Question 3

Mostly not

The hard working people of Cambridge especially in that area do not all work at the science park or St John's or commute. I'm envisaging more a "Big Bang cafe" .. A tribute to Stephen Hawking.. Of some sort maybe speak to Pure Maths on that one.. Some themed areas eco designed quarter. Benches that look like folded books, sculptures made out of recycled objects to fit with the Green Theme.. Venue's for music as Cambridge is lacking.. Encouraging local bands to play from the 6th form colleges.. Green areas.. An out door amphitheatre.. Not just science

Not at all

They should be outside the city and with more space for residents. More people will work from home in future and will not need to be in the city centre. This looks like a ghetto.

Not at all

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Neutral

In line with no additional traffic, surely it makes sense to have the bars, restaurant etc closer the the rail station? A library would be welcome. With the density of proposed housing your shared communal spaces appear too small.

Mostly not

The planned development creates too dense a population of residential housing, with to much of an emphasis on high-rise apartment blocks; local infrastructure cannot cope with the existing density of population and does not do enough to explain what is planned for the transport infrastructure beyond walking and cycling. Whilst the documentation attempts to convince the readers that the development will include plenty of green space, however the high-level figures boasting 10 hectares appear to include the existing green space at the Science Park and the 'public squares' that are most likely to be primarily concrete (as in Eddington, Aura and other new developments in Cambridge). It is positive that the existing green space and lakes at the Science Park will be retained, but a more green and open feel must be achieved to the east of Milton Road; the proposed linear park merely landscapes an unavoidable water management feature. The development does nothing to assist integration with the existing Kings Hedges and Chesterton 'estates', both of which are showing signs of neglect by the Cambridge City and Cambridgeshire Country Councils. A brand-new housing development will exacerbate this impression of neglect and risks the old Arbury and Kings Hedges estates falling back to the 'no-go' areas of the eighties and nineties. More must be done to limit the stark comparison between new and old in the well-established Kings Hedges, Chesterton and Arbury areas.

Mostly yes

The once currently planned seem to be well placed, but there is a bit of a gap around the central science park area, and also where the sewage works currently are.

Not at all

Should we be encouraging eating ok with the current obesity crisis or allowing people to use green belt land to exercise and enjoy nature rather than building a new water treatment works?

Mostly yes

Looks positive and broad.

Mostly yes

I think the idea of integrating these centres with local communities is important - I live off Milton Road and there are no cafes, bars and restaurants close by. This would be a huge improvement to this area. I think independent bars, cafes and restaurants should be encouraged and prioritised - the last thing Cambridge needs is another chain coffee shop or restaurant. Cambridge has a growing reputation for food, coffee and street food and this should be considered and encouraged.

Mostly not

This is a copy of the comments about community facilities as both are related to the same issue about adequacy of facilities. Again, the question is a bit loaded as the adequacy and economic environment are equally important. The previous comments on adequacy do not seem to have been taken on board. The Community Forum submissions to the Issues and Options consultation on this topic were as follows: Adequacy of school facilities. Whilst there is no clear definition of the target demographic or mix of housing or tenures, it is clear that local Secondary schools are full and under stress. They are also inconvenient, so a strong shared view emerged that there should be on-site secondary school provision with adequate ancillary space as well as primary school (and nursery) provision. Adequacy of medical facilities. Accepting that these are facilities provided by third party (private) CCG entities, there was a strong view that adequate health facilities were required including pharmacy. The example of Trumpington should be followed. A settlement of circa 18,000 people will need more than primary care and at least integrated care centres. There also needs to be enhancement of the citywide facilities which the settlement will make additional demands on, such as Addenbrookes. A new Cultural Centre for Cambridge. So far only the idea of occupants feeling so connected by reliable public transport with the centre of Cambridge that they will readily go there for cultural activity has been explored. This of course relies on a proper range of high quality public transport, not just inadequate bus services. Nor does the proximity of the Guided Bus, which is questionably a positive factor, or the railway station offer the means to take people to where they wish to be. However, it is also important to consider using the creation of this community to be the basis for building a new top quality concert hall and venue for Cambridge that will be larger than anything presently on offer, near to the railway station, and of sufficient size and flexibility to serve as a major regional focus – 2,000 plus seats. Shopping Facilities. Everything needs to be done to encourage vibrant independent shops and facilities. This will require affordable rents and the ability for facilities to grow in an organic and flexible manner. Steps may need to be taken to prevent large chains. Providing higher buildings will not in itself provide what is required. Communities. Developing successful communities needs to be a top priority and needs to be given a great deal of thought. Certainly, providing the right facilities and a people centric environment is a start. Thought also needs to be given to how different demographics will live together, as has so lamentably failed at CB1. Marmalade Lane is an example of an alternative approach that much can be learnt from, although it may not work wholesale for everyone. Impact on Citywide Facilities. A development of this size, on top of all the other new developments both built and planned, will make large demands on the citywide facilities. These would include the hospitals, education, arts facilities, night life, social services and local government. It is not clear how these will be expanded to avoid overcrowding, or even where there is space to do so. There don’t appear to be any plans for the developers to contribute to anything outside the actual development and local government has no money. End of CF submission It seems we are supposed to be grateful that a development the size of Ely will have a basic level of facilities. The consultation seems to be only about how the facilities will be arranged, not the fact that they are not adequate for the size of the development. This will create unnecessary travel out of the development and impact already overstretched services in Cambridge. Unfortunately, the community forum’s recommendations are again being ignored. There was major uproar locally when it was suggested that there would not be a secondary school so we were then told that one would be included. It is now being suggested that there won’t necessarily be one provided, just a space in case it might be needed. It is doubly disappointing that the project has gone back on its word on this and I expect major local discontent about this. I don’t know how long an empty space will survive the covetous eyes of the developers anyway. The lack of medical facilities beyond primary care level is also a serious mistake. The way ahead in medical care is widely seen as Integrated Care Centres at a scale between primary and large hospital care. This would be a golden opportunity to start on the right foot. It would also avoid a lot of unnecessary trips to Addenbrookes with the higher internal and external costs involved. In terms of shopping there need to be cheap rents imposed which will enable useful independent stores to survive, just building them is not enough. Orchard Park has a totally underwhelming shopping centre which, besides a supermarket includes empty shops, an estate agent and a pizza delivery place. For some reason new developments seem to really struggle with pubs. There is not really one at Orchard Park and some give this as a reason for the community not really taking off. Cambourne has one pub which is best avoided at all times. The suggestion of a large cultural centre has not been taken up which is a lost opportunity.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Neutral

