully supports the approach taken in this policy. All new development must meet net zero carbon for space heating and power usage, whilst minimising embodied carbon if we are to meet our goals under the Climate Change Convention.