Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

OBJECT

The Greater Cambridge City Deal recognised the relationship between housing and economic growth, and that the shortage of available and affordable housing within Greater Cambridge has an impact on house prices, commuting patterns, and recruitment and retention of employees. The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Devolution Deal committed to delivering substantial economic growth and to double economic output during the next 25 years. The 2018 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Independent Economic Review (CPIER) identified that recent employment growth has been faster than anticipated, and the aim of doubling economic output in the area by 2040 was realistic. It was suggested in CPIER that economic growth could be achieved by attracting knowledge-intensive businesses that would not locate elsewhere in the UK, by delivering new housing, and by prioritising infrastructure projects. The National Infrastructure Commission, the Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority and the Greater Cambridge Greater Peterborough Enterprise Partnership acknowledge and support the economic growth potential of the Greater Cambridge area, and consider that there is a need to substantially increase housing delivery in order to support that economic growth and address the significant housing affordability issues that exist. At present there is an imbalance between rates of economic growth and housing delivery in Greater Cambridge.

All these factors support a significantly higher number of homes than are proposed in the preferred ‘medium plus’ growth option of Policy S/JH. It is considered that the ‘medium plus’ growth option makes insufficient upward adjustments to the housing requirement (from Section Id.2a of the Planning Practice Guidance) to take into account growth strategies, strategic infrastructure improvements and housing affordability in Greater Cambridgeshire. The ‘medium plus’ growth option also does not reflect the anticipated growth aspirations of the Oxford to Cambridge Arc Spatial Framework, or that the economic success of Greater Cambridge is of national significance.

It is suggested that the emerging GCLP should have selected the higher growth level option to support economic growth, address housing affordability, and reduce in-commuting. The higher growth level option will require infrastructure funding, but there are existing transport improvements already planned for Greater Cambridge and further investment in infrastructure (e.g. water and electricity) will need to be secured as part of the Oxford to Cambridge Arc.

Requested Change

It is requested that housing and jobs requirements in Policy S/JH are based on delivering the higher growth level option.

OBJECT

Cambridge District Oddfellows is promoting land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham for residential development, and in representations has requested that these sites are allocated in emerging GCLP. These representations to Policy S/DS are focussed on the preferred development strategy for the rest of the rural area, and specifically the decision to allocate a very limited amount of development to the more sustainable villages.

The overall development strategy is very reliant on the delivery of an extensions to an existing new settlement (Cambourne West + an additional 1,950 dwellings at Cambourne), planned new settlements (Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield) and new communities on the edge of Cambridge (North East Cambridge and Cambridge East). It is acknowledged that the principle of development at most of these strategic sites is already established through adopted development plan documents; the additional dwellings at Cambourne is proposed through emerging GCLP and associated with East West Rail. However, it is considered that there are a number of risks associated with the preferred development strategy, which relate to housing delivery rates and whether these can be increased at some new settlements, the relocation of existing uses from some sites, and the delivery of affordable housing.

The most recent housing trajectory for Greater Cambridge (published April 2021) already predict high average annual housing delivery rates for the new settlements; Northstowe and Waterbeach are predicted to deliver 250 dwellings per annum, and Cambourne West and Bourn Airfield are predicted to deliver a combined total of 300 dwellings per annum. Cambourne has historically delivered approximately 230 dwellings per annum. Hampton (in Peterborough) has historically delivered 259 dwellings per annum. Cranbrook (in East Devon) which has the highest annual delivery rate of current new settlements is delivering at 295 dwellings per annum). The Inspector for the Huntingdonshire Local Plan recommended that the combined housing delivery rates Alconbury Weald (the former Alconbury Airfield and Grange Farm) should be no higher than 300 dwellings per annum, and for St Neots East (Loves Farm and Wintringham Park) should be no higher than 200 dwellings per annum. The predicted average housing delivery rates at Northstowe, Waterbeach and Cambourne West/Bourn Airfield already appear to be at levels comparable to or higher than other new settlements elsewhere. It is likely that current predicted delivery rates are already optimistic, but there is no credible evidence that faster housing delivery rates can be achieved at Northstowe or Waterbeach. It is noted that Cambourne, Hampton and Cranbrook all had multiple housebuilders on site at the same time and delivered affordable and market housing in conjunction with one another. It is requested that predicted housing delivery rates for the new settlements take into account the above comments, and the assumption that faster housing delivery rates can be achieved at Northstowe and Waterbeach should be deleted from the development strategy.

