Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Search representations
Results for Trumpington Residents Association search
New searchComment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/ST: Sustainable transport and connectivity
Representation ID: 208740
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
And there’s the rub – “with appropriate mitigation”. Principal among “The mitigation
assessed as necessary” is “City Access Proxy”, i.e., a substitute for the failed City Access
Project. But there isn’t one! Nor at present does it appear that there will be one in the
foreseeable future. As a direct result, the “200,000+ vehicles crossing the outer boundary of
Cambridge between 7am and 7pm each day” is likely to increase not decrease as it urgently
needs to, and the “20% reduction in car traffic planned by the Greater Cambridge
Partnership” looks increasingly like a pipe dream. [10. Infrastructure, Contents, page 660] [It
was 25%, not 20% as the Draft Local Plan states, but what is 5% among friends when we are
so far away from the traffic reduction that is essential to a decent quality of life?]
In Trumpington our experience is of increasing not decreasing traffic levels with the adverse
impacts on our quality of life this entails. And we do not see with any confidence a prospect
of this changing for the better any time soon. Indeed, with the yet higher rate of growth now
envisaged in the Draft Local Plan on top of the already high rate associated in our area with
the Cambridge Biomedical Campus in particular, we fear it will get worse.
We ask that as a strict condition of the Draft Local Plan with its planned level of accelerated jobs and housing growth proceeding to full approval, there is a firm guarantee. of the transport wherewithal being in place in good time to ensure that the planned 20 percent reduction in traffic on our road network is achieved well in advance of 2045 and
maintained thereafter.
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/ID: Infrastructure and delivery
Representation ID: 208741
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
We ask that as a condition in the Local Plan 2025-45, this major deficiency in hospital
infrastructure is satisfactorily remedied before yet more jobs and housing growth are
allowed. This should be funded either by those who gain from development or by
Government – or both.
We also ask that before it is finalized the Infrastructure Delivery Plan includes appropriate
provision for other missing forms of essential infrastructure particularly “Children and
Adult Care Social Services” which are dismissed with faint mention in the Draft Plan. Please
refer to paragraph 11.2 which says, “There may also be a need to consider the implications
of Children and Adult Social Services for healthcare and community provision” – “may also
be a need to consider” should become “does consider”. The £11 billion of cuts in Rate
Support Grant to local authorities in England since 2010 (at 2011 prices), have resulted in,
amongst other things, the decimation of the Youth Service and associated youth centres, the
total demise of the Sure Start service, and more and more stringent criteria for eligibility to
receive adult care services. These services are ESSENTIAL to the “Wellbeing and social
inclusion” aspirations of the Draft Local Plan. As is true social housing at truly affordable
rents which does not drive out of Cambridge the very people upon whom we rely for our
basic services – as the Covid pandemic vividly demonstrated. [See pages 18 & 19 of this
response]
If the CBC’s Landowners wish to obtain the benefits of further CBC growth, they must be
prepared to contribute to the real cost of that growth and not to assume that cash
strapped public bodies will come up with the goods. Further expansion must only be
allowed if the CBC’s Landowners publicly commit themselves to making this contribution.
Otherwise, the proposed expansion should not be allowed.
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy I/ID: Infrastructure and delivery
Representation ID: 208742
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
We have read carefully the water supply section of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. It seems
reassuring. However, while estimated costs are given for key “critical” projects, there is not
an explicit plan for their funding which there needs to be, particularly for the Fens Reservoir
at £1,965 million, and the Water recycling centre effluent re-use scheme at £400 million (not
total cost, just funding from the Cambridge Water Company). At a smaller level, there must
also be some scepticism about the River Cam abstraction project creating “opportunities for
a new surface abstraction from the River Cam”. Like many others in Greater Cambridge, we
will need a lot of persuasion that the depleted River Cam can or should provide such
“opportunities”.
We ask that an explicit funding plan for “critical” water supply projects is adopted and
made public to provide necessary reassurance and accountability.
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Object
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/CBC: Cambridge Biomedical Campus (including Addenbrooke's Hospital)
Representation ID: 208743
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Our opposition to the CBC’s yet further expansion into our Green Belt does not result from
purblind attachment to preservation of the Green Belt no matter what. It is the result of a
rational and concerned view that neither the CBC in its submissions nor the two councils in
this Draft Local Plan establish the “exceptional circumstances” which are the only grounds for
further release – for the only incursion into the Cambridge edge of the Green Belt proposed
in this Plan.
