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

Not good. There are already so many new towns planned, that are changing the landscape and countryside. Seems like city creep into the green spaces which make Cambridgeshire great.

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. A key issue is the delivery of jobs in such settlements – Cambourne being the prime example. The lack of delivery of jobs inevitably has major travel implications and therefore we believe that it is better to deliver such employment land associated with smaller settlements which already have some service and employment base.

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before considering planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land.

Any such settlements should be on brownfield land and should not have adverse impacts on the landscape or nearby villages eg by increasing rat running through them.

There are already too may planned new settlements in the Cambridge sub area. They take at least 10 years to deliver any housing and are often dependant on significant infrastructure investment that may be lacking in certain market conditions.

Sites for new developments must have excellent public services & transport infrastructure. The loss of large amounts of agricultural land and biodiversity assets should be resisted.

Must be the preferred option, granted suitable location and sustainable transport.

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

The creation of new settlements is fraught with delivery problems, which lead to significant delays. It would be more prudent to support and improve the sustainability of existing settlements, upgrading the existing infrastructure as necessary.

The creation of new settlements is fraught with delivery problems, which lead to significant delays. It would be more prudent to support and improve the sustainability of existing settlements, upgrading the existing infrastructure as necessary.

New settlements are good provided they are connected to Cambridge with both high-quality public transport and high-quality, dutch-style, segregated cycleways.

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

I think you should build higher buildings near to sustainable transport- eg Like at Cambridge North. If you need .to build on green belt then leave green corridors like spokes going to the centre of the city where people can walk and cycle and there are habitats for wildlife. There must be no reliance on cars when you build new developments. The buildings should be made of timber and should be carbon neutral like in Eddington

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. It would more appropriate to look at completing and expanding existing new settlements rather than embarking on new settlements, particularly those to the north of Cambridge

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. It would more appropriate to look at completing and expanding existing new settlements rather than embarking on new settlements, particularly those to the north of Cambridge.

Greater Cambridge is seeing the development of a number of planned new settlements around the City – particularly to the north and west. These are vital to Cambridge’s future. However, by their nature they involve very long “lead in” times often having to start “from scratch.” Creating wholly new settlements involves major new infrastructure and services, before housing and employment development can emerge. The College does not oppose further new settlements, but considers there is now a need for the new Local Plan to significantly extend some existing villages, particularly those outside the Green Belt such as Duxford, which would provide a sustainable future for the village. We set out our reasons at Q 40, Q41 and Q44 why we think the expansion of Duxford to the south of Cambridge is a special case and accords with NPPF (Policy 72).

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. A key issue is the delivery of jobs in such settlements – Cambourne being the prime example. The lack of delivery of jobs inevitably has major travel implications and therefore we believe that it is better to deliver such employment land associated with smaller settlements which already have some service and employment base.

Very Supportive

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe (see Q45 above) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand.

New settlements should be built on brown field land not on green field and quality agricultural land. It is difficult to see where, after Cambridge airport, another large area of brown field land could be found.

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. It would more appropriate to look at completing and expanding existing new settlements rather than embarking on new settlements, particularly those to the north of Cambridge. It is clear that a significant amount of employment and job creation is taking place to the south of Cambridge and that larger allocations need to acknowledge this.

Previous local plan policies have created a number of new settlements at Northstowe, Cambourne, Waterbeach New Town and Bourn Airfield. It is evident from this experience that new settlements are costly and take a significant amount of time to deliver (often at timescales that are slower than anticipated and therefore with the potential to jeopardise forecast housing land supply). The success of the existing allocated new settlements depends on their continued support and their potential further growth beyond the existing allocated areas. Cambridgeshire County Council has promoted sites at Waterbeach and Northstowe which could allow for the continued growth of these settlements. Allocating larger urban extensions of existing communities would allow for the sustainable growth of settlements that already have amenities, employment sites and transport links. Cambridgeshire County Council as landowner has promoted large sites at Shepreth, Sawston and Whittlesford Parkway, where development of large sites can provide new facilities, support existing services (particularly village High Streets) and would capitalise on existing sustainable transport links to Cambridge and other rural employment sites.

We are unsure at present. It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. It would more appropriate to look at completing and expanding existing new settlements rather than embarking on new settlements, particularly those to the north of Cambridge

It would be best to pause on new settlements until such time as there is further progress with the actual development of Northstowe, Waterbeach and Bourne Airfield. It is almost certainly the case that the District Council has learnt many lessons from the planning of these (and Cambourne) and experience is developing all the time. There are obvious issues over the costs of servicing sites for new settlements, the delivery rate of new housing and the design quality achieved. The complexities are appreciated so it is felt better to await more substantial development of these new settlements before planning for more. There would not appear to be major brownfield sites which could support a new settlement so they would inevitably involve greenfield land. We do endorse the idea of new growth areas on the Cambridge fringe including in the Green Belt (see question 45) but we would not term such development as a new settlement in the same vein as those currently permitted or in hand. The Council should be mindful that new settlements do little to bolster the Council’s housing land supply and do not generally deliver new dwellings in a five-year timescale. As such, the Council should consider smaller and medium-sized developments, which will deliver dwellings within that timeframe.

It should be noted that new settlements were a key part of the development strategy for the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 i.e. the delivery of the existing new town at Northstowe, and planned new settlements at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield, in addition to an extension of Cambourne an earlier planned new settlement. Housing has started to be delivered at Northstowe within the last couple of years, and the developments at Waterbeach and Bourn Airfield are currently proceeding through the planning application stages. The delivery of these existing and planned developments will continue during the plan period for emerging GCLP and beyond, and as such will continue to be a key part of the development strategy. The GCLP Issues & Options consultation document highlighted the advantages and challenges to the delivery of new settlements. However, there is no mention of the difficulties that new settlements have in terms of delivering policy compliant levels of affordable housing – see Greater Cambridge Housing Market Economics Analysis (prepared by Bidwells on behalf of North BRLOG). For example, Northstowe is required to provide 20% affordable housing overall. The DIO/Urban & Civic part of Waterbeach new settlement is required to provide 30% affordable housing overall and subject to a review mechanism, but it is noted that no affordable housing will be provided in the first phase. The proportion of affordable housing to be provided from the RLW part of the Waterbeach new settlement is unknown at this stage. The Bourn Airfield new settlement is required to provide 40% affordable housing, but the proportion that will actually be provided is unknown at this stage (there is a live planning application). It is clear that the existing and planned new settlements are not providing enough affordable housing, which should be a concern in an area such as Greater Cambridge which has significant housing affordability issues. In contrast most of the existing urban extensions on the edge of Cambridge do deliver policy compliant levels of affordable housing; the one exception is the proposed developments within Cambridge East, where there were specific abnormal costs related to the proximity of Cambridge Airport and the need for noise mitigation. Therefore, no additional new settlements should be identified in the development strategy for emerging GCLP, partly because of the inability of these types of development to deliver policy compliant levels of affordable housing. It is considered that housing affordability will be improved in emerging GCLP if there is more emphasis on developments that are capable of providing policy compliant levels of affordable housing from the outset and throughout the development e.g. edge of Cambridge, and additional sites which provide affordable housing are allocated to address the shortfall in the delivery of affordable housing from the existing and planned new settlements. In addition, the experience from the examination for the emerging Uttlesford Local Plan, which proposed three new settlements, highlights the complexity of delivering this type of development including the funding and delivery of infrastructure.

New settlements have a tendency to be car dominated.

I don't think this option. It takes years for new settlements to become lively and fully serviced. They also encourage more people to drive.