Question 1
No uploaded files for public display
Firm integration with surrounding communities to allow them to develop in addition to the new community is so important. King's Hedges, particularly, has so few amentities (shops, pubs, cafe etc).
No uploaded files for public display
The vision seems very exclusive. At a time where we need to be more *inclusive* and be accommodating for people that can't cycle, or even walk very far, it's surprising to see that Cambridge is pushing for this exclusive community. And it sounds like the reasoning is because of air pollution, but with the introduction of electric cars, and the governments commitment to push purely towards electric vehicles being on the road in the very near future, this dramatically decreases air pollution already, so I'm keen to hear the real reasons behind the drive for this exclusive community.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
It represents further overdevelopment for the City, is far too high and dense and is based upon untested and over-optimistic expectations in changing ways of life.
No uploaded files for public display
This is nonsense given its location. It's an outlying district of the city. It will never be well connected to where people want to go -- the proof is that the connectivity doesn't exist for the businesses which are already there. Demand exists but has not been satisfied. Adding demand will make no difference to that and hence building homes here will simply increase car demand. Attempting to thwart car demand will produce congestion, insecurity and unhappiness. Connect the existing business areas there properly first and the contention that public transport can provide sufficient connectivity might stand better. At the moment, it is a hollow claim.
No uploaded files for public display
It mainly sounds like a good vision to built this area around, however I would like to see more focus on providing homes and services for those in lower-income brackets. There have been many new developments in Greater Cambridge and too few have been accessible for young people and others with lower incomes.
No uploaded files for public display
Need to include equestrian access, who are equally vulnerable road users, alongside pedestrians and cyclists - e.g. by linking areas like Ditton Meadows to Milton Park. The use of high rise buildings would radically change the rural outlook of neighbouring Fen Ditton. Sewage works must be kept on the Milton side of the river, not moved to Honey Hill. What will happen to the travellers who live in this area?
No uploaded files for public display
How will you ensure the range of jobs you promise? I attended an exhibition of the plans and urged the inclusion of a care home (this was before the covid 19 outbreak!). Pointing out that in such a large area there should be such provision, not just for schools. The advantage would be that low paid care workers could afford the houses and also walk to work safely, especially considering that some would be on night shifts. PLEASE think about which low paid jobs there will be, given more auto tills for retail, online shopping reducing the retail uptake. There is likely to be more need for care homes (increasing elderly population, higher percentage of disabilities/people with health issues) in the future and there is already a shortage!
No uploaded files for public display
The vision is great, but your plans won't achieve it. Too many high density high rise flats. These aren't homes and won't build communities
No uploaded files for public display
Doesn't say anything about housing affordability. While everything it does say sounds marvellous, this omission is a fatal flaw. You must be aware that affordability is a key issue in Cambridge, which is rapidly turning into a middle-class ghetto, with a large proportion of the 100,000 car journeys daily into the city (in normal times) being people who work in the City but can't afford to live here. But you are doing nothing with this vision section to address it. This significant site should be used to make a real difference.
No uploaded files for public display
I like the vision. But I see no mention of the elderly. Any rounded community must have not only schools but also retirement flats or sheltered housing.
No uploaded files for public display
Without doubt, the summary of the vision for North East Cambridge sounds wonderful. That is the easy bit, but definitely something to aim for. The balance between green spaces (not just lawns and designer planting) and buildings, roads, pavements needs to be carefully planned to avoid the green spaces appearing as a token gesture. I like the vision's description of a 'beautiful area' as something to aim for. I think the Cambridge district of Eddington could be referred to as an example where there have been efforts to vary the plants, verges, hedgerows etc so that the balance between brick and planting does not resemble a supermarket carpark.
No uploaded files for public display
I dont think this is a good plan
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
A connected, eco friendly, cultural and vibrant hub of activity and community is what NE Cambridge desperately needs. It should encourage all these values in others too :)
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
I fully support these proposals and particularly like the focus on green spaces, pedestrians and cyclists.
No uploaded files for public display
There is not the fresh water or transport infrastructure to support this level of development. The size of new sewage works required is going to have a devastating impact on the green belt.
No uploaded files for public display
Reasonable vision but is over-ambitious/ inappropriate in terms of the height of the developments and grossly under ambitious in the extent of developing a comprehensive region-wide transport infrastructure to support the laudable ambition of reducing car usage. A comprehensive plan and commitment is needed to enable and ensure affordable and regular public transport to and from the surrounding villages at times that support both work and leisure commutes from villages where so many people currently live. Dedicated segregated cycle paths need to be established both within the city and to all the more local villages to provide a safe and realistic alternative to car and public transport. The current plan implies several cycle paths exist but none are of an appropriate standard and others shown do not currently exist. I do not believe the statement that the whole area is a 30 minute walk from Cambridge North station, since it is 3km from the station to the far end of the site even taking a direct line.
No uploaded files for public display
I think it is an admirable goal and hope to see it come to fruition. Being carless should be a key goal, not just for the environment, but for the fact fact that some of us find owning and running a vehicle just impracticle
No uploaded files for public display
It is ambitious and non-attainable. Orchard Park had similar plans and ambitions which did not come to fruition. It can hardly be carbon friendly; the building process, construction traffic, bridges and underpasses are hardly climate friendly. You are going to move a sewage work from this site to a green field site and then try to introduce landscaping here on a brownfield site. The number of houses will outstrip the employment available in this area and only encourage people to commute to the areas of employment in south Cambridge such as the biomedical centre
No uploaded files for public display
Nothing to add
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Please, no more building. Cambridge has grown too big too fast.
No uploaded files for public display
Good aspirational goals, but needs to be realistic, e.g. creating housing is good, but this will also remove various industrial sites (with associated jobs) to make way for those houses. If the end result is that people need to commute from these houses to wherever the jobs have gone, this will result in more car usage.
No uploaded files for public display
I live in Milton. My priority is to get to Cambridge North station. That matters more than anything else. Currently I drive and park abut 10 minutes' walk away from the station entrance to avoid paying any car parking fees. Occasionally I walk from my house to the station but it is 35+ minutes, via the Jane Coston Bridge over the A14. It is long because it is a dog leg. I support the proposal for a diagonal walking/cycling route. It is vital that all such roads are as direct as possible to the station. If the walking time could be reduced to 25 minutes I would walk to the station without taking my car, unless it is raining. I would hope that there would be shops along this direct walking route so that I could buy a sandwich etc. for my train journey. Going to Tesco in Milton is still a dog leg for me.
No uploaded files for public display
Homes should be built that people want to live in with plenty of space for cars and should be freehold (which I assume these will not be because they will have 4+ storeys). They should not be leasehold as an excuse for the developer to rip off the buyers with ever-increasing service charges. I currently rent and would certainly not buy a house in the proposed development. With the coronavirus crisis, it is clear there is value to spacious homes with gardens...whereas cramming people in close to fixed commercial areas will become increasingly anachronistic in high-tech industries where people have the ability to work from home.
No uploaded files for public display
Some good aspects, some I'm less convinced by for example Transport - Significant numbers of people commute into the area yet no plans to improve this unless you either live in the area, live close enough that you can cycle or are lucky enough (to afford) to live near a railway line 8000 homes is a large number for such a small site and will result in the other aspects being squeezed in and thus the area will feel like inner city London rather than Cambridge I've recently been reading "Invisible Women" by Caroline Criado Perez and struck by the number of times planning policy has made things harder for women, not delibrately but through the bias's we've gone up with. Please read this book and apply the principles into North East Cambridge to ensure the area doesn't fall to the same failings
No uploaded files for public display