Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
Search representations
Results for Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) search
New searchComment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
STRATEGY
Representation ID: 59594
Received: 13/12/2021
Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)
Sustainability
94. In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
95. CPRE does not believe that the draft Local Plan meets this essential test. The use of greenfield land, the
effect of water supply on the Cambridge aquifer, the increased flood risk to the Fens caused by the Plan
and the lack of an integrated public transport plan are all examples of unsustainability.
Sustainability
94. In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
95. CPRE does not believe that the draft Local Plan meets this essential test. The use of greenfield land, the
effect of water supply on the Cambridge aquifer, the increased flood risk to the Fens caused by the Plan
and the lack of an integrated public transport plan are all examples of unsustainability.
Green Belt
96. We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton. It is also inconsistent with the re-iteration of the purpose of the Green Belt in the statement
on Great Places in the Plan.
97. CPRE will strongly oppose all attempts to further erode the Cambridge Green Belt.
98. CPRE should not have to make this statement to planning authorities who should be ensuring full
protection of the Green Belt.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/DS: Development strategy
Representation ID: 59595
Received: 13/12/2021
Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)
Green Belt
We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton. It is also inconsistent with the re-iteration of the purpose of the Green Belt in the statement
on Great Places in the Plan. CPRE will strongly oppose all attempts to further erode the Cambridge Green Belt.
CPRE should not have to make this statement to planning authorities who should be ensuring full
protection of the Green Belt.
Sustainability
94. In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
95. CPRE does not believe that the draft Local Plan meets this essential test. The use of greenfield land, the
effect of water supply on the Cambridge aquifer, the increased flood risk to the Fens caused by the Plan
and the lack of an integrated public transport plan are all examples of unsustainability.
Green Belt
96. We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton. It is also inconsistent with the re-iteration of the purpose of the Green Belt in the statement
on Great Places in the Plan.
97. CPRE will strongly oppose all attempts to further erode the Cambridge Green Belt.
98. CPRE should not have to make this statement to planning authorities who should be ensuring full
protection of the Green Belt.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/BRC: Babraham Research Campus
Representation ID: 60401
Received: 13/12/2021
Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)
We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton.
Sustainability
94. In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
95. CPRE does not believe that the draft Local Plan meets this essential test. The use of greenfield land, the
effect of water supply on the Cambridge aquifer, the increased flood risk to the Fens caused by the Plan
and the lack of an integrated public transport plan are all examples of unsustainability.
Green Belt
96. We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton. It is also inconsistent with the re-iteration of the purpose of the Green Belt in the statement
on Great Places in the Plan.
97. CPRE will strongly oppose all attempts to further erode the Cambridge Green Belt.
98. CPRE should not have to make this statement to planning authorities who should be ensuring full
protection of the Green Belt.
Comment
Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options
S/GC: Genome Campus, Hinxton
Representation ID: 60402
Received: 13/12/2021
Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)
We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton.
Sustainability
94. In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
95. CPRE does not believe that the draft Local Plan meets this essential test. The use of greenfield land, the
effect of water supply on the Cambridge aquifer, the increased flood risk to the Fens caused by the Plan
and the lack of an integrated public transport plan are all examples of unsustainability.
Green Belt
96. We are appalled by the proposals to remove further land from the Green Belt, particularly at Babraham
and Hinxton. It is also inconsistent with the re-iteration of the purpose of the Green Belt in the statement
on Great Places in the Plan.
97. CPRE will strongly oppose all attempts to further erode the Cambridge Green Belt.
98. CPRE should not have to make this statement to planning authorities who should be ensuring full
protection of the Green Belt.
