Cabinet AGREED the following responses to the proposed changes to the draft revision to the Regional Spatial Strategy for submission to the Secretary of State:
The Proposed Changes to the Draft Revision of the Regional Spatial Strategy
This is consistent with the challenging levels of development for which South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City are already planning. Further development on the edge of Cambridge cannot be accommodated without calling into question the fundamental purposes of the Cambridge Green Belt to protect the character and setting of the historic city or to prevent villages in the vicinity of Cambridge merging with the City or with one another.
Green Belt
The Council welcomes the fact that the Cambridge Green Belt will not be reviewed through this RSS but is concerned at the suggestion that it may be examined in the future as part of the RSS review. The potential for revising the boundaries of the green belt around Cambridge without undermining the purposes of the Cambridge Green Belt was comprehensively explored during the preparation of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan. The evidence is that opportunities for further revisions to deliver regionally strategic levels of development post 2021 are unlikely to be found without harming the character and setting of Cambridge or resulting in coalescence with nearby villages. . Whilst this does not form part of this review of the RSS the District Council advises caution on the assumption that growth can continue at the same rate post 2021 in or close to Cambridge.
Compact City
The Council objects to the deletion oft the term ‘compact’ from the description of Cambridge in Policy CSR3.
Northstowe
Reference to Northstowe as a settlement of initially 8-10,000 houses should be deleted and its size confirmed in the revised wording to Policy CSR1.
In Policy CSR1 when Northstowe is mentioned the population size should be included as follows ‘…at the new settlement of Northstowe, with a population size of up to 10,000, linked to the guided busway….’
Affordable housing
In Policy CSR1 there should be a new paragraph added after the second paragraph using the following wording….’ In recognition of the pressures for housing arising in the Cambridge Sub-region at least 40% of new housing needs to be affordable. Employment development will also be expected to contribute towards affordable housing. ’
Policy H3 should specifically recognise the problem of affordability in the Cambridge Sub-region and the following wording should be added to the end of the policy: ’…In some areas of the region such as the Cambridge Sub-region there will need to be set higher targets for affordable homes’.
Employment
The Council welcomes the flexibility for the job growth figure for Cambridgeshire County to be allocated between each of the five Districts provided that the level of job growth in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire continues to be governed by the ‘selective management of growth’ policy to encourage the growth of high technology research and development companies that need a location close to the historic city of Cambridge.
Stansted airport
In the context that it is government policy to promote a second runway at Stansted and the Secretary of State is required to agree the RSS, it is understandable that the RSS is proposed to be modified to remove references to opposition to a second runway. However, equally the Council can continue its opposition to the proposal of Stansted to have a second runway and welcomes the recognition that the airport developers will be expected to contribute to any surface access improvements necessary as a result of the expansion of the airport.
Cambridge Airport
The Council welcomes the inclusion of this mention of Cambridge Airport.
Housing
The RSS should be revised to recognise the existing step change in growth that the Cambridge Sub-region has taken and the words ‘at least ‘ be removed from Policy H1 for Districts planning for annual growth in excess of 1,000 dwellings.
Travellers and Gypsies
The Council welcomes the inclusion of Policy H4. It is hoped that other districts progress the requirements of this policy and that the rapid progress of this Council is recognised by the Government and that this does not prove to be disadvantageous to this Council.
Transport
This policy is to be welcomed by the Council since many of the non-regional roads pass through villages in this District.
The Council welcomes the recognition that the Cambridge area will be subject to a further study but there needs to be a reassurance that this will be linked to further commitment to investment in infrastructure in the Cambridge Sub-region if further growth.
It is of great concern that schemes have been omitted from the tables in Appendix A that are seen by this Council as being important to supporting the growth agenda.
The following schemes should be reinstated into Appendix A:
(a) M11 dual 3 lane J9-14 – was previously listed as ‘part of an endorsed transport strategy – further appraisal needed’.
(b) A428 dualling A1 to Caxton – was previously listed as ‘part of an endorsed transport strategy – further appraisal needed’.
New inclusions
The Council welcomes the inclusion of policies on water, carbon emissions and renewable energy but considers that improved sustainability at the dwelling level will need to be complemented with measures to promote the overall sustainability of the development as a whole. There also needs to be reduction in air travel in the long-term.
Early review
The Council is already meeting a very challenging agenda of growth and considers that if further growth is to be imposed on the Cambridge Sub-region it must be at a level directly related to local job growth, environmental, social and infrastructure capacity all of which will be stretched by the current RSS in that part of the Sub-Region close to Cambridge. Continued sustainable growth may only be possible if the remaining Districts in the Cambridge Sub-Region play a greater role in accommodating housing and employment growth after 2021.
Noted