Question 6

Not at all

Please see my comments above about the inappropriate plan to put families, parents with babies, children, older people living in high rise flats. That only leaves first time buyers who will be stuck not being able to sell their property or the elderluy who will have to sell once they can no longer climb the stairs. Lifts break down. They are a recipie for isolation and serious mental health problems. You should wait for the reports following the Grenville Flats enquiry to identify how dangerous it can be to put people in high rise flats. Research must be done following Covid 19 to find out how and where people want to live. I believe everyone wants enough space so they can work from home. If children have to be educated at home they need space. Your plan should be to ensure everyone has their own personal green space - a tiny balcony is not the answer. Where do you keep your bike to ensure it is secure? Building these flats in C is not necessary and changes the whole nature of the city and the surrounding countryside. The proposed density is wholly out of keeping. Cambridge will turn into a huge metropolitan zone with a town the size of Ely stuck in the NE site, another town bigger than Ely at Waterbeach, another town bigger than Ely on the airport site, another town bigger than Ely at Northstowe and so on. The need for some more houses for the current population does not require cramming every last bit of space with blocks of flats.

Mostly not

No answer given

Not at all

The buildings need to be lower. Will not be in keeping with the rest of the city. Need less density and more green space.

Mostly not

My main concern about the AAP is that overall residential/business space densities are too high, particularly on the principal development sites to the east of Cowley Road. Building heights should generally not exceed 6 storeys. Given the good public transport connections and the objective of creating a sustainable community, net residential densities there of 250 dpha are probably acceptable. From experience of other master planned regeneration schemes, developers will take the maximum heights/densities set out in the AAP and seek to meet them or exceed them on every development parcel. Although including a small number of landmark buildings above the general maximum in the district centre is a commonly used device, more thought needs to be given to why it is being done. At the general density applied in the AAP, any tall landmark building will be irrelevant within the new neighbourhood and just serve as a pointlees (or pointed) intrusion into views from Milton/Horningsea/A14/A10 and across the Green Belt. The recently built hotel at Cambridge North which is 6 storeys serves as a good test of how intrusive buildings twice that height will be.

Not at all

Absolutely ridiculous number of buildings. The buildings are too much and overwhelming. Please consider the whole of Cambridge. Why build everything in blocks with no character, like Eddington & Knighton? Just square, ugly blocks! Is 13 storeys really necessary!

Not at all

Absolutely ridiculous number of buildings. The buildings are too much and overwhelming. Please consider the whole of Cambridge. Why build everything in blocks with no character, like Eddington & Knighton? Just square, ugly blocks! Is 13 storeys really necessary!

Not at all

The infrastructure is not sufficient to support height density housing.

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. Given these types of buildings, it is hard to understand whether any family space will be created or whether everyone will be crammed together in apartment blocks. Let's hope there is not another lock-down where access to a garden is required!

Not at all

This is my biggest objection to the development. Some of my other concerns could be addressed by reducing the number homes being built. I am very sad when I think about the people who would end up living here. The plan says that there will be homes 'of different sizes and types', but as far as I can see, they will all be flats. Throughout the last 6 months, it has frequently been noted that the people who have been able to cope with lockdown the best are those who have a garden. I hate the idea of 3 primary schools worth of children all growing up without a garden of their own to play in. How can a development be 'a healthy district where wellbeing, recreation and community safety are built into its design' if no-one has space of their own to relax, play, grow food and other plants and entertain friends? I accept that some people actively prefer to live in a flat, but the prices of houses in Cambridge which have gardens suggest that most people would prefer this option. Accepting that there will need to be some flats, the planned buildings are too high, and completely out of keeping with the character of Cambridge. This is not London.

Not at all

Your approach to building heights and densities is totally inappropriate. This will create a dense, urban hell totally unbecoming of our beautiful city.

Not at all

13 storeys is unacceptable, 11 storeys is unacceptable. 6 maximum. You only have to walk on Magog Down to see what damage has already been done to the skyscape. Do not do this.

Not at all

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Not at all

Emphatically no! They are completely out of proportion in the context of East Chesterton and in relation to Cambridge itself. The absolute maximum height for any building should be 6 storeys. This is not a city centre and Cambridge is only a small town: it cannot bear this kind of rampant overdevelopment and retain i's character or amenities for the current residents. It will not be in any way a pleasant place to live, work or see: the buildings will create wind tunnels and feel like canyons. .this is not New York!

Not at all

This is what I have put about density (there is are other areas to comment on: Not at all, it is an obscene and ill-considered attempt to cram as much property into the location as possible, without learning any lessons about the risks of poor planning or high density housing from the CB1 quarter and the problems there. I fully recognise the need for more housing in Cambridge and especially genuinely affordable housing, however there is as huge risk of creating a ghetto slum with endemic social problems that will fester in the sector and spill out to neighbouring areas. Cambridge already is one of the top 5 targets for London-based county lines operations (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54356383), and this site will be a perfect launchpad for further operations, sitting right on top of a train station directly connecting to London, as it does. I find it very alarming this consultation has been so poorly advertised and can't help but be cynical about the reasons for this. The development stands to make millions extra in profit for developers as a result and we have ample track-records of developers eroding aspirations for developments to make sub-standard housing and sub-standard community, most of Orchard Park being another example. A genuine social development must eschew the highest development densities to provide genuine affordable housing not just for people, but for families and community - not just cramming in people in battery-farm conditions. This development is an unrepeatable opportunity but it MUST be about improving Cambridge, not lining developers' (and their contacts') pockets. Lockdown has shown up even more the need for appropriate living space, and with an evolution to more home working this will only increase in importance, This development must establish a robust plan for a decent standard of living, and it must make this plan absolutely iron-clad, or the future of the quarter is already clear and it not a good one.

Not at all

I think the building heights being proposed are too high. Streets will be over powered by the heights of the buildings as they are near cambridge station and will feel crowded. The population density is far too high I think it is quite frankly duplicitous and disingenuous to describe one of the benefits of this site as being a brownfield site and talk about benefits to the surrounding communities when in order to make it available you are forcing the sewage works to move to greenbelt land which significantly impacts the local communities and biodiversity when there is no operational need for that site to be moved or upgraded.

Mostly not

The approach to building heights and density should be determined by aspects such as liveability rather than external factors which could lead to overdevelopment. I personally think 13 stories is far too high. That is taller than the University Library which used to be a unique landmark on this Fen Edge landscape. 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. I commute down Hills Road; in strong winds the area south of the railway bridge has become very dangerous since the two tall buildings (the Marque and the two opposite) have led to some very odd and dangerous gusty winds that can force cyclists into the middle of the road. There appears to e no thought of the effects of wind on the streetscape in the planning system. Also wayfinding should be clear and simple.

Not at all

This is a very high density area, and unless used 100% for affordable housing, not appropriate. The recent coronavirus lockdown has shown that high density housing without much green space is not what people want. If you want to make undesirable housing, and therefore affordable then this density might work. But as a vision of the future for most people it is terrible. It combines all the worst aspects of the worst housing areas in the country. There just aren't enough wannabe gang members and drug dealers in Cambridge to fill it up. There are very few comments about green space in the information, and it seems that the accessible green space will be outside the plan area, in Milton Park, or beside the river. The suggested housing density is too high to allow much green space and it will just result in an unpleasant area to live. You say you want to build densely in order to reduce the need for building land, but there is plenty of land available outisde the green belt to build a new town. This could have your suggested mix, and if it is on a railway line, or the proposed CAM metro, then it could be built at a lower density and be a much more pleasant place to live.

Not at all

Buildings up to 13 storeys high with a density that matches some areas of inner London are inappropriate. They will not provide living conditions that support the mental and physical well being of the city's residents. Other cities are taking high rise blocks down; why are you proposing building them?

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.

Yes, completely

No answer given

Not at all

Some blocks of flats are 13 stories high and are out of keeping with the area. They will dominate the landscape for miles around. The development is more in keeping with blocks built in the mid-20th century with a few meagre facilities- shops, a doctor’s surgery, a community centre nearby. Many of these blocks have now been pulled down. They never provided an environment with the mental and physical wellbeing of the community at heart. This development is falling far short of the lofty aims set out in your original plan.

Mostly not

I do not support 13-story buildings and reject the argument that they will provide "visual focus" as predictable developers' nonsense. This is already a high-density development and does not need 13-story buildings. This apart, I would be willing to support proposals for high density as long as they comply with the policies here.

Not at all

The proposed number of homes is far too large for the space. I also strongly question if there is actually a need for so many flats in Cambridge. Rather there is a need for decent size affordable family homes with adequate green space! The building heights are far too high for Cambridge as a historic city and these buildings and this area seem destined to become the slums of the future.

Not at all

The proposed number of homes is far too large for the space. I also strongly question if there is actually a need for so many flats in Cambridge. Rather there is a need for decent size affordable family homes with adequate green space! The building heights are far too high for Cambridge as a historic city and these buildings and this area seem destined to become the slums of the future.

Not at all

The proposed number of homes is far too large for the space. I also strongly question if there is actually a need for so many flats in Cambridge. Rather there is a need for decent size affordable family homes with adequate green space! The building heights are far too high for Cambridge as a historic city and these buildings and this area seem destined to become the slums of the future.

Not at all

These buildings will be up to 13 storeys high, higher than anywhere else in Cambridge and denser than much of inner London. Many people feel this is inappropriate for an historic city. Buildings will dominate the skyline from Milton Road, Fen Ditton, the towpath etc. The documents cite buildings such as King’s College Chapel and Ely Cathedral as examples of tall buildings in the area, yet these are of enormous architectural and historical merit, rather than office buildings or blocks of flats.

Not at all

You are destroying Green Belt by moving the sewage works from this brownfield land! All around Cambridge there are massive housing developments, we don’t need this one. To build 8 and 13 storey buildings will devastate the skyline.

Not at all

No answer given