Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 210615

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Where there are existing public rights of way the character of those should be retained by green corridors or other means.

Comment

Representation ID: 210616

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• This paragraph identifies the need to consider the cumulative effects of development on local landscape character. The local plan should consider opportunities to improve connectivity between adjoining or adjacent development sites so that provision is made for non-motorised routes that link developments. The existing practice of treating each development as an isolated site, even where there are separate parcels within a larger development, restricts the ability of the highway authority to require each individual development to contribute to the
creation of a more connected PROW and no-motorised user network.

Comment

Representation ID: 210617

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• The policy could explicitly recognise the value of PROW in providing connectivity between rural communities. Development should not hinder this function but should seek to augment it, and where there is limited rural connectivity, expanding the PROW network should be championed.

Comment

Representation ID: 210619

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• The facilities to promote non-motorised access for all should seek to provide connectivity to the PROW network. To increase accessibility any existing barriers to access such as stiles or gates should be removed wherever possible.

Comment

Representation ID: 210620

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• We propose that active travel facilities should be designed to link to networks beyond the development.

Comment

Representation ID: 210621

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• Where consideration is given regarding access to employment sites by foot or cycle, consideration should be given to see if public rights of way can be instated to provide access opportunities. Where PROW are unachievable, permissive footpaths and bridleways should be considered.

Comment

Representation ID: 210622

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• Where consideration is given regarding access to employment sites by foot or cycle, consideration should be given to see if public rights of way can be instated to provide access opportunities. Where PROW are unachievable, permissive footpaths and bridleways should be considered.

Comment

Representation ID: 210623

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• The policy does not recognise the health and wellbeing benefits offered by the PROW network. This network enables people to make a connection with the natural environment, providing an opportunity to enhance mental wellbeing, and enables users to exercise at the same time as travelling to a destination. They offer clean, traffic free journey opportunities. PROW are an existing leisure and cultural asset which can be maximised and the policy could do more to recognise and promote this.

Comment

Representation ID: 210624

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• We support providing and enhancing accessibility to green and blue spaces, but the policy could recognise that non-motorised user routes to leisure spaces can contribute to healthier lifestyles.

Comment

Representation ID: 210625

Received: 28/01/2026

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

• The policy could support the establishment of PROW to enable and encourage users to connect to the wider PROW network, which can provide much greater opportunities for exercise than that available within one single development.