Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
Representation ID: 56486
Received: 06/11/2021
Respondent: Ms Avril Coghlan
- Noise and light pollution can affect insects, birds, bats, etc. It should not be allowed that proposed developments that will cause a lot of light pollution and noise pollution are allowed near nature sites, and existing biodiverse places like parks, rivers, etc.
- Where a new development (e.g. housing estate) is proposed near a noisy road or place that is brightly lit at night, it should not be allowed that the proposed 20% increase in biodiversity is due to bat boxes, bird boxes, etc. that are sited beside a brightly-lit noisy place where wildlife will not thrive. Bats and birds and insects are adversely affected by sound and light. It would seem better to me that the 20% increase in biodiversity would be at an off-site place that is more amenable to biodiversity in that case.
- In recent years some areas of Cambridge have had carefully planned developments that seem to have given rise to real increases in biodiversity, e.g. the Trumpington meadows. On the other hand, some other proposed developments (e.g. the recent planning proposal for the Anderson land in Cherry Hinton) did not include any increase in biodiversity, because the developer had actually systematically cut down trees and bushes and sprayed Roundup for several years before measuring the biodiversity baseline. There should be more consistency between the requirements for different developments - the wildlife and people of all of Cambridge/Cambridgeshire deserve the same level of careful planning and consideration for biodiversity as has been given in Trumpington.
- It should not be allowed that developers spray a site with Roundup and cut down trees and bushes to the level that biodiversity decreases hugely, and then use that as the baseline for their increase in biodiversity by the proposed development.
- Insects are at the bottom of the food web, and as such, are essential to all larger animals such as birds, hedgehogs, etc. Cambridge should declare itself a pesticide-free town as many other cities and towns around the world are doing, to encourage insects, which are necessary for all other animals to thrive.
- Cambridgeshire has an extremely low rate of woodland compared to other counties of England. It would be of great value to biodiversity to create some managed broad-leaf woodlands near Cambridge.
- The amount of litter along the roads and in hedges, trees, etc. near Cambridge is enormous. This must have a big effect on wildlife that gets caught in or accidentally ingests plastic bags etc. Developers should have to contribute to a litter clean-up fund to get rid of litter around Cambridge.
- Noise and light pollution can affect insects, birds, bats, etc. It should not be allowed that proposed developments that will cause a lot of light pollution and noise pollution are allowed near nature sites, and existing biodiverse places like parks, rivers, etc.
- Where a new development (e.g. housing estate) is proposed near a noisy road or place that is brightly lit at night, it should not be allowed that the proposed 20% increase in biodiversity is due to bat boxes, bird boxes, etc. that are sited beside a brightly-lit noisy place where wildlife will not thrive. Bats and birds and insects are adversely affected by sound and light. It would seem better to me that the 20% increase in biodiversity would be at an off-site place that is more amenable to biodiversity in that case.
- In recent years some areas of Cambridge have had carefully planned developments that seem to have given rise to real increases in biodiversity, e.g. the Trumpington meadows. On the other hand, some other proposed developments (e.g. the recent planning proposal for the Anderson land in Cherry Hinton) did not include any increase in biodiversity, because the developer had actually systematically cut down trees and bushes and sprayed Roundup for several years before measuring the biodiversity baseline. There should be more consistency between the requirements for different developments - the wildlife and people of all of Cambridge/Cambridgeshire deserve the same level of careful planning and consideration for biodiversity as has been given in Trumpington.
- It should not be allowed that developers spray a site with Roundup and cut down trees and bushes to the level that biodiversity decreases hugely, and then use that as the baseline for their increase in biodiversity by the proposed development.
- Insects are at the bottom of the food web, and as such, are essential to all larger animals such as birds, hedgehogs, etc. Cambridge should declare itself a pesticide-free town as many other cities and towns around the world are doing, to encourage insects, which are necessary for all other animals to thrive.
- Cambridgeshire has an extremely low rate of woodland compared to other counties of England. It would be of great value to biodiversity to create some managed broad-leaf woodlands near Cambridge.
- The amount of litter along the roads and in hedges, trees, etc. near Cambridge is enormous. This must have a big effect on wildlife that gets caught in or accidentally ingests plastic bags etc. Developers should have to contribute to a litter clean-up fund to get rid of litter around Cambridge.