North East Cambridge and Cambridge East are allocated in both Local Plans as strategic sites. It is acknowledged that these sites involve the re-use of previously developed land. However, the redevelopment of these sites is complex and involves the relocation of the existing uses; the relocation of a sewage treatment works and existing businesses in the case of North East Cambridge, and the relocation of airport related uses and businesses in the case of Cambridge East. It is considered that the delivery of development at these sites will need to be realistic, taking into account all of the challenges that need to be overcome prior to the commencement of development. It is requested that realistic assumptions about delivery are applied for North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

It is noted that most of the new settlements will deliver less affordable housing than the normal policy requirement of 40%, mainly because of the need for these developments to also deliver significant levels of new transport and community infrastructure in initial phases. The affordable housing contributions are as follows: 20% at Northstowe, 30% at Waterbeach, 30% at Cambridge East (Wing), 30% at Cambourne West and 40% at Bourn Airfield, although all are subject to a review mechanism that could result in adjustments to the level of affordable housing. The proportion of affordable housing that will be provided from the developments at North East Cambridge and Cambridge East are unknown at this stage, but because of the costs associated with the relocation of existing uses and the delivery of new transport infrastructure it is very unlikely that 40% affordable housing will be provided at least in the initial phases. It is clear that the existing and planned new settlements and new communities in the edge of Cambridge are not and will not provide enough affordable housing, which should be a concern in an area such as Greater Cambridge which has significant housing affordability issues. It is requested that, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East, the development strategy should allocate additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing including small and medium sites in the villages.

The preferred development strategy for the rest of the rural area is based on the assumption that the villages in this area are unsustainable because existing and future residents would need to travel by car to access services and facilities and employment opportunities. It is considered that this assumption is incorrect for some villages, including Cottenham, which contain a good range of services and facilities and is accessible by sustainable modes of transport. In addition, the preferred development strategy for the rest of the rural area provides no support for existing services and facilities in villages and provides no strategy to meet current identified affordable housing needs of villages. Cambridge District Oddfellows are not advocating a dispersed development strategy whereby most development is directed to the villages, but is requesting that a sufficient amount of land is allocated at the more sustainable villages to support services and ensure that identified affordable housing needs are met.

There are three paragraphs in the NPPF that suggest a different approach is required in the development strategy for the rest of the rural area. Paragraph 105 seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised, but acknowledges that the opportunities will be different in urban and rural areas. Paragraph 79 seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas by locating housing where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and enable villages to grow and thrive. Paragraph 62 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.

Cottenham is designated as a Rural Centre; Cambridge District Oddfellows objects to the decision to reclassify Cottenham as a Minor Rural Centre in Policy S/SH: Settlement Hierarchy. Cottenham has a good range of services and facilities including a supermarket and convenience stores, post office, doctors surgeries, dentist, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, bank, primary schools and secondary school, village hall and meeting spaces. The promoted developments at land at Two Mill Field and at land north of Oakington Road would support the existing services and facilities in the village.

The promoted developments at land at Two Mill Field and at land north of Oakington Road would be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village. Cottenham is currently connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. It is noted that the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project proposes substantial improvements to the bus services for Cottenham, including a bus every 10 minutes to Cambridge via Histon, a more frequent service to Oakington, and a more frequent rural service to Chatteris via Wilburton, Haddenham, Sutton and Mepal. These improvements to the bus service to and from Cottenham are not reflected in the decision to reclassify the village as a Minor Rural Centre or in the decision to not make any allocations in the village.