I do not know the answer to this question, but the 'local shops' for the Nine Wells development involve using the hospital shops, which is not encouraging.

Mostly yes

Unclear what exactly a health centre contains - presumably GP and pharmacy provision? If so, I would question whether 1 pharmacy is sufficient for all the new housing or whether a further one should be provided at another of the centres. Additionally I don't see any mention of public sports facilities. With this much new housing I think that provision of some sort of public sports facilities, particularly sports fields and a gym but also possibly a swimming pool, would be crucial.

Yes, completely

So happy that there'll be a library and social spaces within walking distance of my home and work!

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Neutral

No answer given

Yes, completely

The school site should be very carefully designed so it is difficult to access by car for school dropoff and pickup. The walking and cycling option should be by far more convenient and protected.

Mostly not

The intention to generate shops/services and high tech businesses in the area make sense given the proximity to the existing science and technology parks. Creating 7500 news homes on the site currently occupied by the sewerage works makes no sense since the plan does not clearly state that to achieve this the sewerage works must move to greenbelt, which is entirely unacceptable. There is no need to create affordable housing in this area to serve local industry since most staff working in those companies are well paid and live in suburbs. Increasing the fraction of affordable housing in neighbouring Arbury and King's Hedges should be the focus.

Neutral

The plan is not explicit about what exactly an 'arts hub' would consist of. I would hope it contained a gallery/exhibition space as well as provision for dance, music, other arts events, etc. What numbers of performers / audience members would be catered for? How would the proposed facilities relate to existing arts venues in Cambridge? The question of whether ‘centres’ are in the ‘right place’ will depend in part on whether adequate consideration been given to integration with public transport, and to inclusion of sufficient bike and vehicle parking. An ‘arts hub’ in particular would need to allow for e.g. accessibility for evening events. I would like to see a more local character in the mix of shops for the N/E Cambridge centre, favouring independent cafes, shops, greengrocers, boutiques, etc. over the ‘usual suspects’ of chain stores / fast food outlets / coffee chains (e.g. as found at the Cambridge central station area). This would help avoid the new development looking like any other ‘identikit’ developments found across the country. I am in favour of the inclusion of a neighbourhood centre and library. I understand that Orchard Park community centre has been very successful in contributing to local community cohesion, so that would be something to emulate.

Mostly yes

When you say local shops I hope you do not intend to have more tesco express, more aldi or more lidl.

Neutral

I really don’t know – I find it hard to imagine what the local centres will be like. I do approve of making the station square more of a local centre, but it seems unlikely that I will ever have anything to do with the others.

Mostly yes

It's difficult to comment without more detail (e.g. knowing who will be leasing units!) but I do feel we should encourage more than just chains and promote independent shop and restaurants to improve opportunities in Cambridge.

Neutral

No answer given

Not at all

People do shop online these days. You don’t need a high-street. High-street is dying. People may need more outdoor landscape, coffees and just convenient stores.

Mostly yes

however I think you need to reduce the Cowley Road and District centres in terms of volumes of homes and offices. Two reasons: post Covid there will be less people in offices and as usual with Cambridge planning you shove loads of houses into a small area and don't consider the impact on roads and existing communities

Neutral

No answer given

Mostly not

I think there are too many. It would be better to have two bigger ones than 4 smaller ones. Concentrate on District centre and Science park sites.

Mostly yes

A reasonable size supermarket will be needed as well as smaller local shops.