Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Matter for
Decision
i.
The
report presented the draft Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and
Construction Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for consultation
purposes. The SPD was being prepared to
provide guidance on the implementation of policies related to climate change
and sustainable design and
construction within the adopted Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Local Plans
in order to support the Greater Cambridge growth agenda and delivery of sustainable
development.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces
Resolved:
i.
To agree the draft Greater
Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (attached at Appendix 1 to
the Officer’s report) for consultation
purposes;
ii.
that the consultation
period will take place between Monday 15 July and Monday 23 September 2019;
iii.
that the Joint Director of
Planning and Economic
Development be granted delegated authority, in liaison with the
Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces, and the Chair and
Spokes for the Planning Policy and Transport Scrutiny Committee, to make any
editing changes to the draft SPD and supporting documents prior to publication
and to agree the Statement and Consultation and draft Strategic Environmental
Assessment (SEA) and draft Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) Screenings
Reports for consultation alongside the draft SPD, including with the three
statutory bodies.
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 Senior Sustainability Officer.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Members expressed regret that national policy
frustrated local ambition to deliver higher standards of sustainable
development.
ii.
Suggested that the consultation documents should be
sent to local voluntary groups including Camsight.
The Senior Sustainability Officers stated the following in response to
Members’ questions:
i.
The report would return to this Committee in
January for adoption following the consultation period.
ii.
The introduction to the document addresses the
integration of sustainability considerations into the design of new
developments from the outset, with reference to the RIBA (Royal Institute of
British Architects) works plan.
iii.
The SPD concentrates on the built environment with
wider environmental concerns being addressed elsewhere.
iv.
Policy 30 would not apply to extensions built under
permitted development rights. However, there was a possibility that this could
be covered under building regulations at a future date.
v.
A ‘Forword’ would be
added to the document at a later stage and this would set out the Council’s
ambition to encourage exemplar applications.
vi.
Confirmed that the document would add weight to the
Local Plan and would influence the next Local Plan.
vii.
The proposals had been subjected to viability
assessments. However, it was acknowledged that these might be challenged by
developers.
viii.
Confirmed that Equality Impact Assessments had been
included in the documentation.
ix.
Suggested that the document would not be considered
a material consideration until formally adopted but that it would gain weight
to decision making process the nearer it came to adoption.
The Planning Policy Manager stated the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
The
SPD would supplement the adopted Local Plan which includes a wider commitment
to sustainability in future joint Local Plans.
Councillor Hipkin stated that he felt that
the discussion on this very important document had been cut short and that he
had not been able to ask all of his questions.
The Chair stated that he had not seen the Councillor indicate his wish
to speak and invited him to ask his final questions before moving to the vote.
Councillor Hipkin stated the following:
i.
Enforcement
would be problematic given staffing constraints.
ii.
Asked
if the environmental standards delivered on the University development at
Eddington could be required elsewhere.
iii.
Suggested
that the Council, in its role as a developer, should be exemplar and should
deliver to the same standard as that achieved by the University.
The Senior Sustainability Officers responded.
Requirements for Eddington had been based on a national policy document that
was no longer available. The Planning Inspector had removed some of the more
challenging standards from the Local Plan.
The Strategic Director accepted that Eddington was
an outstanding scheme but stated that due to the very high costs, it was not
accessible to many people. The Council needed to deliver viable accommodation
for local people.
The Executive Councillor thanked the
Committee for their thorough debate on this item which would be relevant to the
next Local Plan.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the amended
recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
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.