South Cambridgeshire District Council's 'Housing Statistical Information Leaflet' (December 2019) identified a need for 52 affordable dwellings in Cottenham for those with a local connection to the village – see https://www.scambs.gov.uk/media/18316/affordable-housing-housing-statistical-information-leaflet-december-2019.pdf. It is acknowledged that the recent planning permissions for housing in Cottenham would meet most of the current identified affordable housing needs, although further affordable housing needs will arise during the plan period to 2041 and additional allocations should be made to meet those future needs. As a Rural Centre and one of the more sustainable settlements in South Cambridgeshire, Cottenham should seek to accommodate district-wide affordable housing needs and not just those from the village and the immediate surrounding area. The made Cottenham Neighbourhood Plan allocates three previously developed sites for housing, but it is noted that these sites fall below the site size threshold where affordable housing would be required, and as such no affordable housing would be delivered from these sites. There is a Cottenham Community Land Trust, but no schemes to deliver housing have been identified and the organisation appears to be having some difficulty in finding suitable sites. The promoted developments by Cambridge District Oddfellows at land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham could include a proportion of land for a community land trust scheme, in conjunction with a development for housing and affordable housing if the site is allocated in emerging GCLP.

For all these reasons, small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area, including Cottenham, because it is accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within the village, and there is an identified need for affordable and community land trust housing in the village.

Requested Change

The following changes are requested to Policy S/DS: Development Strategy:

It is requested that predicted housing delivery rates for the new settlements take into account the evidence from similar development elsewhere.

It is requested that the assumptions about faster housing delivery rates for Northstowe and Waterbeach are deleted from the development strategy.

It is requested that realistic assumptions about delivery are applied for North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

It is requested that additional sites that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing are identified in the development strategy, including small and medium sites in the villages, in order to address the under-delivery of affordable housing from Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne West, North East Cambridge and Cambridge East.

It is requested that small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area, including Cottenham, because those villages are accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within those villages, and there is an identified need for affordable and community land trust housing in those villages.

As requested in the Cambridge District Oddfellows representations to Section 2.6: Rest of Rural Area, the land at Two Mill Field and the land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham should be allocated in emerging GCLP for residential development.

OBJECT

It is proposed in Policy S/SH that Cottenham should be reclassified as Minor Rural Centre. The reason for this reclassification is because Cottenham does not have a high quality public transport in the form of a segregated transport route i.e. access to a Greater Cambridge Partnership scheme or the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway. Cambridge District Oddfellows object to the reclassification of Cottenham when the village has all of the other attributes of a Rural Centre, and the existing bus services are good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership is bringing forward a project to improve the services and connections.

Cottenham has a good range of services and facilities including a supermarket and convenience stores, post office, doctors surgeries, dentist, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, bank, primary school and secondary school, village hall and meeting spaces. Cottenham is currently connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. The Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop at Oakington is approximately 3.5km from the centre of Cottenham. The Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project proposes substantial improvements to the bus services for Cottenham, including a bus every 10 minutes to Cambridge via Histon, a more frequent service to Oakington (including the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop), and a more frequent rural service to Chatteris via Wilburton, Haddenham, Sutton and Mepal. It is acknowledged that the public transport routes from Cottenham are not segregated, but the current bus service is good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project will improve the quality of the bus services from the village including connections to the Cambridge Guided Busway at Oakington. The Making Connections project has not been taken into account in the decision to reclassify Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy. The frequency of the bus services from Cottenham to Cambridge would be equivalent to those on a segregated bus route. For all these reasons, Cottenham should remain as a Rural Centre.

Requested Change

It is requested that the status of Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy is not altered, and it remains as a Rural Centre.

OBJECT

It is proposed in Policy S/SH that Cottenham should be reclassified as Minor Rural Centre. The reason for this reclassification is because Cottenham does not have a high quality public transport in the form of a segregated transport route i.e. access to a Greater Cambridge Partnership scheme or the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway. Cambridge District Oddfellows object to the reclassification of Cottenham when the village has all of the other attributes of a Rural Centre, and the existing bus services are good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership is bringing forward a project to improve the services and connections.

Cottenham has a good range of services and facilities including a supermarket and convenience stores, post office, doctors surgeries, dentist, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, bank, primary school and secondary school, village hall and meeting spaces. Cottenham is currently connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. The Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop at Oakington is approximately 3.5km from the centre of Cottenham. The Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project proposes substantial improvements to the bus services for Cottenham, including a bus every 10 minutes to Cambridge via Histon, a more frequent service to Oakington (including the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop), and a more frequent rural service to Chatteris via Wilburton, Haddenham, Sutton and Mepal. It is acknowledged that the public transport routes from Cottenham are not segregated, but the current bus service is good and the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project will improve the quality of the bus services from the village including connections to the Cambridge Guided Busway at Oakington. The Making Connections project has not been taken into account in the decision to reclassify Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy. The frequency of the bus services from Cottenham to Cambridge would be equivalent to those on a segregated bus route. For all these reasons, Cottenham should remain as a Rural Centre.

