Two announcements yesterday concerning issues we have blogged on frequently in teh past
Addressing water scarcity in Greater Cambridge: update on government measures
The Case for Cambridge Cambridge Delivery Group
Recognising the unique context in Cambridge, the government has made a one-off commitment to work with local partners to address the deficit in water supply, until water companies bring major infrastructure online, through a new water credits system. This is underpinned by a major investment in measures to offset new demand for water in the area through retrofitting water efficient devices in existing buildings.
Pretty much exactly as we have recommended on here
As such it is difficult to see the Darwin Green scheme recently at PLI being refused, a condition /S106 will implement a credit scheme, now the credit scheme, as we recommended. The appeal could have been avoided.
In order for growth to proceed in a sustainable way, we have developed a 2-part plan:
1. Ensure long-term water supply so that the city can grow in a sustainable way. We are doing this by:
- Assuring the delivery of long-term major water supply infrastructure including the proposed Grafham transfer and Fens Reservoir.
- Supporting the development of a plan for strategic water resources over the long-term.
- Using Cambridge as an area for innovation in water management in agriculture and through nature-based solutions.
2. Support growth in the short-term so that development currently stalled can proceed. We are doing this by supporting increased water efficiency, reuse and offsetting, which will prime a ‘water credits system’.
Currently, 99% of Cambridge Water’s supply comes from aquifers and other groundwater sources, which can put pressure on the environment, in particular at sensitive sites and when flows are low. The delivery of Fens Reservoir would precede cuts to abstraction licence caps by the EA, which will mean that less water is removed from the aquifer. It will build resilience in the water supply and further protect and enhance biodiversity and minimise risks from drought and flooding….The Grafham transfer will only be available when the Grand Union Canal resource option is in place which allows Affinity Water to reduce its water transfer from Grafham Water.
We are commissioning regional-scale models to support a long-term water resources plan that meets our development growth ambitions. This will include working with water companies across the region to identify new transfers and supply-side options beyond those already in Water Resources East’s core regional plan.
Water credits system
We will pilot a ‘water credits’ system where developers can offset their development through the purchase and sale of water credits to ensure they have a neutral impact on water scarcity within Cambridge. This will provide the mechanism for development to progress through planning while minimising the risk to the environment. We are undertaking detailed design work but can set out now our starting point in doing that work.
We will establish a market framework and a market operator who will oversee where ‘water credits’ can be allocated to developers to ensure that the impact of water demand from new development is neutralised. This will be in place as long as it is necessary. Initial government investment will be used to retrofit both household and non-household properties in Cambridge to provide the initial credits, with any property owners meeting the market requirements for retrofits able to supply the market in future. ..We are confident this overall package will be sufficient to address the EA’s concerns
In terms of growth of Cambridge – kicked until after the election as no fiscal scope.
In the longer term, we are taking the steps to establish a development corporation to oversee and coordinate the complex operation and the fundraising required to deliver a bold vision for Cambridge. The development corporation, once established, will be backed by a multi-year funding settlement that is commensurate with the government’s high level of ambition. This will be set out at the next Spending Review.
The content of the Case for Cambridge will be uncontroversial and holds no surprises to the Science and busienss lobby in the city none the less it will be controversial to the substantial anti-growth coalition in the city.
What it says is encouraging and clarifying re teh scale and horizen of growth
These illustrative scenarios estimate the potential additional value to the economy once new residents have moved into the properties. Given Cambridge’s highly skilled and specialist economy, we anticipate additional investment and skilled labour to be attracted from abroad, reducing any displacement of jobs from elsewhere in the country. Building 100,000 new homes by 2050 has the potential to add approximately £4.3 billion to the economy (between £2.1 billion and £6.4 billion with a central estimate of £4.3 billion). This in turn has the potential to translate in today’s terms into an annual increase of approximately £1.5 billion of additional receipts for the exchequer (income from taxes and other sources), which can be spent on public services. Building 150,000 new homes by 2050 has the potential to add approximately £6.4 billion to the economy (between £3.2 billion and £9.7 billion with a central estimate of £6.4 billion). This in turn has the potential to translate in today’s terms into an annual increase of approximately £2 billion of additional receipts for the exchequer (income from taxes and other sources), which can be spent on public services.
Building on historical precedent, such as the development of the garden cities and Milton Keynes, there is huge potential to capture, for the public benefit, any increase in land value that will arise from development decisions taken in Cambridge by central and local government.
To make sure that the city grows in a sustainable way that protects its central character, the government is examining major new urban quarter opportunities, plugged into and connected with the existing city. Any new quarter must embody the commitment to design and gentle density set out above, built in a way that is in keeping with the historic centre and that maintains proximity to the countryside. A sustainable transport network will also be key – including, for example, streets, bike paths and mass transit options – that connects new areas to existing ones and improves traffic flow.
It is in this way that an expanded Cambridge can provide a network of beautiful and wellconnected town centres and economic clusters, where active travel is prioritised and with all the social and health facilities required to service local communities. While no decisions on the location of any new quarter have been taken, this pattern of development aims to protect and enhance what is special about Cambridge and will be central to assessing future options for sustainable growth.
Cambridge has the potential to be an exemplar of urban expansion that enhances the natural environment, with great parks, generous local allotments, tree-lined streets, wildlife corridors and easy access to nature through the ‘green fingers’ that already stretch into the countryside. Work is already underway to increase the nature reserve around Wicken Fen to the north of the city, which will contribute to Greater Cambridge’s healthy and beautiful natural environment.
The government’s ambitions for growing Cambridge will require a step-change in the type and scale of infrastructure that we plan for, and we will need to take a longer-term view of growth than is required generally by Local Plans. The emerging Local Plan looks to 2041. Our timeframe is to 2050 and beyond. By setting up a development corporation with the powers and funding to consider the infrastructure needs of all parts of an expanded Cambridge, and using its convening power, the government will be able to facilitate and drive forward sustainable infrastructure-led growth.
The government will ensure that the East West Rail Growth Board, chaired by HMT, includes consideration of how the new rail connection into Cambridge can be best integrated into the city’s transport network for the future. As we reommended in an article here it gives Freiburg im Breisgau as an example of how to do this
The Leader of Cambridge City Council, Cllr Mike Davey, said: “There has been no public engagement, and the City Council has not been involved in the writing of the ‘Case for Cambridge’.
The Leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council, Cllr Bridget Smith, commented: “There is a lot to digest here, but there are parts of today’s update we can welcome – including the focus on resolving the crucial water supply issues which we have been pushing hard on for several years. …
“However, we still need to understand what these tens of thousands of new homes and jobs would look like and where they would all go. Residents and locally elected representatives also need assurance that they will be able to have their say on all such major proposals, even those from central Government.
…given all the investment made by both councils in joint working, including the creation of an award-winning shared planning service to manage future development across the area, I remain unconvinced at this time that a Development Corporation is the most appropriate means to implement these plans.”
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions 