Question 1
Add to the list of principles to guide new development: > Layout, choice of materials (and their long term resilience and attractiveness), range and type of "must have" facilities together with landscaping and architecture make this a place where people are proud to live and work.
No uploaded files for public display
The vision seems fine but I have low confidence that it will actually be carried out to the letter and instead will be repeatedly compromised.
No uploaded files for public display
I support less cars and better public & bike transportation. But I run a company that serves homes and needs vehicle access to them. How will I work in this area. And some people will need vehicles and access to their home by vehicle so do not ignore them completely.
No uploaded files for public display
The proposal is very dense and contains too few green spaces in my opinion.
No uploaded files for public display
I think it is completely unrealistic, and doesn't properly reflect the reality of how much space people need to live, particularly when some distance is needed with a pandemic. I think it is far too many new homes in a very small area. I don't think it is sustainable environmentally, or meets the targets set.
No uploaded files for public display
Seems too dense, and out of keeping with the surrounding area
No uploaded files for public display
On paper it looks great but it's not mentioned how much green belt land will be consumed both with the new building and with the relocation of the waste water treatment plant. If the latter is relocated to an area that is currently used for conservation and recreation purposes (such as one of the areas proposed, by Honey Hill and the SSSI Wicken Fen near Horningsea) then this rather defeats the point. Also not much point in providing housing with reduced parking unless both the availability and cost of public transport is addressed - and this information.
No uploaded files for public display
The approach is too urban. The area desperately needs a large destination park with places to sit and relax, preferably with water features. There needs to be allotments and a nature-focussed approach to landscaping. There needs to be LOTS more trees. The cycle route to the centre of cambridge is currently very poor and needs improving desperately. I’d like to see the approach more along the lines of Eddington or the Millenium Village site in Lindon, rather than more grot exemplified by
No uploaded files for public display
The vision might be fine - but how can you achieve it when it is surrounded by polluting transport links - A14 & Milton Road: noise, exhaust gasses Railway: noise The land is contaminated and will be expensive to clean up. You are pushing out the sewage works to Green Belt land - areas which are currently full of diversity, wildlife and archeology, and are also contain peaceful traffic free public rights of way. If this is done you must include these in the carbon footprint for the NE Cambridge area. The vision for NE Cambridge is completely out of keeping with the surrounding villages and neighbourhoods i.e. excessively tall buildings, lack of private open spaces e.g. gardens, overly dense housing.
No uploaded files for public display
Agree that the area needs developing and we need housing but the density is too high, with not enough green space for the number of people intended to live there, especially if those living in flats don't have a garden. The existing green space on Stourbridge Common, Ditton Meadows and the tow path was very overcrowded in lockdown. If more people move to the area the current open space will become more overcrowded. The proposed buildings are far too tall for Cambridge.
No uploaded files for public display
Your vision is nice but unfortunately due to the density of your development you aren't going to achieve it. Half of your development is exsicting science park which I think mostly there in your development plan your are going to build a hotel and multi story parking barn needed for the residents of your futuer development, that is going to creat negative effects on the neighborhoods. Just spending 227 million pound on moving the swear the government could had bought 979 properties -based on 231855 pound average house price in uk- and could have provided affordable housing for the residents which I think around 1100 families are on waiting list in Cambridge. And I am sure that the relocation cost will end up in around 350 million pounds as the scenario which happened to building the North Cambridge station.
No uploaded files for public display
The development needs more green space as this is important for people's well being, especially if they don't have gardens. There are not enough green spaces in North Cambridge as it is.
No uploaded files for public display
Good vision, minimize impact on Green land by reducing size rather than moving sewage works
No uploaded files for public display
Unfortunatley this vision sounds ideal but in reality is unlikey to meet the high expectations Climate - the building works that will have to take place including the removel of the sewage works is not going to be kind to the climate. will the houses be built to the high standards of being eco friendly? It being a beautiful area - it is next to the A14!!!!! Significant numbers of new homes - When are homes going to stop being built in cambridge on such large scales - Cambridge is changing beyond recognition nad the infrastructure can not cope now never mind if this project goes ahead. A range of jobs - We dont need any more space for further jobs. There is enough space already, some of which is not being utilised. Healthy district - hard to believe how tis can be next to the A14 Discouraging car use - this is unrealsitic. No public transport system and cycle net work will enure this in reality. Cambridge should be providing a better public transport system for those of us who already live here before unrealistically promising this for a new project. The emphasis on discouraging car use is never going to achieve its aim. The public transport system and safe cycling network need massive improvment beore we will choose altrenatives to cars. We need encouraging to use alternatives now. Is this the right itme to be planning such a large development. It is not a good use of public funds. The governement should be sending money on Social Care, NHS and Education. Fostering community well being - how is this going to happen
No uploaded files for public display
I was initially excited by the plans but I now have some concerns. I am very preoccupied by the climate crisis and how we can do all we can as global citizens to reduce our Impact on the planet. The plan no longer aims to be carbon free and only wishes to ‘discourage’ car use- this may as well be meaningless and I have concerns about how plans to house so many people will greatly increase the carbon footprint of the area - in terms of car use and sheer energy required for so many people. As a follow on to this I would like to see dedicated community gardens and space for allotments. Why is the plan to increase biodiversity so low at just 10 per cent? Surely we can aim higher? This could be a true example of sustainable building but it seems as though somewhere along the journey of development potential for profit has been put before the planet.
No uploaded files for public display
Probably some more open space and some more houses rather than flats. But overall I think it looks good.
No uploaded files for public display
Huntingdonshire District Council confirm that the draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan as presented for consultation does not constitute a strategic matter that needs to be addressed as part of Greater Cambridge’s Duty to Cooperate.