Requested Change

It is requested that the status of Cottenham in the settlement hierarchy is not altered, and it remains as a Rural Centre.

Section 2.6: Rest of Rural Area

It is considered that the growth of the more sustainable villages must be part of the development strategy for emerging GCLP, and particularly those villages that contain a good range of services and facilities, are accessible by a range of modes of transport, and where there is an identified need for affordable and community land trust housing.

Paragraph 79 of the NPPF seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas and acknowledges that housing can enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and support local services. The promoted developments by Cambridge District Oddfellows at land at Two Mill Fields and at land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham would support the existing services and facilities in the village, including the supermarket and convenience stores, post office, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, and existing and future bus services.

Paragraph 69 acknowledges the role that small and medium sized sites can make towards meeting the housing requirements, and that such sites are often built-out relatively quickly. Small and medium sized sites typically only require limited new physical infrastructure and amendments to the access arrangements. The housing monitoring data from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire confirms that small and medium sites are delivered quickly i.e. within two to three years. It is considered that small and medium sized sites make a significant contribution towards the short term housing land supply and the five year housing land supply position in Greater Cambridgeshire. It is requested that small/medium sized sites such as land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham are allocated to meet the requirement for a mix of sites including those that are easily deliverable.

Paragraph 104 of the NPPF expects transport issues to be considered at the earliest stages of plan-making. Those issues include opportunities created by existing or proposed transport infrastructure in terms of the scale, location and density of development, and opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use. Paragraph 105 expects significant development to be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable. The services and facilities and businesses within Cottenham are all accessible by walking and cycling. Cottenham is currently connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. The Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project proposes substantial improvements to the bus services for Cottenham, including a bus every 10 minutes to Cambridge via Histon, a more frequent service to Oakington (including the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway stop), and a more frequent rural service to Chatteris via Wilburton, Haddenham, Sutton and Mepal. As such, realistic alternatives to the car for travel to and from Cottenham exist, and bus services will be improved in the future once the Making Connections project has been delivered.

Paragraph 62 of the 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. South Cambridgeshire District Council's 'Housing Statistical Information Leaflet' (December 2019) identified a need for 52 affordable dwellings in Cottenham for those with a local connection to the village. It is acknowledged that most of the current need for affordable housing would be met by recent planning permissions, but there will be future affordable housing needs that arise in the future and sustainable villages such as Cottenham should seek to meet district-wide affordable housing needs too. It is noted that Cottenham Community Land Trust have not yet brought forward a scheme and may be having difficulty finding a suitable site. The promoted developments by Cambridge District Oddfellows at land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham could include a proportion of land for a community land trust scheme, in conjunction with a development for housing and affordable housing if the site is allocated in emerging GCLP.

For all these reasons, small scale housing allocations should be made in the more sustainable villages within the rest of the rural area, including Cottenham, because those villages are accessible by sustainable modes of transport, there is a need to support the existing services and facilities within those villages, and there is an identified need for affordable and community land trust housing in those villages.

The Cambridge District Oddfellows representations to the assessments of the land at Two Mill Field (Site Ref. 40419) and land north of Oakington Road (Site Ref. 40417) comment on the potential constraints identified with the promoted developments and explain how those constraints would be addressed. In summary, and for both sites, the promoted developments would include additional landscaping at the site boundaries, green infrastructure, and biodiversity enhancement measures. It is noted that land adjacent to both sites have been promoted through the call for sites process of the emerging GCLP, and it should be possible to deliver a coordinated development if a number of neighbouring sites were allocated too e.g. strategic landscaping, open space, access arrangements, footway provision etc. The planned improvements to the bus services in Cottenham as part of Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project should provide realistic alternatives to the car for some journeys and reduce the impact on the strategic highway network.

Requested Change

It is requested that the development strategy for the rest of the rural area includes additional allocations in Cottenham.