“The Cambridge Biomedical Campus … is appropriate for a mix of uses centred on
the Campus’s unique function of bringing together clinical care, clinical education
and clinical research including medical research institutes which meet local,
regional, and national health care needs – together with directly related
biomedical and biotechnology research and development activities
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Object
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/CBC: Cambridge Biomedical Campus (including Addenbrooke's Hospital)
Representation ID: 208744
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This is of strategic importance. The “Addenbrooke’s Access Road” located in Trumpington
together with the CBC’s unenforced private roads are being used in effect as a Cambridge
Southern Relief Road - which has not been built - and was roundly seen off as a proposal
using a different route in the early 1990s. As a direct result, the level of traffic and associated
nuisance on Addenbrooke’s Road, and linked roads such as Shelford Road, is way above what
was planned for the access road to Addenbrooke’s Hospital; and was assumed in the
“Cambridge Southern Fringe Area Development Framework” [January 2006, pages 26 - 27]
within which the developments of Trumpington Meadows, Glebe Farm and Clay Farm have
recently been established.
This is entirely unacceptable to us – as it should also be to the CBC’s Landowners whose
direct responsibility it is to stop the CBC’s private roads being used by 2,000 plus
unauthorized users every day*. A responsibility in which they have failed for more than a
decade - and continue to fail at the very time when Cambridge South Station will open this
summer drawing yet more unauthorized users on to the CBC’s private roads – and the
Addenbrooke’s Access Road.
Unless the CBC Landowners devise and implement a robust contemporary solution to
ensure that the CBC’s private roads are only used by authorized users – and no-one else –
the proposal to realign Granham’s must be a non-starter. If the two councils are in any
way minded to allow the realignment of Granham’s Road in the new Local Plan, it must be
on the strict condition that the CBC landowners have devised, tested, and implemented a
modern system which stops unauthorized users using the CBC’s private roads. If this
condition is not met, the proposed realignment of Granham’s Road must not be allowed.
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/GB: The Cambridge Green Belt
Representation ID: 208745
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
A confidence further diminished by the Landowners’ stated intention to “… create a
prominent gateway site for the campus and the city” in this most sensitive of locations
causing, as we have seen, “Very High Harm” to the Greater Cambridge Green Belt. [Page
16/35] This proposal is, to say the least, insensitive. It would not be the CBC that would be
honouring the Green Belt by gracing it with the CBC’s presence. The Green Belt would be
honouring the CBC at Very High Harm to itself.
Therefore, the Landowners’ proposed southern entrance to the CBC should be humble,
unobtrusive and carefully landscaped so as not to add to the Very High Harm the CBC
would be doing to the Green Belt. We are strongly opposed to a prominent gateway being
created in this location. If agreed, it should be unobtrusive and blended into the landscape
of Cambridge City edge.
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/GB: The Cambridge Green Belt
Representation ID: 208746
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
GCSP and the two councils are asked to take explicit account of our great concern at the
open-ended position the CBC has taken on this crucial matter - by, we propose, making it
abundantly clear that if a further extension of the CBC into the Green Belt were to be
agreed in the 2025-2045 Greater Cambridge Local Plan, it would be conditional on a CBC
Landowners’ contractual commitment to make no further bids in the future for yet more
land to be taken out of our precious and diminishing Green Belt. Unless the Landowners
agree to that condition, the proposed Phase 4 addition to the CBC should not be agreed
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
Comment
Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation
Policy S/JH: New jobs and homes
Representation ID: 208747
Received: 30/01/2026
Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association
So called “affordable” housing at 80% of market rents is way out of reach for large numbers
of people in our community because market rents are so high in Greater Cambridge due to the high growth in jobs which draws in people who can afford them at the cost of residents
who cannot. This is in direct conflict with the Draft Local Plan’s -
“… strategic priority for our wellbeing and social inclusion policies
6.2 Strategic Priority: Help improve equality of access and opportunities for people in
Greater Cambridge to lead healthier and happier lives, ensuring that everyone
benefits from the development of new homes and jobs.”
“A minimum of 48,195 new homes meeting the needs of the total population of which at
least 20 per cent must be social at a maximum of 60 per cent of market rents and a further
20 per cent affordable at a maximum of 80 per cent of market rents.”
Unless this or a similar amendment is adopted, the Draft Local Plan’s strategic priority for
wellbeing and social inclusion of “ensuring that everyone benefits from the development of
new homes and jobs” will not be achieved. [Pages 24-25 of the Draft Local Plan]
In light of our recent correspondence concerning the Cambridge Biomedical Campus's continuing failure to stop unauthorized drivers from using its private roads, I attach a copy of the TRA's response to the Draft Local Plan which touches on this. Please refer to the section headed "Proposed realignment of Granham's Road" starting on page 14.
You may also wish to skim other parts of our response. To ease this, there is an explicit contents list on pages 1 and 2, and text shown in bold italics is a conclusion, proposal or recommendation.
