Issue details

The Draft Minerals and Waste Local Plan is subject to consultation until 9 May 2019.  This is the second consultation on the emerging Minerals and Waste Local Plan (MWLP), which will replace the existing Core Strategy (2011) and Site Specific Proposals Plan (2012).  The first round of consultation on the Preliminary Minerals and Waste Local Plan ended in June 2018, and was reported to Members via committee in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire.  Comments at this initial stage in 2018 were restricted to high level issues and matters of principle, as the published document did not contain much detail.

The current consultation period was initially due to close on 25 April 2019, but as this stretched across the Easter holiday period has been extended by two weeks.  The original timetable set did not permit a response to be prepared for a committee cycle.  Greater Cambridge Shared Planning have therefore prepared a joint response for members to consider “out of cycle” in both Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire.  The proposed response is contained at Appendix 1, and the key points are highlighted below.

The emerging MWLP will cover the period to 2036 and is prepared for the area covered by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

No new minerals extraction sites are proposed by the Draft MWLP, with extensions proposed at Cottenham (Chear Fen) and Willingham/Over (Needingworth).  Those that are allocated in the emerging plan are already being worked, with the allocation now reflecting the area that is still available.  There remains considerable uncertainty around the largest sand and gravel extraction allocation at Block Fen/Langwood Fen, Mepal.  Whilst this allocation is not within the Greater Cambridge area, it is significant to the choice of overall strategy.  The Draft MWLP is clear (see paragraph 3.22 of the consultation document) that the allocated site has not delivered at the anticipated rate, and a recent application for planning permission was refused as it did not accord with the adopted policy position.  The County Council continues to seek assurance from the owner/operator of the site that applications that are policy compliant will be forthcoming in a timely manner, but also suggest that if these assurances are not forthcoming they would consider removing the allocation.  Whilst this is an appropriate course of action to take for the Minerals and Waste authority in response to a site that has not come forward as intended, there is a need for an alternative strategy to meet the requirements for sand and gravel over the Plan period.  This alternative strategy is not apparent in the Draft MWLP.  An objection will be raised on this basis.

There is a change in approach proposed to the way in which waste management is addressed by the emerging MWLP.  The policy sets out a criteria based approach, which identifies key locations  that would be considered most suitable for the provision of new or extended waste management facilities.  The key locations of relevance to the Greater Cambridge area are: Cambourne, Cambridge, Northstowe and Waterbeach.  The policy goes on to reflect that where the proposed use and operations are potentially suitable within and urban setting, then proposals should first consider the use of employment land in specific circumstances.  There is a concern that this approach may not be fully compatible with employment allocations as the job density is likely to be low, and potentially not reflect an efficient use of employment land.  GCSP recognise this approach may offer flexibility and prevent land becoming unnecessarily sterilised or otherwise blighted by a waste management operation, if it subsequently not found to be necessary.  However, there is a concern this approach will not meet the identified needs for waste management facilities across the Plan area.

There is a further requirement for strategic development sites of more than 1,500 new homes to make provision for on-site waste management.  In principle this approach is considered acceptable, however there is insufficient information within the policy, or more widely in the Plan, about what type of waste management facility is likely to be required and how this would be secured.  Recognising this would be proportionate to the scale of the new settlement, it would be helpful for the policy or supporting text to provide some clarity.

The North East Cambridge development area, currently subject to an emerging Area Action Plan requires a comprehensive approach to development to be achieved to ensure the most efficient use of land.  Policies in the Draft MWLP are not completely clear in this regard, and GCSP will continue to seek assurance that the existing allocations and safeguarding areas will not prevent this comprehensive approach from being achieved.

Alongside the publication of the Draft MWLP and a range of supporting documents, a draft Statement of Common Ground has also been prepared for comment and engagement by the County Council.  Response to this document and further engagement with the MWLP team will be required to ensure that the interests of GCSP and the two Councils are fully reflected.