Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Bick, Birtles, Marchant-Daisley and McPherson.

 

 

Councillor	Item	Interest
Blencowe	13/45/CNLa	Personal: YMCA Football Club Chair
Smith	13/45/CNLa	Personal: Employed by University of Cambridge
Ward	13/45/CNLa	Personal: Regular user of the Cambridge Airport.

 

Speaking on Agenda Item 4a: Local Plan 2014

 

Mr Hart addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          The draft Local Plan would not adequately control development at the airport.

               ii.          Cambridge Airport, Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council had been asked for details on the airport development, but information had not been provided.

             iii.          Mr Hart had undertaken his own investigation into emissions and their impact on the environment.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change asked the Head of Planning Services to liaise with Mr Hart after the meeting regarding his concerns.

 

Mr Hart asked if the 2014 Local Plan could ensure that airport development occurred in line with the Airport Strategic Plan.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change undertook to liaise with Mr Hart after the meeting.

 

Mr Rix addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          He and other people took issue with the inclusion of GB1 and GB2 sites in the Local Plan as sites for development.

               ii.          Queried if CC911 would be included as a site for development.

             iii.          He had requested information but this had not been supplied.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded:

 

                 i.          Asked for details of information that had been requested.

               ii.          This Council meeting would decide which sites would go forward to the Planning Inspector as proposed allocations for development.

             iii.          GB1 and 2 were included as sites due to housing need pressure.

 

Mr Rix queried the likely response by the Planning Inspector if GB1 and GB2 were not included as sites for development.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said that if the Council could not provide sufficient sites to meet housing need then the Inspector would not approve the Local Plan. This meant that planning applications could be approved on appeal in the absence of a Plan.

 

Mr Gudgeon addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          Sought clarification why GB1 was being used to meet the 14,000 housing target.

               ii.          Suggested the 14,000 target was an arbitrary figure and open to challenge.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded that economic forecasting was not an exact science. The data included a range of forecasts to generate a best estimate figure.

 

Mr Gudgeon queried what the forecast figure was based on.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said the forecast was based on evidence. He offered to liaise after the meeting if Mr Gudgeon requested.

 

Mr Meed addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          He undertook bird surveys for the RSPB.

               ii.          He had surveyed the area around Worts’ Causeway. This was a habitat for red and amber list species (ie rare ones). Any loss of habitat was a threat to these species.

             iii.          Requested that the Council repeat a bird/bat/plant survey as undertaken in the past.

             iv.          Suggested the Local Plan showed a misunderstanding of the ecology of ground nesting birds, which would result in a net loss of species. This goes against planning policy and should be reviewed.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said the Nature Conservation Officer has been involved throughout the Local Plan process. The Council took nature conservation issues seriously and referred to Wildlife Trust representations. A survey had been commissioned to mitigate issues. The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said he would liaise with Officers regarding any further surveys that may be necessary.

 

Mr Meed took issue with the Council’s advice from experts and referred to the Green Infrastructure Strategy which he felt proposed a better use for the area.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change invited Mr Meed to input into the consultation process.

 

Mr Beresford addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          Residents objected to Worts’ Causeway being developed for housing.

               ii.          The green belt is valued as a green and leisure space that should be protected.

 

Mr Jones addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          He appreciated that more homes were needed.

               ii.          Took issue with the evidence base for the Local Plan and development of GB1 and GB2 sites.

             iii.          Queried the housing need figure.

             iv.          Requested a public inquiry into the use of GB1 and GB2 as development sites because Central Government had not changed green belt protection.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded

 

                 i.          Legal advice suggested that deferral of the Local Plan would lead to greater green belt development pressure.

               ii.          The Planning Committee were responsible for implementing policy.

             iii.          The Council was developing policy in a changing planning environment. It needed to balance needs and policy requirements.

 

Mr Jones said that nibbling away at the green belt was unacceptable. He asked for all background documents referred to in the Local Plan to be made available as he had experienced difficulty accessing them.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said the intention of developing GB1 and GB2 sites was to avoid nibbling away at the green belt. Background documents referred to in the Local Plan were available on the Council website.

