I object to the proposal S/RSC/HW on many grounds
• We need to protect the Green Belt
• Communication to Cambridge from Shelford is not excellent but in fact poor. The fact that for large parts of the day trains are only once an hour makes it impractical to use for such a short journey on a consistent basis. The same will be true for Cambridge South if it is built. I would also expect that only a small proportion of the purchasers of any new houses will actually work in the Cambridge Biomedical Campus site. As such this cannot be regarded as an exceptional circumstance for green belt release.
• The number of houses is not commensurate with the amount of land proposed to be released. As mentioned in the document they do actually want to build more properties which will lead to more congestion. I have been informed that the amount of land proposed to be released would normally support about 250 homes
• I believe that there is an issue with ensuring that there is sufficient water available to supply the site.
• With so many new houses the local schools will not be able to cope.
• We are now very conscious of the affect we are having on the environment. We need to encourage food to be grown locally to help protect the effect of greenhouse gases associated with food being transported long distances. There is a growing trend of supermarkets sourcing food from local farmers to help with this. If arable land is built upon it is contrary to all of this
• As a recent employer in Great Shelford, I see no reason for so many extra houses to be built in the Shelford/Stapleford area. The building of houses not near the place of work can only lead to extra congestion on the roads
• Mingle Lane has many young children walking and cycling along it, particularly to and from the local school (which I am led to believe is at capacity). The extra traffic referred to above would jeopardise their safety. It should be noted that the representation states that an alleged study, of which no copy has been available, is reported to have said that the junction could be made safe - however if it has not been reported that it would be safe. If that were the case I am sure the representation would have stated it.
• The railway crossing at Shelford station already causes severe congestion with queues to the traffic lights already being a regular occurrence. With a potential of an extra two hundred cars (two per household) in the area as well as all of the delivery vans this will only get worse.
• There is a substantial amount of wildlife in the fields. Foxes, deer etc are regularly seen in the area. The loss of habitat would be a further reduction in the land available for these animals
• It should be noted that the character of the cemetery would be particularly affected. This would further add to the grieving of those people who have lost their loved ones.
• I believe that attempts have been made to remove this land from the Green Belt on previous occasions. No justification has been given as to why the circumstances have now changed and that the land should change status. Bold statements have been made and as they are given without any rationale substance they should be rejected. I would expect that if the land is removed from the green belt it would never be put back.
• The character of the villages would change dramatically. The affect on local residents should not be discounted. The quality of life of those living in the area would see a substantial fall.
• The development of brown filed sites, particularly in the centre of Cambridge is noted and indeed encouraged as this is closer to the place of work for many individuals who would otherwise have to suffer arduous commutes from places outside of the area. Brown field sites do in fact become available in the Great Shelford area and over the course of the next few years it should be expected that this will also be a source of extra housing if needed.