Question 1
How can you claim this is a brown field site development when the existing Anglain Water waste treatment plant currently occupying the site has to be moved to what appears to be a choice of 3 green field sites? This contradicts low environmental impact by further destroying the current green fields.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Needs affordable housing though so many young people not able to buy or get council housing
No uploaded files for public display
There are definitely some benefits, including more public amenities and community spaces - something that North Cambridge currently lacks. Also the focus on bringing biodiversity into the area and sustainability are great. But there are also some issues. 1: it is wrong to assume that people will be discouraged from using cars. 8,000 new homes means 8,000 cars - maybe not just for commuting to work, but for taking kids to school and going on trips (until train travel becomes better connected and affordable, people in Cambridge will always want cars). This will inevitably lead to more traffic in the already very congested area, especially around science park. Further, by restricting the number of parking spots, people will end up parking awkwardly/illegally all over North Cambridge, endangering cyclists and pedestrians. Or possibly new houses will be unable to sell so will remain empty. 2: the plans say some of the housing will be “affordable” because they will be shared ownership, but this is not the same. Houses need to actually cost less than average for Cambridge to be affordable. And what about provision for council houses, which are increasingly needed (especially after Covid)? No mention of this. 3: no secondary school means people are likely to need to commute to drop their children off at other places if they are uncomfortable with their children cycling (which we can see is the case by the high number of cars than contribute to traffic heading towards secondary schools in the south of the city). 4: lots of plans for new cycle routes which is great, but what about the current ones in north Cambridge, many of which are in dire need of improvements (e.g. along Kings Hedges Road and Milton Road). 5: what kind of shops will you encourage for the area? It would be a shame if we just had a repeat of the typical UK high street with chain shops and yet more Costa Coffees. It would be good to encourage more independent shops and family-owned businesses. 6: will there be a reduction to any of the current Science Park offices? And what is happening to the Business Park? A lot of people already work in these areas and may be concerned about their company having to relocate. 7: 8,000 new houses sounds good but there are a lot of houses in North Cambridge that need attention and could be remodelled to accommodate more people. It would be better to focus on improve the current housing stock before building yet more expensive houses. 8: finally, how will you avoid the issues that have plagued the area around Cambridge Central station, including gridlocked roads and taxi pick ups, and houses that have become “AirBnB brothels”? The road leading up to the station there has been subject to incredibly high levels of air pollution. How will this be avoided?
No uploaded files for public display
Agree
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
The essential element in an uncertain world. It must be informed by likely & probable changes in technology, the nature of work & the future role of village/neighbourhood/town/city centres
No uploaded files for public display
The top of the list reasons for disagreeing are: 1. This presumes that the sewage works are moved to somewhere else. The only viable places are at lower or equal altitude and near the river. That means they will be moved onto green belt land or brownfield site. Since Waterbeach brownfield sites are the only vaguely feasible ones, they are likely to be moved onto green belt. This should not happen. 2. The council has ludicrous ideas that there should be only one car-parking space per two households. Far from leading to few people owning cars, this will lead to car-parking battles not only within the new district, but also between the new district and Orchard Park and other nearby places.
No uploaded files for public display
I think it is important to use all "brown field" space when it becomes available
No uploaded files for public display
Summarise Cambridge: - Poor city layout. - Poor transport links. Cambridge train station is one of the worst I have been to. Busses are shocking for a city that discourages cars. - Not much to do, little character. Your proposals: - Overly ideologically interested in climate change. - From what I have seen of Cambridge, you will attempt to make it very dificult to use a car but not acctually make it easier to cycle or take a bus.