 

Ms Barnard queried why GB1 and GB2 had been released as land for development. She suggested this went against planning policy regarding sustainability and access to services.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded:

 

                 i.          Reiterated the Council needed to balance needs and policy requirements.

               ii.          Site developers would have to address access to services in their planning applications.

 

Ms Barnard queried if housing needs trumped sustainability.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded that housing needs had to be balanced with the desire not to develop the green belt.

 

Dr Peckham addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          Stated the city had traffic flow and congestion issues.

               ii.          Current traffic flow issues in Worts’ Causeway and Babraham Road would be exacerbated by developing GB1 and GB2.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded that transport challenges for the area around Worts’ Causeway were well known. Any developer would have to explain how they would mitigate issues or they would not get planning permission.

 

Ms Göhler addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          Welcomed some objectives of the Local Plan.

               ii.          Suggested the Transport Strategy needed to be strengthened to be sustainable.

             iii.          Referred to Cambridge Past Present & Future representations on the Local Plan.

             iv.          Suggested avoiding green belt developments, keeping the city compact and avoiding urban sprawl.

              v.          Said there was a need to strengthen green belt protection.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded:

 

                 i.          Thanked Cambridge Past Present & Future for being a critical friend.

               ii.          Officers had looked at all sites to develop in the city, no more were available hence the green belt proposals.

             iii.          If any sites had been discounted from the Plan it was because they were unviable.

 

Ms Göhler reiterated her concerns regarding green belt development and requested that alternatives be looked at.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said that South Cambridgeshire District Council had their own housing needs to fulfil. Cross border shifting of housing developments had been explored through a Memorandum of Understanding.

 

Mr Parry-Jones addressed the Council and made the following points:

 

                 i.          Took issue with proposal to develop the green belt.

               ii.          GB1 is important to Cambridge.

             iii.          There was no evidence to justify the development of GB1 for housing.

             iv.          The Council should protect its heritage assets such as listed buildings.

              v.          Took issue with housing need figures.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change responded:

 

                 i.          Reiterated the Council needed to balance needs and policy requirements.

               ii.          The Worts’ Causeway sites were not required under the 2006 Local Plan but were now.

             iii.          Housing need figures were lower than previous ones.

 

Mr Parry-Jones said green belt sites would not be sustainable and would overspill into other areas of the green belt.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said the onus was on developers to provide sustainable developments or they would not get planning permission.

Appendices attached:

 

·       Appendix B: Sustainability Appraisal (Sa) of the Cambridge Local Plan

 

·       Appendix C: Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Joint Sustainability Appraisal of the Sustainable Development Strategy

 

·       Appendix E: Equalities Impact Assessment

 

·       Appendix H: Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Memorandum of Co-operation – Supporting the Spatial Approach 2011 – 2031

 

 

The following appendices are accessible via the following hyperlink

 

www.cambridge.gov.uk/public//ldf/draft_submission/full

 

·       Appendix A: Cambridge Local Plan 2014: Draft Submission Plan

 

·       Appendix D: Habitats Regulations Assessment

 

·       Appendix F: Statement of Consultation and Audit Trails

 

·       Appendix G: Cambridge Policies Map (draft)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Ward spoke to the amendment sheet as circulated around the Council Chamber. The amendment proposed related to the threshold on new development at which affordable housing requirements would be sought.

 

The amendment sheet is attached at appendix 1 to these minutes and is available via:

 

http://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/documents/b7289/Amendment%20Sheet%2027th-Jun-2013%2018.00%20Council.pdf?T=9

 

Amendment  From The Independent And Conservative Group

 

Councillor Hipkin proposed and Councillor Meftah seconded the following amendment:

 

That sites GB1 and GB2 are not released from the Green Belt and allocated for housing development, and that as a consequence the Council resolves to meet its housing needs elsewhere within its administrative area.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was lost by 32 votes to 2 with 3 abstentions.

