Question 6

Not at all

Reduce density and increase open spaces. We need to encourage new city dwellers to be healthy, happy and good citizens.

Mostly not

Too high a density and way too high buildings. Why do the Cambridge ruling elite hate the people of north Cambridge? Compare and contrast the rubbish built at Orchard Park and the proposal here with the Accordia development in central Cambridge and the housing on the Clay Farm site in south Cambridge. Possibly this is the fault of South Cambs, who don't care what kind of rubbish housing gets dumped south of the A14.

Mostly not

I am concerned at the higher developments, in part because it may not be appropriate for the location (Cambridge is predominantly low rise), and more importantly, because of its impact on liveability. Higher buildings make living spaces & green areas less pleasant, and also risk creating wind tunnels.

Neutral

The approach to building heights and density should be determined by aspects such as liveability rather than external factors which could lead to overdevelopment. The framework for the area should begin with walking and cycle routes and generous amounts of green space. Individual buildings and areas should be designed to provide a pleasant and attractive experience for people to move through the area on foot or by cycle. Plenty of street trees should be used in areas of tall buildings to avoid wind tunnel effects. Wayfinding should be clear and simple.

Mostly not

Some of this is OK, but 13 stories in the flat fenland surroundings is way, way too high. The recently built Hotel is already fairly dominant, and going higher would just be awful. Also, given the extreme packing density on the streets below, people will be both packed in but also cut off, way up that high. Apart from simply creating more apartments (in which case why stop at 13 stories?), creating a mini-LA in the Fens is just wrong.

Not at all

13 storey buildings, even those with silly apex towers, are NOT appropriate for the site nor anywhere else in or bordering the Fens. It is incredible that you are even proposing this idiocy. There are no homes or workspaces with these many storeys in Cambridge city, why should the height be suitable in north-east Cambridge? The existing outline design, in terms of height, density and weird collection of colours with no obvious link to the surrounding areas, is one where no one will want to live, that will fast turn into a grotty slum, and which is entirely inappropriate in our post-pandemic world. You have included Kings College Chapel and Ely Cathedral in your height comparison. If anything were to make me furious, this is it. How dare you even think it appropriate to include two of the greatest building in the whole world in your comparison.

Not at all

The buildings are too high. They go against the CCC policies of 4 storey building. I don't understand that having a high building as a focus is good! I only see it as a negative and oppressive feature.

Mostly yes

We don't have a large issue with the proposed variety of building heights, however, we believe that buildings beyond 10 storeys feel out of keeping with residential developments across Cambridge. However, our comfort in the proposals is wholly conditional on the quality of the overall sky-scape produced by the aggregated development. Quality and variety are paramount - if it results in a series of indentikit cuboid ugly buildings then it would be a disaster.

Not at all

Given that these buildings will be up to 13 stories high they will be higher than anywhere else in Cambridge, which is not appropriate. The density is also too high and will mean that people have a very low quality of life. What on earth are you thinking in terms of what people actually need to have a healthy existence?

Not at all

High density housing seems very likely to be used for commuting to london.

Mostly not

Comparing blocks of flats to the architecture of King’s College Chapel and Ely Cathedral is hardly a fair comparison. I'd very much like to have either in view from my garden. I wouldn't want a 10 story block of flats. Height and density seem far too much.

Not at all

No answer given

Mostly not

No answer given

Not at all

The surrounding villages and neighbourhoods are mostly low rise housing

Not at all

Far too tall for historic Cambridge. The new hotel by the Cambridge North can be seen from Chesterton High Street.

Mostly not

Too much high rise giving too high population density

Mostly not

This area is clearly going to be developed to a very high population density. The provisions outlined for footpaths and cycleways attempt to make a virtue out of absolute minimum design standards and it is doubtful if even these will be fully achieved. More trees and more maintained public green space is vital for the successful development of a liveable environment.

Not at all

This area is not appropraite for such a high density of buildings. 13 storey blocks - no thanks. One and two bedroom dwellings in 13 storey buildings - could lead to social isolation. Not enough capacity for growing families. Why would a secondary school not be needed - it needs to be in the initial plan - it will be needed!

Mostly not

For offices, I think it's ok to go to 6 storeys high, but for flats I wouldn't go over 4-5 storeys. I think for the area no more than 6 storeys considering the landscape. I don't think it's appropriate to go to 11 storeys high.

Not at all

The building heights are way too high: they are suitable for a metropolitan city centre but totally out of proportion for the outskirts of a small-ish city.

Not at all

This type of high density housing in blocks even though they are not "high rise" is not suited to Cambridge. It's unique atmosphere and appearance will be eroded. Cambridge need not be the victim of its own success. We need to spread the wealth around. The people working in the area will not aspire to live in one and two bedroom dwellings. They will only rent them temporarily and then buy in a village. This type of building will not be conducive to a community.

Neutral

No answer given

Not at all

Heights of 10-13 storeys are not acceptable. These buildings will be too tall for the area and totally out of keeping with other developments in Cambridge. I thought there was a rule about the heights allowed in Cambridge? Currently the new developments on the outskirts of Cambridge are a very poor advert for this historic city. We must do better and quality and vision of the build and surrounding environment is paramount.

Not at all

The heights proposed or 10-13 storeys are too high and out of keeping with other developments in Cambridge.

Mostly not

The building heights are way too high: they are suitable for a metropolitan city centre but totally out of proportion for the outskirts of a small city. The heights of buildings and corresponding number of expected new residents, should be decreased for the benefit of all; this pertains also to the expected numbers of 'new jobs' created, which is pitched at an unrealistic 20,000. The approach to building heights and density should be determined by aspects such as liveability rather than external factors which could lead to overdevelopment. The framework for the area should begin with walking and cycle routes and generous amounts of green space. Individual buildings and areas should be designed to provide a pleasant and attractive experience for people to move through the area on foot or by cycle. Plenty of street trees should be used in areas of tall buildings to avoid wind tunnel effects. Wayfinding should be clear and simple.

Not at all

No answer given

Not at all

See Q1. It is an entirely inappropriate density of houses to space, not even subscribing to the guidelines of the local plan ( so whose plan is it???). Nothing more to say

Not at all

Such high density (more than London or Paris) is not appropriate for this area. One-and two-bedroom dwellings in 13 storey blocks could lead to social isolation and lack of community. It doesn't cater for growing families. Are they expected to move out when children reach secondary school age, reducing diversity?

Neutral

Distribution of building heights & densitites is probably about right, but I completely disagree with the first sentence in this paragraph "North East Cambridge is a very sustainable place to build – it is brownfield land, with good public transport, walking and cycling links." A "good" public transport link means that the railway station if a 30-40 minute walk away? The busway only goes 2 directions from this location, and current cycling links are virtually non existent (only along the busway). The cycle way along Milton road is narrow and in terrible condition, it is hard to get onto the "Jane Coston" bridge (which is also very narrow), and once you are the top top and enjoying the ride "down", you have to stop at the junction.

Not at all

Some of the buildings are far too high at 13 storeys, which is higher than any other development in Cambridge and totally inappropriate. They would dominate the skyline and be unpleasant to inhabit. It is irrelevant to compare them with architectural gems such as King's College Chapel.