Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

1.41 Public transport is only one part of the solution and for some the infrequency of services is a constraint to its use. Whilst cycling and walking also have their limitations there is clearly merit on focussing growth where new residents can walk and cycle to facilities and services as well as being able to cycle to higher order settlements, specifically Cambridge, to meet they employment and wider recreational needs. 1.42 As a result of the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s greenway proposals Comberton will soon benefit from enhanced cycle connectivity with Cambridge. This improved connectivity adds further weight to the development of our client’s sites at Bennell Farm where development has already been permitted due to the sustainability of the site.

Nothing chosen

1.43 Our client believes that it is inevitable that further land will need to be removed from the Green Belt to enable the delivery of the most sustainable form of growth for the Greater Cambridge area. However, the release of further sites on the fringes of Cambridge, especially those to the west, will result in substantial harm to the relationship between the historic core of the city and the surrounding countryside. Therefore, it is necessary for the Councils to look towards the most sustainable rural settlements that are still within reach of Cambridge by sustainable modes of travel when considering where to focus future housing growth. 1.44 With well screened sites like our client’s sites at Bennell Farm new homes can be accommodated by maximising the use of land with no loss of openness to the Green Belt in a sustainable location. New residents will be within easy cycling distance of Cambridge and have access to enhanced cycle connectivity with the city so that their travel needs do further exacerbate global climate change and other more localised environmental impacts.

Highly flexible

1.45 Our client believes that the Councils should be highly flexible towards development of both jobs and homes on the edge of villages. For years development frameworks have constrained development in sustainable locations preventing applications being permitted even where there would not be a significant encroachment into the countryside. 1.46 Other Local Planning Authorities are proposing policies that are more flexible when it comes to considering developments on the edges of settlements. As part of the 2019 review of its Local Plan West Norfolk and Kings Lynn Borough Council has included the following Policy LP26 (Residential Development Adjacent to Existing Settlements). This policy allows greater flexibility to the development of land on the edges of settlements, outside development boundaries, where the criteria of the policy are met. It also attaches weight to the use of such land to accommodate self-build dwellings. 1.47 The Greater Cambridge Local plan should consider a similarly worded policy that identifies the criteria for small-scale developments on the edges of settlements, outside development frameworks, that infill gaps or are sensitive to the locality. By attaching weight to the provision of plots for self-build such a policy could boost the supply of housing and address the needs of people on the Councils’ self-build registers.

Highly flexible

1.48 Our client believes that the Councils should be highly flexible about the size of developments allowed within village boundaries. The Councils need to focus on the delivery of more medium and some larger scale developments in the more sustainable rural locations like Comberton. Our client’s site at Bennell Farm is an excellent example of where a number of dwellings have been permitted in excess of the arbitrary number normally permitted within the development frameworks of Minor Rural Centres. These new homes will have real benefits for the village, including the delivery of a policy compliant level of affordable housing, and as such further growth should be allocated to the site to allow the extension northwards of this successful development.

42. Where should we site new development? 1.49 Rather than ranking the development options our client believes that the Councils should ensure consistent delivery across the plan period by avoiding an over concentration of development in a specific area or an over reliance on large strategic sites. Essentially, the Councils should not base their growth strategy on a single strategy. 1.50 Our client believes that a significant element of the new homes needed to meet the needs of the Greater Cambridge area will need to be accommodated in the higher order settlements near to Cambridge, like Comberton. Therefore, it is inevitable that the Greater Cambridge Local Plan will need to release sites from the Green Belt to allow the most effective form of development to meet the predicted housing needs of the area.

No uploaded files for public display

1.51 Densification can work well in urban areas but in the villages the focus should be on extending existing, successful development sites where the necessary infrastructure to accommodate new homes is already in place, or can easily be enhanced. Our client’s site at Bennell Farm is an excellent example of such a development and should be seen as an area where further housing growth can be accommodated.

1.52 Given the extent of the Cambridge Green Belt the development of site outside it are inevitably too far out for most residents to cycle to jobs and facilities in Cambridge. Therefore, the development of these sites is reliant on public transport improvements, that require significant upfront costs and are not always delivered in line with new homes. 1.53 The implications in making such sites sustainable through the enhancement of public transport infrastructure often impacts negatively on the viability of developments, which inevitably reduces the percentage of affordable housing that they can deliver. This has already been seen with Cambourne West where a significant financial contribution towards the Cambourne to Cambridge public transport route resulted in a level of affordable housing being agreed below the policy requirement of 40%.

1.54 The NPPF recommends that Green Belt boundaries only be amended in exceptional circumstances once it has been established that all other reasonable options for meeting identified needs have been examined. The NPPF also identifies the need to promote sustainable patterns of development when reviewing Green Belt boundaries. 1.55 Increasing densities in urban or village locations or poorly located new settlements should not be promoted as viable alternatives to amending Green Belt boundaries around Cambridge. The Councils need to take a diverse approach to allocating new sites for residential development, which inevitably will result in amendments of Green Belt boundaries in less sensitive areas in order to deliver the most sustainable patterns of development and be consistent with the requirements of the NPPF.

1.56 Our client believes that new settlements take too long to deliver. Moreover, they generally require a significant level of social infrastructure up front especially if facilities are not delivered in time for when new residents move in. This has been seen with Cambourne where early residents suffered higher levels of depression as the social networks within established settlements were not there. Large new settlements are also more susceptible to national economic downturns as has been seen with the delay in the delivery of homes at the new town of Northstowe. 1.57 New settlements can also have greater landscape impacts and require new highways infrastructure, new junctions, roundabouts, etc, to serve them, which also have significant landscape impacts. All the new settlements that have been permitted in South Cambridgeshire have resulted in reduced levels of affordable housing as a direct result of the significant expenditure on infrastructure needed to develop the sites. Even where they are greenfield sites like Cambourne West this is still the case.

1.58 Our client strongly believes that the growth of villages is one of the most sustainable options for the delivery of new homes to meet the existing and future needs of the Greater Cambridge area. Sites on the edges of villages can often be delivered with limited landscape impacts or loss of Green Belt function, especially where site are defined by existing landscaped boundaries. This has been successfully demonstrated with our client’s delivery of the site at Bennell Farm. 1.59 The development of sites on the edges of villages can also help to sustain existing facilities and social infrastructure in the village as well as providing a more diverse population. 1.60 By focusing growth on the District’s most sustainable rural settlements, like Comberton, the negative impacts of in-commuting by car that are presently experienced by the area can be reduced. New residents will have greater travel options with the enhancement of the cycle route between Comberton and Cambridge that will ultimately lead to more sustainable modes of travel by new and existing residents.