 

Labour Amendment 1: Strengthen Sports And Leisure Facilities Provision, Including In Northern Fringe East

 

Councillor Blencowe proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment:

 

1.1 Policy 14 - Northern Fringe East  p57 of the Local Plan add ‘, leisure’ in second paragraph after ‘retail’.

1.2 Policy 73 Community, Sports and Leisure Facilities added text on Sports Facilities and Community Stadium.

Page 196 add ‘, Sports’ to the heading to read ‘Community, Sports and Leisure Facilities’

1.3 Add a new ‘d) Will be permitted if they are provided in sustainable locations.’

1.4 After new d) add wording ‘Proposals for new and improved sports and leisure facilities will be supported which improve the range, quality and access to facilities both within Cambridge and where appropriate in the sub region. This policy is relevant to a wide range of facilities from health clubs to serve parts of the city to leisure and sports provision to serve the city and sub region such as a concert hall, community sports stadium and sports complex. In securing a suitable location for city wide or sub regional facilities developers will be expected to demonstrate use of the sequential test in considering sites for development.
(With consequential addition of these facility types also to Table 200).’

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 36 votes to 0.

 

Labour Amendment 2: Support Community Stadium And Investigate If Practical In City

 

Councillor Blencowe proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment:

 

Add new paragraph above current Para 8.13 on p197 of the Local Plan.

The case and need for a sub-regional Community Stadium is evidenced by recent studies and analysis and is supported.  Further proposals for an appropriately located Community Stadium site that meet the necessary requirements on combining a sports stadium with onsite community sports facilities will be investigated in the city.

On a show of hands the amendment was lost by 20 votes to 18.

 

Labour Amendment 3

 

Councillor Herbert proposed and Councillor Blencowe seconded the following amendment:

 

Jointly Investigate Community Stadium With South Cambridgeshire District Council

 

Add new paragraphs above current paragraph 8.13 on p197 of the Local Plan. ‘A joint process will also be proposed and developed with South Cambridgeshire to jointly assess appropriate sites in both areas, with the aim of identifying an appropriate and deliverable site for a Community Stadium, including if a suitable city site is not identified and deliverable.

There is current under-provision of various sports facilities that a properly located and defined Community Stadium could contribute to, and why wider sports and leisure facilities should also be considered in appropriate Areas of Major Change.’

 

And Ensure Community Facilities Are Multi-Purpose

 

Add text at end of the current paragraph 8.13 ‘Flexible buildings such as community centres or halls should be designed to accommodate as many different community and leisure activities as possible. This would enable shared use, for example, dual use of school halls and sports facilities.’

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously.

 

Councillor Ward proposed and Councillor Pitt seconded the following amendment:

 

‘There is current under-provision of various sports facilities that a properly located and defined Community Stadium could contribute to, and why wider sports and leisure facilities should also be considered in appropriate Areas of Major Change and other locations.’

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously.

 

Labour Amendment 4: Policy 68 Open Space And Recreation Provision Through New Developments

 

Councillor Herbert proposed and Councillor Hipkin seconded the following amendment:

 

New paragraph above paragraph 7.48 p184 of the Local Plan
‘Onsite provision in significant new developments will be considered the norm and major new sites will need to meet their obligations on open space rather than claim that current well used facilities have spare capacity, given the need to add extra sports and recreation facilities and extra range of facilities for a growing and increasingly active population, subject to wording being agreed through the democratic process.’

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change said he would accept the amendment if the Mayor’s amendment (shown in bold) was added to the Labour Group amendment.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously.

 

Labour Amendment 5a: Maximising Affordable Rented Housing Delivery

 

Councillor Price proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment:

 

Page 147 Policy 45 of the Local Plan - Affordable Housing and Dwelling Mix insert new sentence after ‘future household needs for Cambridge’: A minimum of 75% of the affordable housing provided will be wholly for rent.

Add a new paragraph above paragraph 6.3 on p147
Policies in the Affordable Housing SPD will be applied to maximise affordable housing supply, and then strengthened in the planned review of the SPD to increase future affordable housing and define affordable rents, with a target percentage of under 60% compared to Cambridge market rents, provided this is not precluded by national policy and funding.’

