Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda item
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The report recommend that members confirm selected elements
of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan development strategy via the Development
Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options).
Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy
and Infrastructure
i.
Agreed
the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18
Preferred Options) (Appendix A), and in particular the proposed policy
directions in section 5 for the following proposed policies:
a) Policy S/JH: Jobs
and homes
b) Policy S/DS:
Development strategy (to confirm three key sites and development strategy
principles to inform identification of any further sites)
c) Policy S/NEC:
North East Cambridge
d) Policy S/CE:
Cambridge East
e) Policy S/CBC:
Cambridge Biomedical Campus
ii.
Noted
the findings of Appendix E: Sustainability Appraisal Update as a supporting
document that has informed the decisions regarding the Greater Cambridge Local
Plan development strategy update
iii.
Agreed
the following supporting documents that have informed the decisions regarding
the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Development Strategy Update:
a) Appendix B:
Strategy Topic Paper: Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred
Options),
b) Appendix C:
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Consultation Statement: Development Strategy
Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options) which includes responses to
representations relating to the content of this report,
c) Appendix D:
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Consultation Statement: Equalities Impact
Assessment: Development Strategy Update
iv.
Noted
the findings of the following new evidence documents that have informed the
draft policy approaches set out in Appendix A: Greater Cambridge Local Plan
Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options) (see Background
papers):
a) Greater Cambridge
Economic Development, Employment Land and Housing Relationships Evidence Update
(Iceni Projects), December 2022
b) Greater Cambridge
Housing Delivery Study Addendum (AECOM), December 2022
v.
Agreed
that any subsequent material amendments be made by the Executive Member for
Planning and Transport, in consultation with Chair and Spokes.
vi.
Agreed
that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes that do not materially
affect the content be delegated to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic
Development in consultation with the Executive Member for Planning and
Transport, in consultation with Chair and Spokes.
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 Planning Policy
Manager and Strategy and Economy Manager.
In response to Member’s questions the Planning Policy
Manager, the Strategy and Economy Manager and Joint Director of Planning and
Economic Development said the following:
i.
Agreed there needed to be an acceptable solution
to the water supply issue and a focus on sustainable locations for future
development
ii.
Noted the comment that revised forecasts should
be seen as a positive with regards to the increase in homes and jobs which
reflected the continued growth of a successful local economy.
iii.
It was proposed that the draft plan should
include strong water standards for residential (design standard of 80L per
person per day) and non-residential development; currently exploring the issues
raised in the representations.
iv.
Officers were engaged with consultants who were
continuing to develop the integrated water management study to inform the local
plan. Officers were also continuing to engage with the water company and the
Environment Agency.
v.
Cambridge Water Company were aware of the need
to reduce typical water usage across the area when developing their Water
Management Plan, to assist with this aspiration they were rolling out the
installation of smart meters.
vi.
Not as simple to say that all the surrounding
areas in Cambridgeshire had the same water resource issues as Greater Cambridge;
Greater Cambridge is unique in being supplied solely by groundwater..
vii.
Neighbouring local authorities had been
contacted during preparation of the first proposals on a range of issues,
including whether they could accommodate any of Cambridges planned growth and
would need to be contacted again if the identified needs could not be met
within the area in line with the requirements of National Planning Policy.
viii.
Regarding the suggestion to expand the plan
period, this would also lead to the identified needs increasing would go up
further. However, there was potential for that need to be spread and the
suggestion would be explored.
ix.
The local economy was experiencing a strong
growth period. Consultants had looked at similar growth economies around the world
and there would be a point of gradual slow down. Continued studies were likely
to be required as the emerging Local Plan moved forward.
x.
Consultants had looked at a range of growth
scenarios that might play out across different industrial sectors to draw their
conclusions.
xi.
To achieve a balance across the economy there
was a need for other types of sectors to grow such as the industrial and
warehouse sector. The Service would be looking at what could be done to support
a variation of roles, not just the life sciences and clusters.
xii.
An entire range of infrastructure was being
explored such as water, electricity, transport as examples when supporting
healthy and sustainable communities.
xiii.
There were significant challenges to achieve
water neutrality; in the short term it was expected to require work on reducing
water consumption, and highlighting the importance of water recycling including
grey water.
xiv.
In simple terms the economy in Cambridge would
continue to grow and more homes were required. It was important to demonstrate
the proposals were sound and deliverable having regard to the requirements for
Local Plans set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.
xv.
Welcomed comments on suggested formatting of the
documentation.
xvi.
Noted the comment that accommodation linked to
the commercial growth. The Genome Campus was an example of this. Key worker provision was being discussed as
part of exploring the rationale for the expansion of the biomedical campus.
xvii.
Officers were working to understand the housing
need for all sectors of workers and how that need could be responded to.
xviii.
Believed there was a conversation to be had
around acceleration of delivery of housing rates, recognising the limits of the
market housing. However, it was not always in the interest of the development
sector to build as many homes as might be required. There was also a limitation
on the number of people able to get a mortgage and the number of people who
wanted to purchase a property which must be considered amongst other factors.
xix.
The City Council had received public funding to
supply an increase in council homes which was one of element of the housing
need being identified from economic growth.
xx.
It was important to look at the rate and
diversity of the portfolio of new homes that came forward at the same time to
achieve an inclusive community.
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.
Supporting documents: