Question 4

Not at all

No answer given

Mostly not

I am concerned about the amount of business space that has been set aside for this development. I don't believe it is justified in what is now a completely different economic environment due to the Covid pandemic. The HIF money is to be used for housing so who is paying for the business space? The financial aspects to this development raise a lot of questions about who is paying for it and who will benefit most from it.

Mostly not

I think this is the wrong place for so many residential units. I think the plan should include more commercial and industrial units as this site is right by the A14 and railway. This makes it a good location for visiting clients deliveries etc. The pollution from the A14 and also the toxins in the ground from the brownfield site history make it harmful for residential units. There is also a risk of flooding in this are. Shared ownership houses are not really affordable. I'd like to see some housing association houses with capped rents and keyworker priority. I am surprised to see 8000 houses listed as I am sure I have seen 5.5K and 6K respectively on earlier plans. All if these are way too high. Residential units should be limited to 2k and include houses with gardens and flats near the station

Neutral

genuinely affordable?? not for most people on average wages, unless you are able to hold down developers' prices. However, the main point here is that most new developments do not have facilities for small business owners who need space for storage of goods, or workspace. I'm thinking of plumbers, electricians (who also need secure storage for their vehicles rather than car barns unless properly covered by security), on-line retailers, gardeners and probably many more that I can think of. Also needs to be space for self-build communities.

Mostly yes

It's difficult to tell, it would be helpful to compare the plans to existing areas of Cambridge to give an idea of what 7,000 or so homes actually looks like in reality. I'm very sceptical about this "genuinely affordable housing" as that's not something I've seen in any development in Cambridge recently. Completing this consultation is hugely annoying - why are you giving me the same demographic survey after every question? My details haven't changed in the last 2 minutes. And why are you sending me an email for every question instead of one summary at the end?

Mostly yes

All the homes must be built to Building Regulation Code M4 (2) and as close to 100% as possible Code M4(3) the most modern and sustainable design of buildings.

Not at all

See my response to question 1. Shops and jobs are OK but I am completely opposed to the vast number of unnecessary new homes. Who wants to live on the site of a former sewage works in any case?

Mostly not

Will the jobs be suitable for people who will live in the neighbourhood? Can key workers live there? Is shared ownership really a good idea for 'affordability' - doesn't it hinder people's flexibility? Will affordable homes be built to a quality and standard that means they are suitable for a sustainable, zero carbon future (insulation, no gas, sustainable materials etc? It is vital that poorer people are not discriminated against in being full participants in a sustainable future, and are not left with high costs of being in less sustainable homes in a few years time,

Neutral

Bit concerned the the jobs will not match those being housed, and that the majority will still commute, especially to the science park, and the business Park.

Mostly not

Creating many more jobs than homes without addressing wider transportation needs-such as a cycle connection across the Cam, improved bus connections, road improvements for increased traffic and sufficient car parking. Will result in gridlock around an already busy traffic area.

Neutral

I think the density of news homes will compromise quality of life for residents. During covid we have identified the need for more space as we need to live and work at home and have established the value of easily accessible green spaces such as gardens and local parks. The plan doesn't provide enough green space within the area, it seems to in part rely on existing green areas nearby that are already in use. Have the designers taken into account the type of accommodation and space that people will want or need in the future, and will plans adapt as needs change, in part as a result of covid?

Yes, completely

Delivering your aspiration for 40% affordable is crucial. Housing associations? New types of ways to keep this? Church involvement?

Not at all

No answer given

Mostly not

Too many homes, too tightly pack in and 20,000 new jobs will mean a lot more traffic - what % of current commuters drive to the science park? 50% = 10,000 extra cars...

Mostly not

Too many homes, too tightly pack in and 20,000 new jobs will mean a lot more traffic - what % of current commuters drive to the science park? 50% = 10,000 extra cars...

Not at all

Your building houses when the exit Brexit and with COVID-19 face economic disaster. There will be few jobs about so totally wrong balance

Not at all

Nobody can predict how many jobs and new homes will be needed in Cambridge, if big companies like ARM move out of Cambridge, we will be creating homes that won't be needed.

Mostly not

The new norm for start-ups and tech companies is to work remotely - this provides greater access to talent and cheaper overheads during a time of recession. There are thousands of new homes being built in Newmarket, Waterbeach. Put new shops and buildings at Cambridge North, but please build less dense or less homes in central Cambridge.

Mostly not

Well. Most jobs can now be done from home. So this may need a re think.

Mostly not

No answer given

Not at all

As stated before, too many homes are proposed. Additionally you should be firm in your commitment to offer 40% affordable housing - not be fuzzy and start to talk of " around 40%". There is a past record of approving planning with a stated affordable housing commitment and then afterwards agreeing to developers reducing that % figure.

Not at all

Homes should not be built at this location. The proximity to the A14 encourages the ghettoisation due to miserable living conditions due to traffic noise, congestion and pollution.

Neutral

No answer given

Not at all

This needs completely re-thinking post COVID. Who will fill all these business premises? There are more empty factories and empty businesses in and around Cambridge every month. Why not support the businesses that are already struggling to survive? This is no longer appropriate planning.

Mostly not

The provision of housing must be the highest priority in Cambridge

Mostly not

Given the accelerated shift to home working as a result of the Covid pandemic, the question of how many business premises should be included in this plan needs to be revisited. It is especially needs to be borne in mind that with more of the population being home based, there is a greater need for public open spaces to be scattered throughout the community to facilitate and encourage local outdoor activity.

Not at all

No answer given

Neutral

This question seems ill posed to me. Have the planners considered where the residents of this new district will work? What percentage are you expecting to work nearby or in the centre of Cambridge? And what percentage will just be London commuters who hop on the train at Cambridge North? My guess is that a high percentage of people will be London commuters. Why is Cambridge building housing for London commuters?

Mostly not

There seem to be too many new jobs being created compared to the number of new homes, which means that people will have to commute into the area - for Cambridge to effectively tackle congestion and the bigger climate crisis, it needs to support a lifestyle shift to people working locally. I am also concerned at the statement of 'about 40%' of houses will be affordable - which gives flexibility to reduce this. A firm commitment should be made, and this should be 50% minimum. There is a big lack of affordable housing in Cambridge, and anything less than 50% will not be enough to help address this, adding to existing inequalities in the city. Equity is also central to sustainability.

Mostly not

There seem to be too many jobs in comparison to homes which will increase the number of people travelling into the area from outside and therefore unable to walk or cycle to work, creating more traffic around the whole of North Cambridge and the A14. A variety of jobs in an area of mixed-use buildings is welcomed so that many people can live close to their employment, but a better balance of homes and jobs is needed. Construction should be phased so that this balance remains stable at every stage of development.