Issue - meetings

Senior Planning Policy Officer to deliver a presentation with a question and answer session.

The Committee received a presentation from Matt Paterson, Planning Consultant with the Shared Planning Service for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. In addition, members of the Shared Planning Service also manned an exhibition at the venue on the consultation.

The presentation outlined:

     i.        The North East Cambridge Area Action Plan was currently out for consultation.

    ii.        There was an online interactive map system so members of the public could leave comments if they did not want to complete a full consultation response https://necaap.uk.engagementhq.com/.

   iii.        The Planning Policy Team were running drop-in events and had posters, leaflets and booklets available. Community groups had been putting information on their websites about the consultation.

  iv.        A consultation had been undertaken in 2014 but since then North Cambridge Station had been opened and an Ely to Cambridge transport study had been undertaken. The Council had also submitted a Housing Infrastructure Fund bid.

   v.        The purpose of the consultation was to establish the broad land use principles for the area and to begin to outline a shared aspiration and ambition for North East Cambridge as a place.  

  vi.        Transport, climate change, sustainability, employment, housing and supporting uses were also discussed.

Members of the public made the following comments in response to the presentation:

     i.        Queried the height of the buildings and asked if it was in a high-rise area.

    ii.        Noted that the railway line formed the boundary of the development.

   iii.        Queried access into Chesterton.

  iv.        Asked that houses were not located on the boundary of the highway.

   v.        Commented that there was no discussion about the Cambridge Autonomous Metro (CAM) project.

The Planning Consultant commented:

    i.          That infrastructure would need to be in place before houses were occupied.

  ii.          The development could be high in density but it depended what housing options were chosen.

 iii.          Talked about pedestrian and cycle access over the rail crossing.

iv.          Acknowledged there was an issue with the railway crossing and said he wanted to know what solutions Network Rail have for it.

  v.          It was unclear at the moment where the CAM would be delivered. The CAM project had a long build up period and the North East Cambridge site may need to be adapted if the CAM project was brought forward. 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the presentation:

     i.        Did not want the community the other side of Fen Road to be cut off and stated that there needed to be another route out of the development.

    ii.        Recognised that the development was in its early stages and was pleased that they would try and meet 40% affordable housing but he did not want viability to be used as an argument not to deliver 40% affordable housing.

   iii.        Wanted the provision of community facilities, doctors’ surgeries, pharmacies etc to be considered up front.

  iv.        Would need to work with local communities to ensure that there was a link between the new and existing communities.

The Senior Planning Policy Officer commented:

    i.          Lessons are being learnt from development at Orchard Park, Southern Fringe, CB1 and elsewhere around the wider social needs of new communities to ensure that they would be integrated within the community.

  ii.          Work was also being undertaken with the Science Park, schools in Arbury, and Cambridge Regional College.