Cambridge Local Plan Consultation: Building a Bigger, Better Cambridge

Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Councils have been consulting on the next local plan that will determine how the Cambridge sub-region is developed over the next few years. This is my responses to their initial consultation that closed recently.

This is a personal response and doesn't represent the views of any other organisation.

Question 2. Please submit any sites for employment and housing you wish to suggest for allocation in the Local Plan. Provide as much information and supporting evidence as possible.

As indicated in answering Q39, the Green Belt around Cambridge should be reviewed, and where sites currently within the Greenbelt can be developed at high density and with excellent sustainable transport (ie close to major employment sites), those sites should be removed from the Green Belt and the sites developed. This would suggest a number of new sites that could be delivered with many new homes, for example:

• The West Fields between Grange Road and the M11 – Given the local housing shortage and feasibility of developing this area with excellent walking, cycling and public transport links to key employment sites like the City Centre and West Cambridge site, coupled with its lack of special or notable features beyond ordinary agricultural land, its hard to imagine a better or more appropriate site for new housing, and it should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing.
• Much of the land between Cambridge and Shelford could be allocated to housing, with a new public transport corridor and cycle network linking to the Addenbrookes bio-medical campus.
• The field bounded by Long Road, Hobson Brook, the Guided Busway and Clare/Peterhouse sports ground is perfectly placed for housing with sustainable transport.
• Land between Milton village and the railway could be developed around the proposed rowing lake, within easy sustainable commuting distance of the Science Parks area.

Question 4. Do you agree that planning to 2040 is an appropriate date in the future to plan for? If not, what would be a more appropriate date and why?

This date is too far into the future – reflecting our poor ability to deliver in a timely fashion – in particular infrastructure. Plans should be accelerated for public transport improvements (e.g. Cam Metro or alternative area wide rapid transit, Cambridge South Station etc), so housing can be delivered sooner.

Question 5. Do you think we have identified the right cross-boundary issues and initiatives that affect ourselves and neighbouring areas?

A Unitary Authority is urgently required to cover the Cambridge sub-region (Cambridge, South Cambs and possibly slightly larger). The current system is a threat to democracy, as with so many different authorities and bodies involved without consistent political leadership (Cambridge City Council, South Cambs District, Cambs County, The Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, MPs, GCP etc) there is no real accountability – so developing planning policies becomes a technocratic exercise in evidencing how proposals meet dictated overall objectives e.g. on number of new homes required. The next local plan should not be decided on the basis of a questionnaire or consultation like this - there needs to be recognition that many of these questions are political issues (like how fast should Cambridge grow), and they should be decided by politicians making a case, and people voting for those that outline the plans they most agree with. With better democratic accountability, we could have real choice to be bolder and more radical, and with less scope for objections blocking good plans, and less likelihood poor developments will be permitted. All local authority leaders should be urgently calling on the government to create a single unitary authority to allow greater Cambridge to reach its potential.

Question 6. Do you agree with the potential big themes for the Local Plan?

Broadly yes, although there is not enough emphasis on growth - taking advantage of the unique position and opportunity available for the Cambridge sub region to develop further the knowledge based economy and build more globally significant technology companies.

Question 8. How should the Local Plan help us achieve net zero carbon by 2050?

The key element in achieving net zero is developing sustainable transport networks within current and in particular new developments. This involves prioritising walking, cycling and sustainable public transport, and de-prioritising private motor vehicles.

It will be important that new housing is built with easy walking and cycling access to employment sites and other facilities (hence the importance of developing sites such as the west fields) The city should accelerate plans to require all motor vehicles using the city to become zero emission e.g. electric cars and buses. No new buildings should use fossil fuels for space heating or other domestic purposes. Buildings should be designed to not require significant heating in winter or cooling in summer.

Question 13. How do you think we should improve the green space network?

The local plan should maintain protection of all the special parts of Cambridge (e.g. Gog Magogs,
Grantchester Meadows, the River corridor generally). New developments should include significant green areas. The plan should prohibit allowing minimum open space requirements on new developments to be bought out with cash contributions – there needs to be a mechanism to create more substantial open spaces even if land is only developed in small parcels none of which on their own would result in the creation of significant new open space.

Question 15. Do you agree that we should aim to increase tree cover across the area?

Yes.

Question 16. How should the Local Plan help us achieve 'good growth' that promotes wellbeing and social inclusion?

