Decision details

Matter for Decision

The report sought agreement of the Proposed Submission North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (AAP) that establishes the Councils, policies, and proposals for managing development, regeneration, and investment in North East Cambridge over the next twenty years and beyond.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport.

      i.         Agreed the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission (Regulation 19) (Appendix A1) and Proposed Submission Policies Map (Appendix A2) for future public consultation, contingent upon the separate Development Control Order being undertaken by Anglian Water for the relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Plant being approved.

    ii.         Noted the Draft Final Sustainability Report (Appendix B of the Officer’s report), and Habitats Regulation Assessment (Appendix C of the Officer’s report) and agree them as supporting documents to the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission (Regulation 19) that will also be subject to future public consultation.

   iii.         Agreed the following supporting documents to future public consultation: 

a.         Statement of Consultation, including the Councils’ consideration of and responses to representations received to the draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (Regulation 18) consultation 2020 (Appendix D of the Officer’s report) 

b.         Duty to Cooperate Compliance Statement (Appendix (Appendix E of the Officer’s report) 

c.         Draft Duty to Cooperate Statement of Common Ground (Appendix F of the Officer’s report)

d.         Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendix G of the Officer’s report) 

e.         Topic papers (Appendix H of the Officer’s report). 

  iv.         Agreed the findings of the following background evidence documents prepared by the Councils that have informed the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission and are proposed to accompany future public consultation: 

a.         Typologies Study and Development Capacity Assessment (Appendix I1 of the Officer’s report); 

b.         Surface Water Drainage Core Principles (Appendix I2 of the Officer’s report)

c.         Chronology of the feasibility investigations of redevelopment of the Cambridge Wastewater Treatment Plant (Appendix I3 of the Officer’s report).

    v.         Noted the findings of the background evidence documents that have informed the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission and are proposed to accompany the public consultation (see Background documents to the Officer’s report)

  vi.         Agreed that any subsequent material amendments be made by the Cambridge Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport in consultation with Chair and Spokes, and by the South Cambridgeshire Lead Member for Planning, both in consultation with the Joint Local Planning Advisory Group (JLPAG).

 vii.         Agreed that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes be delegated to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic in consultation with Cambridge Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport and by the South Cambridgeshire Lead Member for Planning.

 

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Principal Planning Policy Officer.

 

In response to Member’s comments the Principal Planning Policy Officer, Strategic Planning Consultant and Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the following:

 

      i.         As part of the AAP the retail and town centre evidence-based study had been updated, considering the revised development numbers and amendments to the spatial framework.

    ii.         Five local centres had now been proposed rather than the original four.

   iii.         All homes would be within a five-minute walk of the retail centre that would accommodate resident’s day to day needs.

  iv.         The shop policy had been designed to encourage a variety of individual retailers. In total there would be around 107 units available.

    v.         Appreciated that residents would need access to supermarkets and the AAP outlined five food stores to come forward within those centres.

  vi.         Advised that people’s shopping habits had changed with an increase in on-line shopping; were promoting consolidation hubs which would minimise vehicle movements within the APP area.

 vii.         With no onsite secondary school provision, safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes for children to access local schools in the area had been explored.

viii.         Welcomed the redevelopment of the Cambridge Business Park which would include a mix of business, residential and community use.

  ix.         One of the constraints of the Science Park was the lengthy leases that some of the buildings had, if development had been allocated on to those individual plots it would not be possible to demonstrate that the Plan was deliverable within the plan period.

    x.         Envisaged that residential streets in the AAP area would not be a place where vehicles would be parked, and the streets would become part of public life.  

  xi.         Reluctant to place a definition on the term ‘local people’ used in the AAP. However, there was a local connection test used for brownfield sites which could be applicable.

 xii.         Privately managed community facilities were secured with a community use agreement through planning permission which ensured community use. Those facilities also had to remain commercially viable.

xiii.         Affordable housing needed to be truly affordable. Housing officers would assist in setting the correct rent levels.

xiv.         Currently there were provision for three primary schools. Discussions were being held with County Council Officers to rethink how a school building should be designed, moving away from the single storey land hungry element, and becoming multi-functional.

xv.         A secondary school had not been proposed as The County Council forecast did not deem a secondary school necessary in the AAP area. This would also mean those living in the area would integrate more widely with those outside of the area.

xvi.         Secondary schools were incredibly land hungry and expensive to deliver and there would be significant implications on some of the delivery of the AAP should such a school be built.

xvii.         Agreed it was important to understand the delivery of spaces and the quantity of activities that could take place within them.

xviii.         Recognised the significance of the relationship between density, open space and the impact on residents including their mental health.

xix.         Officers had spent large amount of time over a number of years speaking with representatives from the Science Park to discuss how the space could be integrated within the community.

xx.         Acknowledged the comment that the Arcadia development was viewed as ‘insular’ by residents and had engaged with the landowners to ensure that new facilities were much more generous and open. 

xxi.         Noted the concern expressed regarding the amount of formal open space provision.

 

Councillor Bick proposed and Councillor Porrer seconded the following amendment to the recommendation (additional text underlined, and deleted text struck through):

 

The Executive Councillor is recommended to:

1. Agree the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission (Regulation 19) (Appendix A1) and Proposed Submission Policies Map (Appendix A2) for future public consultation, contingent upon the separate Development Control Order being undertaken by Anglian Water for the relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Plant being approved; 

2. Note the Draft Final Sustainability Report (Appendix B), and Habitats Regulation Assessment (Appendix C) and agree them as supporting documents to the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission (Regulation 19) that will also be subject to future public consultation; 

3. Agree the following supporting documents to future public consultation:  a. Statement of Consultation, including the Councils’ consideration of and responses to representations received to the draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (Regulation 18) consultation 2020 (Appendix D);  b. Duty to Cooperate Compliance Statement (Appendix E);  c. Draft Duty to Cooperate Statement of Common Ground (Appendix F);  d. Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendix G);  e. Topic papers (Appendix H). 

4. Agree the findings of the following background evidence documents prepared by the Councils that have informed the North East Cambridge Page 762 Report page no. 3 Agenda page no. Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission and are proposed to accompany future public consultation:  a. Typologies Study and Development Capacity Assessment (Appendix I1);  b. Surface Water Drainage Core Principles (Appendix I2);  c. Chronology of the feasibility investigations of redevelopment of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant (Appendix I3).

5. Note the findings of the background evidence documents that have informed the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission and are proposed to accompany the public consultation (see Background documents to this report); 

 6. Agree that any subsequent material amendments be made by the Cambridge Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport in consultation with Chair and Spokes, and by the South Cambridgeshire Lead Member for Planning, both in consultation with the JLPAG; 

7. Agree that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes be delegated to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic in consultation with Cambridge Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport and by the South Cambridgeshire Lead Member for Planning.

1. Defer decisions on the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan: Proposed Submission (Regulation 19) and Proposed Submission Policies Map for the shortest feasible period until options of alternative mixes allowing greater on-site achievement of the Local Plan policy standard for formal open space have been considered by members.

The Joint Director for Planning and Economic Development advised the work required to consider the alternative mix of land use and the consultation process would take a further twelve-months to develop and then to engage with statutory consultees.   A delay could create a risk that the Development Consent Order Process would not proceed until the AAP had been agreed which would impact the Local Plan and AAP timetable. The current trajectory for adoption of the Local Plan was that the Plan would be more than five years old. An out of date Local Plan would mean that local polices would be given less weight for planning decisions.

The amendment was lost by 3 votes to 5 votes.

The Committee

The Committee endorsed the recommendations as set out in the Officer’s report by 5 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.