It is requested that land at Two Mill Field in Cottenham is allocated with the following policy requirements:

• Site Area of 3.24 Ha
• Capacity for approx. 90 dwellings, including affordable housing, self/custom build plots and a proportion of community land trust housing
• Delivery of open space and green infrastructure
• Landscaping at boundaries
• Northern boundary compatible with permitted residential development (Ref. S/2876/16/OL)

It is requested that land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham is allocated with the following policy requirements:

• Site Area of 2.36 Ha
• Capacity for approx. 90 dwellings, including affordable housing, self/custom build plots and a proportion of community land trust housing
• Delivery of open space and green infrastructure
• Landscape buffer at northern and western boundaries

A key aim of the Sustainability Appraisal process is to make a plan more sustainable. It tests the social, economic, and environmental impacts of various plan options, to help choose the most sustainable options. It also seeks to determine the extent to which the principles of sustainable development are integrated into the plan and its policies.

It is considered by Cambridge District Oddfellows that the Sustainability Appraisal has not sought to make emerging GCLP more sustainable, and in respect of villages it appears that the assessment against sustainability objectives is not robust because it does not critically review the evidence provided by the Councils. For example, some villages have good access by sustainable modes of transport and contain a good range of services and facilities, there is an identified need for affordable housing in most villages which is ignored in the assessment process, and there is limited capacity within existing settlement boundaries for villages to accommodate additional development.

The sustainability objectives that are relevant to the Cambridge District Oddfellows representations are: SA1 Housing; and, SA2 Access to Services and Facilities.

The Cambridge District Oddfellows representations and requested amendment to the assessment of policy options in the Sustainability Appraisal are as follows:

• Table 5.5: Policy S/SH: Settlement Hierarchy. It is claimed that the preferred option for the settlement hierarchy would deliver sustainable patterns of development. A ‘significant positive effect’ score is identified for the housing sustainability objective (SA1) and the access to services and facilities sustainability objective (SA2). As set out in the Cambridge District Oddfellows representations to Policy S/DS: Development Strategy and Section 2.6: Rest of Rural Area, there are no housing allocations made in most villages, including Cottenham, and as such there cannot be significant positive effect for those villages in the settlement hierarchy where no additional housing or affordable housing is planned during the plan period to 2041. It is not clear how the decision to reclassify Cottenham as a Minor Rural Centre has been taken into account in the assessment for Policy S/SH because it is not mentioned. Cottenham has a good range of services and facilities including a supermarket and convenience stores, post office, doctors surgeries, dentist, library, public houses, restaurant/takeaway, bank, primary school and secondary school, village hall and meeting spaces. There is a currently a good bus service from Cottenham, which is due to be improved with more frequent services and better connections as part of Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Making Connections project. Therefore, Cottenham as a Rural Centre and as location for additional development would have positive effects for the accessibility to services sustainability objective, but the decision to reclassify the village as a Minor Rural Centre and not make any allocations cannot have the same positive effect. The decision to reclassify Cottenham as a Minor Rural Centre is not supported by any evidence and has not been informed by any assessment against sustainability objectives.
• Table 5.22: Policy S/RRA: Allocations in the Rest of the Rural Area: A ‘mixed significant positive and minor negative effect’ score is identified for the housing sustainability objective (SA1). A ‘mixed significant negative and minor positive effect’ score is identified for access to services and facilities objective (SA2). As set out in the Cambridge District Oddfellows representations to Policy S/RRA, it is acknowledged that most of the current need for affordable housing would be met by recent planning permissions, but there will be future affordable housing needs that arise in the future and sustainable villages such as Cottenham should seek to meet district-wide affordable housing needs too. It appears that the Cottenham Community Land Trust is having difficulty bringing forward a scheme because no site is available or identified. It must be a negative outcome for the housing related sustainability objective if future affordable housing needs of the district and villages, including Cottenham, will not be met by the development strategy or the strategy for rural areas. As set out above, Cottenham contains a good range of services and facilities and bus services that due to be improved, reflecting its current status as a Rural Centre. The accessibility to services and facilities is good for Cottenham, but this is not reflected in the assessment for this sustainability related objective, and additional development in this village would improve the sustainability outcomes and support the existing services and facilities.

It is requested that land at Two Mill Field and land north of Oakington Road in Cottenham are allocated in emerging GCLP to deliver better and more positive sustainability outcomes compared with the preferred development strategy.