Issue - meetings

Matter for Decision

The report referred to the Authority Monitoring Report (AMR) for Greater Cambridge 2021-2022

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure

      i.         Agreed the Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council - Authority Monitoring Report for Greater Cambridge 2021-2022 (included as Appendix A) for publication on the Councils’ websites.

    ii.         Delegated any further minor editing changes to the Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council - Authority Monitoring Report for Greater Cambridge 2021-2022 to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development, in consultation with the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport.

 

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 Policy Planning Officer.

 

In response to Member’s questions the Senior Planning Officer, Planning Policy Manager and Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the following:

      i.         The development of large wet lab spaces throughout the City would be monitored by planning permissions.

    ii.         Acknowledged that change of use for retail units that did not require planning permission could be difficult to monitor. Options had been considered as to how it could be monitored such as available commercial data sets to determine if there was any information available, but this could be expensive. Physical surveys of every site could in theory be undertaken by officers but was not likely to be cost effective.

   iii.         As part of the Cambridge Local Plan Policy (CLPP) six district centres were monitored which had shown around 55% of those units remained as retail in the sub centres.

  iv.         Additional information was also used in conjunction with the CLP, consultants were used to provide additional information on retail, using a wide range of resources such as information on changing economy when looking at the change of use.

    v.         Officers had considered how it might be possible to collect information using a number of different service and organisations data bases to improve monitoring however some information would be covered under data protection regulations and data formatting meant that technology available to the service was not currently capable of such analysis.

  vi.         There had been no contact from residents’ groups in Cambridge City to undertake a Neighbourhood Plan, except for South Newnham, despite the Service Website promoting Nieghbourhood Planning. This was different in South Cambridgeshire where several Parish Councils had elected to produce Neighbourhood Plans.

 vii.         The Council continued to use S106 funding streams rather than the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) but would be reviewing the merits of this approach, and the costs levied against a backddrop of suggested change by Government to a new Development Levy.

viii.         Density was measured when the sites had been completed which varied year on year dependent on the size of site.

  ix.         To support the 2018 Local Plan, a Playing Pitch and Indoor Facility Strategy had been commissioned which included swimming pools. An update of these strategies would be prepared to test the proposals for the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan.

    x.         Evidence would be updated regarding the open space standards and green infrastructure needs which should be ready to present later in the year.

  xi.         The reported increase in amenity space of 3000sq m of D1 floorspace was as follows:

·      1700sq m for a new library at Magdalene College, not open to the public

·      Day nursey at Homerton College not publicly accessible.

·      New community space at Mill Road depot housing scheme.

·      Extension to Salvation Army Chapel.

 xii.         Previous quality of life indicators has presented challenges. For example, the Government ceased the Quality-of-Life survey. Through the emerging Local Plan Officers would have to determine a new set of indicators to look at wellbeing.

xiii.         Officers were undertaking work on ‘Placemaking’ which could form a focus on quality of life and wellbeing. Work was already underway to understand place metrics through specific datasets which would be presented to the relevant Committee when concluded.

xiv.         The emerging Local Plan would provide guidance on the development of Mitcham’s Corner; the service would be happy to meet with the West Chesterton Forum.

xv.         Floor space was being monitored through planning permission and did not consider whether the space was occupied or vacant.

 

The Committee

The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.

 

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.