Key to social inclusion is building better public transport networks and improving cycling and walking routes at the expense of roads busy with motor vehicles. Cycling in particular needs a comprehensive interconnected network of cycle routes segregated from other traffic and pedestrians, with priority over motor vehicles.

Ensure local facilities are built at the same time as housing – with private facilities – shops, pubs, sports facilities etc as important as public sector facilities like schools and community centres.

Public Houses should be provided in all new developments. The Councils have belatedly come round to the idea of protecting existing pubs, recognising their value as community assets, but fail to recognise the value of pubs as community facilities in new developments, with pubs usually a poorly executed afterthought. The Fox in Bar Hill and Monkfield Arms in Cambourne are just bland, generic ‘estate’ type pubs. Eddington and Great Knighton don’t appear to have any new pubs at all. A lack of facilities like pubs helps turn these neighbourhoods into dormitory suburbs, with less social cohesion and with increased travel required for leisure.

Ensure all new communities have a good mix of tenures and types of housing.

Question 17. How do you think our plan could help enable communities to shape new development proposals?

Too much new house building is entirely delivered by large, volume, national housebuilders, with no input from the residents that will live there, or the Cambridge context. Planning policies should encourage more self-built housing, and smaller more distinctive developments. Where consultations are held, they should be listened to, instead of holding them and then just doing whatever the developer wanted to do anyway.

Question 18. How do you think we can make sure that we achieve safe and inclusive communities when planning new development?

Local police stations or outposts and higher levels of community policing.

Question 19. How do you think new developments should support healthy lifestyles?

Building high quality cycling infrastructure and encouraging higher cycling rates and lower car usage is the most significant contribution that can be made to support healthy lifestyles. Research indicates a number of significant health benefits from active commuting.

Sports facilities. Ensure there are sufficient green spaces which are suitable and available for events like parkrun. Fund significant sports facilities like a Rowing lake and Triathlon Centre from s106 agreements. Include more sports fields in new developments – too many of the sports fields currently in the city are only available to University members.

Question 20. How do you think we should achieve improvements in air quality?

Build all new developments as zero carbon, with no fossil fuels at all burnt in the new development areas for transport or heating buildings.

Question 21. How should the Local Plan protect our heritage and ensure new development is well designed? Question 23. How do you think we could ensure that new development is as well-designed as possible?

Far too few quality public buildings are built. Outside of the University, with very few exceptions (new mosque, Marmalade Lane), few new developments in Cambridge achieve notable quality, let alone outstanding. Too many are very poor – the Marque, Cambridge Leisure Park and Travelodge, the new hotel at Cambridge North Station, and much new housing is bland and uninspired. Planning policies should encourage the development of at least some landmark buildings within each site (high quality materials and design, intended to stand the tests of time), and all large new development sites should aim for consistent high-quality design and materials throughout the site.

Question 24. How important do you think continuing economic growth is for the next Local Plan?

Very Important. The Cambridge sub-region is uniquely placed to grow rapidly in knowledge-based
industries such as software and biotech. This relies on the network effects of the co-location of new
businesses with Cambridge University and existing businesses, talent and entrepreneurs. By supporting rapid growth, as well as an important role supporting the national economy, breakthroughs will be made that might not otherwise happen - there are cancers that will be cured quicker, and advances in technology essential to tackling climate change and many other problems that simply won’t happen anything like as quickly if we don’t maximise the growth of the Cambridge knowledge based economy, and this economic advantage will be lost to the UK permanently if we don’t encourage growth in the Cambridge sub-region. Saying that Cambridge has had enough growth, and new growth needs to be elsewhere would be a reckless neglect of the current opportunity, the next local plan should encourage that growth explicitly, and political leaders should be much bolder in supporting that.

Question 25. What kind of business and industrial space do you think is most needed in the area?

Too much of the office space needed by tech companies seems to be controlled by the Colleges and small numbers of surveyors and estate agents. As a result, there is not enough flexibility in options
available, particularly for high growth companies. Agents and landlords demanding minimum lease terms of 5-10 years is not uncommon – wholly inappropriate for companies that may be growing at 50-100% a year. New development should prioritise flexible configuration buildings to be let on flexible lease terms.

The other omission is allocating space within the subregion for large tech company headquarter buildings – areas that can allocated to accommodate the custom built headquarters and R+D divisions of the next Arm or CSR. Whilst it is unlikely to be possible to allocate such space immediately adjacent to the City, sites should be identified for this purpose along public transport corridors, and where there are or is potential for excellent cycle access.

