Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 210901

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

The underlying data and plans for CBC submitted by landowners and Vision 2050 itself have not been subject to public consultation, yet the proposals in this policy (such as for 687,000 net additional sq m (GIA) of research and development floorspace (use class E(g)(ii)) specifically related to biomedical and biotechnology uses and clinical healthcare and hospital facilities) are derived from the relevant documents.

Comment

Representation ID: 210902

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

If, despite our opposition, the proposed release is included in the final Local Plan:
- It must be conditional on funds for the building of the new acute hospital being secured and building of the Cancer Research and Children’s hospitals;
- It must be conditional on a solution to the continuing failure to enforce the prohibitions in The City of Cambridge Area G (Consolidation) Order 1993 (as amended) as they apply to the roads within CBC. The proposed southern access road from Granhams Road should not be multi-modal. Private cars should not be permitted to use it.
- Recognise CBC’s unique and limited purpose - consideration should be given to including occupation use restrictions. Amenities should also be limited to those which need to be there.
- Insufficient regard is paid in to the impact of CBC on the shrinking Green Belt that separates Cambridge from its necklace villages and, in particular, on the neighbouring fragile Nine Wells Local Nature Reserve. Tall buildings are a particular issue and we oppose a prominent entrance from Granhams Road.

Comment

Representation ID: 210903

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

We support the proposals for a single integrated campus-wide masterplan for CBC and for the use of a single delivery body capable of managing the delivery of infrastructure and securing the long-term stewardship of shared facilities and public spaces.

Comment

Representation ID: 210904

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

We strongly support the policy to reduce the urbanising impact on this edge of the Green Belt, to facilitate access to the countryside, and to manage car use.

Comment

Representation ID: 210905

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

We are broadly supportive of proposals to develop a new town at Grange Farm with placemaking and nature at its heart. We note and support the benefits of providing a range of planned housing, jobs, amenities, services and other infrastructure at one location in preference to a more ad hoc approach in which fewer dwellings are appended to multiple existing rural locations, putting strain on existing infrastructure and increasing car reliance. However, we do not believe that a new town at Grange Farm will be sustainable.

Comment

Representation ID: 210906

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

It will effectively be a large suburb in the countryside. Residents will have to travel to access larger retail and leisure facilities, cultural and religious amenities, secondary education, and mature open spaces and sites of biodiversity. This will put further pressure on existing congestion points and amenities and will increase pressure on existing open and biodiverse spaces Such as Nine Wells, Beechwoods and Clay Pit. Established recreational spaces will be more attractive and rewarding for people to visit than new sites, and the associated overcrowding that will result at mature sites will have a significant negative impact on these natural assets. CIL/S106 funds may need to be used to assist owners of existing natural assets to manage and mitigate an increase in footfall.

Comment

Representation ID: 210907

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

In contrast to plans for the Babraham Research Campus, none of the 1,500 residential dwellings proposed for Wellcome Genome Campus workers will contribute towards the total number of affordable dwellings coming forward in Greater Cambridge. This will increase demands on nearby settlements to provide land for affordable housing to support growth of the Wellcome Genome Campus, given that not all Campus workers can, or want to be, accommodated on site.

Comment

Representation ID: 210908

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

The development is too small to be sustainable and is not adequately plugged into the public transport network to overcome this without reliance on private cars. Residents will have to travel to access, for example, large-scale retail and leisure facilities, secondary education, and existing open spaces and sites of biodiversity. This will put further pressure on key existing congestion points, such as the A1301 into/out of Cambridge at peak times, junction 9 of the M11 at Duxford, and the ‘McDonald’s roundabout’ junction of the A1301 and A505. As such, significant infrastructure upgrades are needed.

Comment

Representation ID: 210909

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

It will further contribute to a significant expansion in the population of S. Cambs which travels by private car to enjoy existing open spaces, notably Magog Down and Wandlebury Country Park. These biodiverse assets are already under pressure and will need S106/CIL support to manage the impact of additional users. Additionally, “Securing general public access to the existing and expanding campus…” (p342, clause 26) should be prioritised to reduce the impact of population growth on existing recreational and natural assets.

Comment

Representation ID: 210910

Received: 29/01/2026

Respondent: Great Shelford Parish Council

P349, clause 15 – with the loss of Green Belt that expansion of the Babraham Research Campus will involve, we strongly support the need for substantial compensatory improvements to the environmental quality of, and accessibility to, the proposed SEA. Development at the Campus must also maintain key views, enhance existing tree coverage, relate sensitively to its surroundings, and maintain and enhance the wider landscape. These requirements are all laudable. Yet they are entirely at odds with plans by the Greater Cambridge Partnership to construct a busway (i.e. a concrete road), with all the visual, noise and particulate pollution that it will bring, straight through the SEA as part of the CSET scheme. The double standards here are extraordinary.