No uploaded files for public display
The aims of the plan are laudable but the details given in the longer Area Action Plan and supporting documents do not give confidence that this vision will be implemented successfully. For example, the plan's aim for 75% of the additional journeys to be by foot, cycle or public transport depends on the Cambridge Autonomous Metro, "a tunnelled central core which will connect Cambridge station and the city centre to four portal locations". This sounds like science fiction costing billions and it may never happen: the additional car journeys generated by the site will further clog up Milton Road, further slowing down the existing bus journeys to/from the city centre along that route. This in turn will displace more of the new journeys towards cycling, making it even more important to provide sufficient cycle infrastructure connecting the site to the city centre. I support Cambridge Past, Present and Future’s recommendation to establish a special purpose vehicle such as a locally-controlled Development Corporation to ensure that the vision for the area can be properly realised.
No uploaded files for public display
The Governments has a policy of creating centres of economic activity to the north of England. In view of this I believe that the vision for NE Cambridge should be reassessed. The type of housing proposed, high density in blocks, will only appeal to investors, private landlords and Air B and B investors. The developers will not mind this as they will make their profit but Cambridge and its future will suffer. There is a danger of creating an inner city "ghetto" where the people employed in Cambridge will not aspire to live. Post Covid and in view of future pandemics, people will want houses with gardens and access to green areas for recreation and nature.
No uploaded files for public display
It is important that the plan gives emphasis to the need for physical activity to be embedded into the master planning process.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
It would be great to have a community hub and nearby, along with useful shops eg packaging free food shops.
No uploaded files for public display
I think that the vision is inward looking. Its treatment of the current use of the site, and the issues raised by relocation of these uses, is minimal. I am concerned that while it sounds good to convert a "Brownfield site" to a state-of-the-art site ticking all boxes of environmental and quality-of-life boxes, it ignores the downside: the conversion of Greenfield sites in Green Belt land not so far away, at least as far as relocation of the Waste Water Treatment facility is concerned. Unless the plan were to make a case that there is an overall plus, not just a plus in one area at the expense of a minus in another area, I would disagree with it.
No uploaded files for public display
I applaud the ambition but this needs to be matched by high quality building and facilities. Based on current experience of developments in Cambridge, I am pessimistic that this will be achieved.
No uploaded files for public display
The ambition is fine. Execution needs to be high quality and much of the current development in Cambridge is poor, so I am concerned about the scale of this vision. It seems to be quantity above quality.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
The aims of the plan are laudable but the details given in the longer Area Action Plan and supporting documents do not give confidence that this vision will be implemented successfully. For example, the plan's aim for 75% of the additional journeys to be by foot, cycle or public transport depends on the Cambridge Autonomous Metro, "a tunnelled central core which will connect Cambridge station and the city centre to four portal locations". The Guided Busway development track record does not inspire confidence in this project: it sounds like science fiction costing billions and it may never happen: the additional car journeys generated by the site will further clog up Milton Road, further slowing down the existing bus journeys to/from the city centre along that route. This in turn will displace more of the new journeys towards cycling, making it even more important to provide sufficient cycle infrastructure connecting the site to the city centre. Too much power is in the hands of the developers who may go back on pledges (witness the current situation on the Hills Road/Flying Pig site); I support Cambridge Past, Present and Future’s recommendation to establish a special purpose vehicle such as a locally-controlled Development Corporation to ensure that the vision for the area can be properly realised.
No uploaded files for public display
There is lack of infrastructure that sufficiently supports community. The ratio of dwellings versus open spaces is too heavily biased towards dwellings. Thus not leaving enough space for community and wellbeing. On top of this NECAAP is going to push out the waste water treatment plant to green belt. Turning a brownfield site into residential space is going to negatively impact both the proposed development and the surrounding greenbelt. WHY HAS CONSIDERATION NOT BEEN GIVENT TO A SMALLER DEVELOPMENT AND RETAIL THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ON THIS SITE RATHER THAT CAUSE MASIVE ENVIROMENTAL DAMAGE BY RELOCATING IT AND DIGGING UP HALF THE COUNTRYSIDE, WHILST CAUSING A LARGE AMOUTN OF CONSTRUCTION TRAFFICE ETC.... I feel that the comparison in the proposed height of the building to historic cathedrals etc is discussing. as we have seen with new developments around Cambridge the quality of architecture and build quality of low and is destroying a historic city .Take for example the discussing new hotel at Cambridge north what were the planners thinking when allowing this monstrosity. What is the real housing requirement for the Cambridge and Cambridgeshire area and how has this changed in recent times? With the pandemic we have been shown that the situation can change rapidly. Or is this just driven by profit and land values. NECAAP claims 20,000 jobs will be created. Where are these jobs precisely? Given that the 8,000 dwellings will provide homes for 18,000 residents, at least 2,000 of these jobs will be outside the area. also what consideration will now be given post CODID and the changes this has caused. where is the green space for the residents. Balcony's should not be used as outdoor space.
No uploaded files for public display
1/ This development is greatly out of proportion to the land area available. The layout resembles more an inner city estate, with potential for all the problems that we KNOW come from that environment 2/ The driver for this 'lively mix of homes etc' seems largely to be the sudden availability of a redundant sewage works? No doubt the shareholders of the water company will benefit from the huge sums of money involved. Who else will be in line? 3/ There is no mention in this proposal about all the OTHER development now planned in NE Cambridge, a new sewage works (!) the encroachment of Northstowe and Waterbeach, and now to cap it all the Trinity College plans for a 200 acre Science Park 2. In what way is all of this to the benefits of local residents - or are we expected to suck it up for the good of the 'economy' ( read local landowners, landlords)
No uploaded files for public display
It should have plenty of green open space with parks for children and families to enjoy, as the rest of north cambridge is poorly supplied with this
No uploaded files for public display