Question 26. Do you think we should be protecting existing business and industrial space?

Generally yes, but the retail sheds south of Newmarket Road between Coldhams Lane and Coldhams
Common, along with the Beehive centre are relics from a past age of car based shopping trips – the retail sheds should all go and be replaced by housing, which would be within easy reach by cycling and walking from the City Centre and the new Chisholm Trail.

Question 27. How should we balance supporting our knowledge-intensive sectors, with creating a wide range of different jobs? What kind of jobs would you like to see created in the area?

Growth should focus on high value knowledge-based employment sectors and businesses to support
these sectors, as Cambridge has special strengths in these areas and the benefits to the City and Country should be maximised.

Question 30. What approach should the next plan take to supporting or managing tourism in Cambridge and the rural area?

Most of the main tourist sites are already very busy. We shouldn’t encourage much more of it, and should ensure current tourism doesn’t have an impact on local environment, e.g. pollution/congestion from tourist coaches.

Question 32. Do you think we should plan for a higher number of homes than the minimum required by government, to provide flexibility to support the growing economy?

Yes – strongly agree – we should aim for as rapid growth of housing as can be done at high quality and with great transport infrastructure, as long as this is supported by the continued growth of knowledge based industry.

Question 33. What kind of housing do you think we should provide?

Focus on making the market price of housing affordable to as many people as possible, rather than
sucking all the value out of new development by insisting on very high % levels of below market priced housing to be rationed and allocated by the Councils. This should enable more of the planning gain to be taxed and used to provide high quality sustainable transport that everyone will benefit from and that is required to meet carbon neutral goals. Some traditional affordable housing is clearly needed, but more affordable housing is best delivered by just building a lot more housing in the area.

Question 35. How should we ensure a high standard of housing is built in our area?

Local housing design standards should adopt design principals advocated by groups such as
Createstreets (www.createstreets.com).

Question 36. How should the Local Plan ensure the right infrastructure is provided in line with
development?

The local plan should provide for a rapid transit system, including underground sections to cover the
centre of Cambridge. This can be paid for by taxing the uplift in values from new housing developments.

Space needs to be made available for segregated cycle routes.

All new properties should be built with fibre to the premises internet connections.

Question 37. How should we encourage a shift away from car use and towards more sustainable modes of transport such as public transport, cycling and walking?

Stop building car-centric development like we do now – make proper provision for cycling.

Question 39. Should we look to remove land from the Green Belt if evidence shows it provides a more sustainable development option by reducing travel distances, helping us reduce our climate impacts?

Yes – the current Green Belt should be reviewed, with all ‘non-special’ areas adjacent to Cambridge
removed from the Greenbelt, to be replaced with protection for important wildlife or green sites, and a green belt further out from Cambridge. All other sites within the newly expanded Green Belt should be considered for housing if they can be delivered with sustainable transport to all required facilities.

Question 41. Do you think the Local Plan should be more flexible about the size of developments allowed within village boundaries (frameworks), allowing more homes on sites that become available?

Yes – villages should be allowed to expand, particularly if it helps them become self-sufficient in local services such as healthcare, shops and community facilities.

Question 42. Where should we site new development? Rank the options below 1-6
1 Edge of Cambridge – Greenbelt – and move the green belt out.
2 Densification of existing urban sites
3 Public transport corridors
4 Disperal – growth of existing villages

Question 43. What do you think about densification?

Hard to achieve in areas already developed, but fine in principal as long as sufficient green open spaces retained.

Question 44. What do you think about developing around the edge of Cambridge on land outside the
Green Belt?

Shouldn't do this and encourage commuting through the Green Belt if there were sites in the current
Greenbelt that were easier to deliver with sustainable transport to the key employment sites.

Question 45. What do you think about developing around the edge of Cambridge in the Green Belt?

The most appropriate area for new development.

Question 46. What do you think about creating planned new settlements?

Councils should focus on delivering the ones already planned – eg why has Northstowe taken so long
when the housing need has been so urgent for so long? – its not as if the delay has resulted in really great design or even adequate cycling infrastructure – unless there is a fundamental change in transport thinking, the new settlements will continue to be car based dormitory towns for Cambridge commuters.

Question 48. What do you think about siting development along transport corridors?

The most sensible way to expand Cambridge beyond the City.