Issue - decisions

Matter for Decision                            

 

The report provided responses to the representations received along with recommendations for amendments to the Supplementary Planning Document ahead of adoption with several consequential proposed changes.

 

Decision of Executive Councilor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces and the Executive Councilor for Transport and Community Safety

 

      i.         Considered the main issues raised in the public consultation; agree responses to the representations received and agreed consequential proposed changes to the SPD as set out in the Consultation Statement and tracked changed version of the SPD for adoption (See Appendices A and B of the Officer’s report);

    ii.         Subject to i), agreed to adopt the Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction SPD; and

   iii.         Approved the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development is 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 SPD prior to publication.

 

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 Principal Sustainability Consultant which referred to the Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction SPD having been developed with input from officers from across both Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council. 

 

The document provides technical guidance for developers on the information that needs to be submitted with planning applications to demonstrate compliance with adopted planning policies related to climate change and sustainable design and construction.

 

In response to Members’ questions and comments the Principal Sustainability Consultant said the following:

 

      i.         Did consider moving the reference to gas combined heat and power; but where it had been referenced it had been correctly specified (as stated in paragraph 3.2.2.9 & 3.2.3.2). If used in the right sort of development this was considered a good low carbon option.

    ii.         Gas combined heat and power could enable the delivery of community scale energy schemes; was cost effective and low risk compared to a bio-mass fuel system. Therefore, considered a useful system as the technology could be changed in the future when more zero carbon options available

   iii.         Project work was being undertaken to explore injecting hydrogen into the gas grid to reduce carbon admissions. This could also be a future option for consideration. 

  iv.         The guidance in the document made it clear that where the technology was being proposed, it was being proposed in the right situation and following industry code of practice.

    v.         Have asked developers to think about what they could implement now which would benefit residents’ long term; such topics were heating which could operate at lower temperatures.

  vi.         From the 2025 no gas boilers would be permitted in new residential developments and would have to look at alternatives such as electric heating; by installing a system which could operate at a lower temperature this would allow residents to change their boiler at a future date without installing a new heating system.

 vii.         Reference to the installation of the correct pipework to rainwater harvesting tanks had been made so residents would not have to pull up the floors and new pipework in the future.

viii.         New building regulations would be issued later in the year so there would be an opportunity to add technical notes to the document when those changes to the regulations were published.

  ix.         Section 4 of the document referenced food growing and aimed to encourage developers to go further than the current policy; encouraging integrating food growing into developments in a less formal way.

    x.         Had aimed to make the document as simple as possible, however a certain level of detail was necessary based on the current Local Plan; some of the topics in the SPD were complex, particularly the environmental health issues which had been streamed lined as much as possible.

  xi.         Many consultants were aware of the detail that the City Council had referenced in the document as they had been working with Officers since the current Local Plan had been adopted.

 xii.         Noted the Committee’s frustration of wanting to achieve net zero carbon.

xiii.         Procurement had begun on the evidence base for net zero carbon in the Greater Cambridge Local Plan; already seven consultancies had expressed an interest since Friday 10 January.

xiv.         Had seen developers start to respond to net zero carbon in the absence of policy.

xv.         The sustainability checklists had been developed to provide a simple process for developers to give to applicants at pre-application stage. Different checklists had been produced for the City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council as their policies were different. The Greater Cambridge Local Plan would look to bring the polices together for both authorities.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces thanked the Principal Sustainability Consultant and the planning team for their work on such a comprehensive document. Taking the Council forward from the adopted Local Plan to the next Local Plan while thinking of the environmental and climate predicament.

 

The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Open Spaces 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.