 

On a show of hands the amendment was lost by 20 votes to 16 with 1 abstention.

 

Labour Amendment 5b: Lowering Affordable Housing Threshold

 

The meeting adjourned briefly for discussion including the extent of the amendment to the draft local plan policy already put forward in the amendment sheet and the advice from consultants that supported the approach being considered. Following this adjournment,  there was a consensual amendment to lowering the affordable housing threshold. Councillor Price proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment:

 

On the affordable housing threshold, subject to confirmation in the further analysis: ‘Amend the categories so it reads 2 - 9 dwellings at 10% via commuted sums, 10 - 14 units at 25% and 15+ units at 40% in relation to on site provision. Where the percentage does not relate to whole houses, it would addressed by a commuted sum.’

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously.

 

Labour Amendment 6

 

Councillor Herbert proposed and Councillor Blencowe seconded the following amendment:

 

Transport Links to Disadvantaged Areas of Cambridge

 

Improvements to Policy 5: To strengthen cross-referencing to Transport Strategy and improve connectivity of disadvantaged areas, as raised in the Sustainability Appraisal.

 

And Effective Transport Assessment

 

Add new two paragraphs above current paragraph 2.57 on p35 of the Local Plan:

 
‘A range of development proposed in this Plan will only be deliverable and supported if appropriate transport measures and investment are led, co-ordinated and where appropriate delivered by the County Council.

Development will ensure appropriate transport and wider connectivity to disadvantaged communities in Cambridge with the potential to benefit, so that the benefits extend to disadvantaged parts of the city.  This will specifically include proposals for additional public transport links between major development locations and disadvantaged parts of the city.’

Policy 81 Mitigating the impact of development

Replace first sentence with: Developments will only be permitted where they do not have an unacceptable transport impact.

 

Add two paragraphs after paragraph 9.20 on Page 216:

‘All significant Cambridge development requires effective Transportation Assessment and appropriate prioritised and costed mitigation measures, with delivery plans and timescales to take effect at the time of new development.’

‘The Council is committed to ensuring that transport assessments which indicate ‘insufficient capacity’ on the local or strategic road network then lead to effective and adequate interventions or investment to achieve ‘appropriate mitigation’ of the additional transport impacts of the development.’

On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously.

 

On a show of hands Council unanimously agreed to carry on past 10:30 pm rather than adjourn to another day.

 

Labour Amendment 7: Effective Plans for Areas of Major Change and Opportunity Areas

 

Councillor Herbert proposed and Councillor Ward seconded the following amendment:

 

Add new paragraphs above current Para 3.27 on Page 56 Areas of Major Change and Opportunity Areas:

The appropriate planning policy guidance mechanism will be identified before work commences on design and delivery of development in each of the different and varied Areas of Major Change and Opportunity Areas.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 36 votes to 0 with 1 abstention.

 

Labour Amendment 8: Parking Management in Residential Areas

 

Councillor Blencowe proposed and Councillor Owers seconded the following amendment:

Amend Table L1 on Parking Management p340 of the Local Plan to add wording in the bottom right hand box (relating to 3 or more bedroom dwellings outside the controlled parking zone) to read:

 
Units of 3 bedrooms and above outside the Central Parking Zone, no less than a mean of 0.5 spaces per dwelling up to a maximum of 2 spaces per dwelling.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 30 votes to 3 with 3 abstentions.

 

Resolved (by 21 votes to 0) to:

 

       i.          Approve the draft Cambridge Local Plan 2014, subject to the changes above, for the purposes of publication under Regulations 19 and 20 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

     ii.          Approve the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Memorandum of Co-operation as part of the council’s approach for plan making under the duty to co-operate as required in the Localism Act 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012;

   iii.          Agree that the amendments and editing changes (as above) be made to the draft Local Plan (and associated Sustainability Appraisal and other appendices) and be agreed by the Executive Councillor for Planning and Climate Change in consultation with the Chair and Spokesperson of Development Plan Scrutiny Sub-Committee.