Draft Cambridge Biomedical Campus Supplementary Planning Document

Comment

Representation ID: 200183

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

The ambition statement proposed in the draft SPD is welcomed, with suggested additions to its first paragraph as shown in italics below:
“The Cambridge Biomedical Campus will be a world leading location for excellence in healthcare, education, medical innovation and life science research - creating an
optimum environment for the rapid and effective translation of research into clinical practice – integrated with surrounding communities as well as the wider landscape beyond the city.”

Comment

Representation ID: 200440

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

The key on page 19 to the map on page 18 states “20 Cambridge Children’s Hospital (due 2028).” This needs to be amended given the uncertainty about funding - The CUH NHS Trust has recently changed this date to 2029.

Comment

Representation ID: 200442

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

We would like to see reference to reduction in rat running in the development principles. We ask that consideration is given to the inclusion of a development principle which encourages applicants to offer a contribution to public costs arising from their proposed development.

To reduce rat running on the CBC’s roads, the installation and effective operation of an ANPR system or alternative is a planning matter.

Comment

Representation ID: 200444

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

Policy 31, page 49: Should the last line of the text refer to Policy 28 rather than 29?

Comment

Representation ID: 200476

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

The development principles proposed in chapter 5 of the draft contain much good content including bullet point 6 under the heading connectivity and movement.

However, it does not encourage applicants to recognize and contribute to the public costs arising in part from their proposed development on the CBC. These costs can be substantial, for example in the as yet unfunded Cambridge South East Transport scheme planned by the Greater Cambridge Partnership in significant part to meet the transport needs of the CBC.

We ask that consideration is given to the inclusion of a development principle which encourages applicants to make/offer a contribution, albeit relatively small in most instances given the level of additional demand that may arise from an individual development.

Comment

Representation ID: 200492

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

We appreciate that the draft SPD makes various references to water. These references, not all of which relate to water supply, are dispersed throughout the draft
SPD thus lessening their impact. The water supply crisis warrants a high profile in this SPD.

The SPD should make direct reference to the Environment Agency’s “Guidance note for planning applications”, and make clear that CBC applicants are expected to demonstrate satisfactorily the account they have taken of the Guidance.

Comment

Representation ID: 200601

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

We welcome this initiative by the two Councils and the Shared Planning Service.

Unless stated otherwise, we support the proposed intentions and content of the draft SPD, and look forward to its use in guiding future development proposals for
phases one to three of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and in the assessment / determination of planning applications.

Comment

Representation ID: 200602

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

We note that the CBC’s Vision 2050 updated by CBC Limited is “currently under consideration as part of the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan.” We have assessed the updated version of Vision 2050, noted that the amendments made are not of sufficient substance, and concluded that the document continues not to be fit for purpose - for the reasons given in our joint “Assessment” report with Great Shelford Parish Council from February 2024.

Comment

Representation ID: 200603

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

Given their location, many CBC proposed developments including in Phase 2 and 3, can have a significant impact – positive or negative – on the neighbouring Green Belt. This is not highlighted sufficiently in the draft SPD.

The CBC has already taken 77 hectares out of the Green Belt close to the Gog Magog Hills, immediately neighbouring White Hill. The failure to ensure that CBC development does not harm our Green Belt should not be repeated – a presumption in favour of suitable Green Belt
enhancement should be built into the SPD.

The historical lack of attention by the CBC to its neighbouring Green Belt is exemplified in the CBC’s Vision 2050 where it is not mentioned once. This is also not aided by reference to the NPPF in Chapter 3 of the draft SPD. While the text states that “LPAs should pursue development with a presumption in favour of sustainable development”, this is not qualified by the NPPF’s requirement that unless “exceptional circumstances” are demonstrated, land may not be removed by LPAs from designated Green Belts for development.

Comment

Representation ID: 200604

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

It is not until Appendix 1 that Local Plan Policy 4, “The Cambridge Green Belt” is mentioned. We ask that this lack of balance in the draft text is corrected to ensure that appropriate attention is given to the needs of our Green Belt when CBC development is being considered.