Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

The vision for Greater Cambridge presented in the Plan is laudable in many respects (great places to live, a mix of job opportunities, affordable housing, etc), however, a consequence of the Plan is the slow but inexorable urbanisation of much of South Cambridgeshire, nowhere more so than in the Cambourne area. The proposed location of EWR’s station for Cambourne together with the proposals in the Local Plan for extending Cambourne north of the A428 are the most significant events to affect Elsworth since the establishment of a Parish Council in 1894.

Consequently, the Parish Council has been keen to engage with the District Council, neighbouring parishes and Elsworth residents about the proposals. This is evidenced by:
- the Joint Submission made on behalf of Elsworth, Boxworth and Knapwell to SCDC 'Input to the Draft Local Plan: A Joint Submission by Boxworth, Elsworth and Knapwell Parishes' (2025), which is appended;
- the submission to SCDC ‘Comments on the Landscape Buffer and Coalescence between Elsworth, Knapwell and Cambourne North’ (2025) also appended;
- an association with the group of parishes in the A14 Logistics Forum;
- the leaflet distributed to Elsworth residents 'The Expansion of Cambourne and what it means for our Village' (January 2026) and notes of the subsequent public meeting both of which are appended.

The documents mentioned above acknowledge that proposals in the Plan have potential benefits for Elsworth, for example in the proposed improvements to bus services, the proximity of a rail station, etc. However, they recognise that the extension of Cambourne north of the A428 would also have profound impacts on the village; at worst they could give rise to an existential threat by the geographical coalescence of the village and Cambourne North and by being taken over administratively by Cambourne Town Council. At present the Plan does little to allay concerns about the loss of identity or provide effective mitigation for the adverse impacts. The Plan is also silent on a number of critical issues; see remarks in the section ‘About the Plan’.

PLEASE NOTE that the neighbouring parish of Knapwell, which is similarly affected, also wishes to be associated with the comments which Elsworth is making.

Parishioners have commented on the sheer amount of documentation available, difficulties in navigating it all and the limited time to consider it since its publication on 1 December 2025 and to formulate a response.

Crucially, the Plan requires further work on a number of vitally important matters, such as travel, flooding, etc. There is also little apparent consideration of the impact of significant new housing/
logistical developments beyond the immediate Cambourne area. It is unsatisfactory that we are commenting on the Plan when there is so much yet to be done. Although there will be a further opportunity to comment in Summer 2026, the concern is that by then many matters will be somewhat set in stone.

While the Plan provides a framework in which housing and commercial development can take place, it is for developers to come forward with actual proposals for these and be responsible for their delivery. The anticipated speed of build out (c.350 houses p.a.) has implications for the provision of community services and facilities to which reference is made later.

Parishioners also have some concerns about the involvement in the development of the Plan of a number of unelected bodies (such as the Greater Cambridge Partnership, etc) with which parishes have no contact and no influence, and also about the possibility of the appointment of a Development Corporation.

Regarding the themes -
Climate change: To help meet meet net zero carbon emissions by 2050, the Plan gives a lot of encouragement to active travel modes. While the health benefits of more active travel are not to be denied, this seems to take no account that by that date most vehicles will be EVs. Also it might have been expected that, albeit primarily the responsibility of EWR, some reference would have been made to the carbon footprint of the construction of the railway and electrification of the line.
Biodiversity/Green Spaces: We welcome this being taken so seriously; however more cynical residents question whether it is reasonable to sustain the claim that “development leaves the natural environment better than it was before” when concreting over a substantial area of green fields north of the A428.
Great Places: The Plan talks about the unique character of South Cambridgeshire, but, as has already been alluded to already, the very vision for Greater Cambridge would seem to lead to the slow but continued urbanisation of much of the area.
Well Being/Social Inclusion: Residents have diverse needs and it is welcome that this is recognised in the Plan.
Jobs: No doubt within the commercial development some jobs will be found for Cambourne North residents, but whether these include some higher skilled jobs as the Plan hopes will depend on attracting to the area businesses that can offer them. Again, experience in existing Cambourne suggests this may not prove easy.
Infrastructure:
- A statement of intent is all very well, but travel is such an integral part of the Plan that it is risible that the Combined Authority’s Travel Strategy will not be available before the Local Plan has to be submitted and, without that, it is hardly reasonable to expect residents to comment on this crucial aspect; see further related comments on Policy S/CBN.
- There is an expectation that developers will have to deliver not only houses and commercial premises but also community facilities; regretably their track record is not always so good in this respect and the local authority will have to be rigorous in holding them to account lest the experience of other developments such as Northstowe and Cambourne itself is repeated.
- Also the speed of build out of development at Cambourne North will be crucial in the delivery of such facilities. At the anticipated build rate of 350 p.a. it will take a considerable time to achieve a critical mass to warrant the construction of shops, surgeries, schools, etc. which, in turn, suggests that their delivery will be very slow; so there is the prospect of having all the social and behavioural problems to which this may give rise and few of the benefits as has happened elsewhere.
- There are also the known problems (staffing, etc.) in providing health and social care support to the new community.
- Mention is made of CIL/s106 monies. Obviously these will be used in the delivery of facilities/services in North Cambourne, but the Plan is silent on how such monies might also benefit the actual parishes in which development is taking place. More needs to besaid about this.

The Infrastructure Delivery Plan notwithstanding, there must be doubt that new infrastructure will be delivered in a timely manner given the speed of build out and to the extent that is required. While some new jobs will be created by the development at Cambourne North, it remains to be seen how many go to local residents and whether they will include the mix that the Plan hopes for; see previous remarks.

The insistence on achieving integration between Cambourne North and the existing town would seem to recognise the reality that Cambourne North is a new settlement, separated from the existing town by a 4 lane trunk road and a 2 line railway, and not an organic outgrowth of existing Cambourne. There is also perhaps a sense of rectifying things that were not got right originally (e.g. the lack of a town centre). Whether integration will be “supporting services and facilities“ in anything but the long term seems unlikely (see above). With regard to the “northern forest”, see remarks on Policy S/CBN.

There is a certain irony in being a ‘group village’ with restrictions on the amount of development and having the prospect of 13k+ houses in a development 400m from village.

Development would seem in danger of failing the tests of “scale…appropriate to the location” (when coming so close to the villages), development to “protect and enhance local features of green space (when reducing the amount), landscape (when building on the escarpment and beyond)...and “the necessary infrastructure capacity to support the development” (see previous comments on build out).

We would like to explore the possibility of having a green belt with statutory status and of sufficient depth between Cambourne North and the villages in order to to better protect the villages against coalescence.

We would like to explore the possibility of having a green belt with statutory status and of sufficient depth between Cambourne North and the villages in order to to better protect the villages against coalescence.

This envisages reviews with landowners, developers and local authorities. Can the Plan state explicitly that this will include the Parishes?