Questions for Local Plan Meeting 11th June 2013 Question1: Exceptional Circumstances The National Planning Policy

Framework states that ...Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. (paragraph 83) It also says that A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt and lists a few exceptions (paragraph 89). None of the exceptions listed apply to the land North of Impington Lane. I have not been able to locate in any District Council document, an explanation as to why the release of Green Belt land in Impington constitutes exceptional circumstances. The Councils document entitled Cambridge Local Plan and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan: Strategy, Strategic Sites and Other Joint Issues states Where Green Belts are defined, they should only be altered in exceptional circumstances when preparing a Local Plan. It does not state what those exceptional circumstances are. The Draft Local Plan, Chapter 2 Spatial Strategy, states that In addition land is released from the Green Belt at Sawston, Histon & Impington and Comberton to meet the overall need for housing. So are we to surmise that the exceptional circumstances are that the Council needs to build houses to meet targets? That is not one of the exceptional circumstances listed in the NPPF. There will always be a need to build houses so how can that possibly be defined as an exceptional circumstance? Could the Portfolio Holder and officers explain exactly what the Council considers are the exceptional circumstances that apply specifically to the land north of Impington Lane that justifies its removal from the Green Belt and inclusion in the new Local Plan?

Question 2: Assessing Housing Need The Cambridge sub-region Strategic Housing Market Assessment, chapter 12 (published May 2013) states that 19,000 more homes are needed in South Cambridgeshire. That figure is based on a tenuous prediction of 22,000 more jobs in Cambridge for 2011- 2031. SHMA chapter 12 predicts that the population will increase by 38,000 in South Cambridgeshire (2011- 2031). The puzzle is why an increase of population of 38,000 requires 19,000 homes. The SHMA suggests an occupational ratio of 2.31. Even the 2.31 ratio is a best guess, reduced from current occupancy rates of 2.42. From my calculations it means that 16,450 houses are needed. Information in the Strategy, Strategic Sites and Other Joint Issues states that existing sites in South Cambridgeshire including the new town of Northstowe, will deliver 14,000 homes by 2031 If you add to that Waterbeach, Bourn and Cambourne (4,370) this totals 18,370 and does not include the Cherry Hinton site (jointly owned by City and South Cambs Councils). Therefore there is no need to release land from Green Belt in Impington. In addition, the draft plan states at 2.65 that ...South Cambridgeshire averages some 208 homes a year from windfall developments (2,900 during the term of the plan) and these are not included in the overall total. The land North of Impington Lane is not needed to meet housing targets. Could the portfolio holder and officers explain how the requirement for 19,000 new homes for South Cambridgeshire was calculated? Given that the existing sites and allocations amount to 14,000 dwellings, that the forecasts are based on a series of assumptions, and the total number of

dwellings are given as 19,379 (22,279 including the predicted windfall sites), how can the inclusion of Impington Lane, a small piece of land in Green Belt, supporting a relatively insignificant amount of dwellings, possibly be justified?

Question 3: Pressure on school places Primrose Lane and Bishops Yard (approx 100 dwellings) will generate a requirement for 25-35 primary school places (County Council pupil product ration per 100 dwellings). It has been well documented that the Histon and Impington Infants School has been oversubscribed recently and some families living the furthest distance away from the school did not get places for their children. In relation to the proposals for North of Impington Lane, appendix B2 p60 states that Although there will be additional pressure on infrastructure and utilities, these will be capable of mitigation, including a contribution to any necessary additional capacity in local schools. I believe that the Council has assumed that it is actually possible to increase capacity which in relation to the Infants School is particularly challenging. Indeed if it is possible to increase capacity why are some children currently being denied places and travelling out of the village to alternative schools? Could the portfolio holder and officers explain how they know that the pressure on school places can be mitigated and exactly how the capacity will be increased at the Infants School? What provisions have been made for additional school places in relation to the Primrose Lane development (phase 1) which is near to completion?