No uploaded files for public display
I think it's great having a development that is planned for a sustainable future, taking the climate and biodiversity emergencies into account. Car-free. streets, green spaces, great.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Very little space. Roads struggling as it is, Milton road especially. Trying to essentially ban cars is not a good way to go. All you do is push parking onto other nearby streets. Not effective use of money. Is the housing affordable? Or just more buy to let
No uploaded files for public display
The vision overall is very good
No uploaded files for public display
The vision overall is very good, all makes sense on the broad sense.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
You live in a dream world!! people will never own only half a car... start building with ample space for parking a gardens then make it truly affordable but setting a money figure to the builders to stick to.. not just use the phase 'affordable housing' that politicians and solicitors can afford. a little sum for you.... £9 per hour 40 hour week = £360 x52 weeks =18,720 per year x 3.5 (sensible lending) = 65,520 ,say 10,000 saved deposit =75,520 a 1 bed flat needs to be at a max 75,520 x2 = £151,040 2 bed house
No uploaded files for public display
I'm worried. I know new homes are needed but I think it will add to the traffic issues in the area. We already have lots of people using Lovell Road as a car park and people speeding through.
No uploaded files for public display
It is dependent on a very frequent train service at Cambridge North Station and removing the capacity constraints which prevent this for which it is essential to close the Fen Road Level Crossing so the plan has to include a bridge for vehicle traffic from the new development over the railway to the land between the railway and the river the other side. Also need to enhance Ely North Junction to remove the capacity constraint this currently restricted junction has on rail services.
No uploaded files for public display
Great approach, density first, cyclable and walkable streets are key
No uploaded files for public display
It's fine, just largely doesn't say much - many of the statement seem to lack substance 'physically conncected' - well, clearly.... But overall mostly ticking good boxes
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
You can't disagree with these high level objectives but the implementation is dire. I am sure any new town would like these. Overall a lot of the land is NOT brownfield it is exiting commercial land, including the sewage works. Seems most of the land is owned by AWS or the City Council. It seems the whole development aims to make as much money as possible for these bodies at the expense of local people. Stinks.
No uploaded files for public display
I think it's also important that the neighbourhood cater to people with varying socioeconomic backgrounds
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Whilst I agree with walking/cycling first, please make sure there are also great options for those with disabilities or limited mobility.
No uploaded files for public display
Everything being equal I think the principles guiding the vision very commendable, but all is not equal and, therefore, I really do not think this development a good idea. Particularly admiral is the plan to create affordable housing and to make the development car free and carbon neutral but, to do so, it will be necessary to move the sewage works from this site to one of three proposed sites all on partially or wholly green belt land! So, to build a new green development here would require 'degreening' elsewhere! To do this would adversely affect the lives of thousands of people in villages and new developments north east of Cambridge. There would be a big increase in HGV traffic on unsuitable country roads, there would be pollution and unpleasant odours affecting nursery and primary schools as well as country pubs, cycle and walking routes as well as private residencies. Furthermore, at least one of the sites proposed for the relocation of the sewage works is on a proposed Green Lung between Cambridge and Wicken Fen. It will be situated in an area designated as part of the Wicken Fen Vision where it is proposed that land will be restored to natural fenland creating a nationally important fenland environment to be enjoyed by all Cambridge residents and it will be close to Stow cum Quy Fen, a SSSI. To build a sewage works here would desecrate a beautiful, biodiverse and important natural environment contradicting your own expressed aim of "responding to the climate and biodiversity emergencies" and creating a space, "where wellbeing, recreation and community safety" are all important. There are several large new developments in the planning stages or already underway in or to the north of Cambridge - the Marleigh development and the Waterbeach Barracks to name two. Is it really necessary to build yet more homes and offices and, in so doing, to change the character of this historic city? With more people working from home as result of Covid 19, particularly in the technology sector, are we actually going to need more office space and are people really going to want to relocate to be near their workplaces? This proposed development seems short sighted and unnecessary and, rather than improving the environment of Cambridge and its surroundings, will do considerable harm to them.
No uploaded files for public display
We should not be building anymore. The buildings are too high and are not in keeping with Cambridge, as a whole. The new hotel building at Cambridge North station is an eyesore (not a good start). Granted, if worse/higher buildings will be built, it will become less of one. But that's like stubbing your toe on your left foot and then chopping your right foot off, so the pain of your tow is not so bad.
No uploaded files for public display