Draft Greater Cambridge Local Plan for consultation

The proposal envisages 6,000–8,000 dwellings. Even using a conservative estimate of 2.5 occupants per household, this would result in a population of approximately 15,000–20,000 people; using a more realistic average of three occupants per household, the population would rise to 18,000–24,000 people. In effect, this would constitute a town, rather than a village or settlement.
Comparable settlements in Cambridgeshire include Wisbech (approximately 34,000 residents), St Neots (approximately 33,000), Huntingdon (approximately 25,000), Ely (approximately 20,000), and March (approximately 22,000). However, the proposal does not include any meaningful comparative analysis of the facilities, amenities, public services, open space, or infrastructure required to sustain a population of this size, nor how these would be delivered in an area currently characterised by rural villages and agricultural land.

I wish to comment on Policy S/GF as a resident of Hildersham (postcode CB21 6DA). My family—my husband and my three stepchildren—has lived in Hildersham for the past fifteen years. The proposal, as currently framed, is likely to have a detrimental impact on both our family and the wider community, particularly with regard to (i) transport, (ii) landscape, and (iii) infrastructure.
(i) Transport
At present, our household has three children attending three different schools: Linton Village College, Sawston Village College, and Sancton Wood School, Cambridge (the latter attended because Linton Village College was unable to meet one child’s special educational needs). Travel times already demonstrate the limitations of the existing transport network. Under adverse conditions—such as heavy rainfall, flooding, or high traffic volumes—the journey to Sancton Wood School, which ordinarily takes approximately 22 minutes outside peak hours, can exceed one hour. Similarly, a journey of approximately 12 minutes from Hildersham to Sawston has on occasion taken up to 35 minutes.
The existing road network, including the A1307 and A505, is already under considerable strain and does not adequately support the current populations of Linton, Hildersham, and Abington, which together total 5,693 residents according to the 2021 Census (Linton: 4,464; Hildersham: 197; Abington: 1,032). It is therefore unclear how this same infrastructure could reasonably be expected to support an additional 6,000 or more residents associated with a new settlement—particularly one larger than these villages combined.
For these reasons, I object to the overall allocation of Grange Farm as a new settlement.
Strategic necessity and duplication
Prior to moving to Hildersham, I lived in central and north Cambridge and am therefore well aware of the significant development currently taking place in north Cambridge and Eddington. Given these substantial and ongoing commitments to housing expansion in that area, it is unclear why an additional large-scale settlement at Grange Farm is necessary. The proposal appears to duplicate development already planned elsewhere, without sufficient justification.
Scale, infrastructure, and comparison with existing towns
The proposal envisages 6,000–8,000 dwellings. Even using a conservative estimate of 2.5 occupants per household, this would result in a population of approximately 15,000–20,000 people; using a more realistic average of three occupants per household, the population would rise to 18,000–24,000 people. In effect, this would constitute a town, rather than a village or settlement.
Comparable settlements in Cambridgeshire include Wisbech (approximately 34,000 residents), St Neots (approximately 33,000), Huntingdon (approximately 25,000), Ely (approximately 20,000), and March (approximately 22,000). However, the proposal does not include any meaningful comparative analysis of the facilities, amenities, public services, open space, or infrastructure required to sustain a population of this size, nor how these would be delivered in an area currently characterised by rural villages and agricultural land.
Landscape, rural character, and employment rationale
The proposed settlement would be situated within an agrarian landscape, surrounded by village communities that have developed organically over time in response to local geography, agriculture, and employment patterns. Introducing a town of this scale into such a context risks permanently altering the rural and historic character of this part of Cambridgeshire.
Furthermore, the most recent figures indicate that the Babraham Research Campus comprises over 60 companies, employing approximately 2,000 staff, alongside around 300 academic researchers, all of whom are presumably already accommodated within the existing housing market. On this basis, there does not appear to be a clear employment-driven need for a settlement of this size in this location.
Conclusion
In summary, the Grange Farm proposal appears to represent a short-cut to large-scale development, rather than a carefully considered strategy of incremental and organic growth aligned with existing settlements and infrastructure. As such, it risks causing irreversible harm to transport capacity, rural character, and community cohesion, without sufficient evidence that the scale or location of the development is either necessary or sustainable.

I wish to comment on Policy S/GF as a resident of Hildersham (postcode CB21 6DA). My family—my husband and my three stepchildren—has lived in Hildersham for the past fifteen years. The proposal, as currently framed, is likely to have a detrimental impact on both our family and the wider community, particularly with regard to (i) transport, (ii) landscape, and (iii) infrastructure.
(i) Transport
At present, our household has three children attending three different schools: Linton Village College, Sawston Village College, and Sancton Wood School, Cambridge (the latter attended because Linton Village College was unable to meet one child’s special educational needs). Travel times already demonstrate the limitations of the existing transport network. Under adverse conditions—such as heavy rainfall, flooding, or high traffic volumes—the journey to Sancton Wood School, which ordinarily takes approximately 22 minutes outside peak hours, can exceed one hour. Similarly, a journey of approximately 12 minutes from Hildersham to Sawston has on occasion taken up to 35 minutes.
The existing road network, including the A1307 and A505, is already under considerable strain and does not adequately support the current populations of Linton, Hildersham, and Abington, which together total 5,693 residents according to the 2021 Census (Linton: 4,464; Hildersham: 197; Abington: 1,032). It is therefore unclear how this same infrastructure could reasonably be expected to support an additional 6,000 or more residents associated with a new settlement—particularly one larger than these villages combined.
For these reasons, I object to the overall allocation of Grange Farm as a new settlement.
Strategic necessity and duplication
Prior to moving to Hildersham, I lived in central and north Cambridge and am therefore well aware of the significant development currently taking place in north Cambridge and Eddington. Given these substantial and ongoing commitments to housing expansion in that area, it is unclear why an additional large-scale settlement at Grange Farm is necessary. The proposal appears to duplicate development already planned elsewhere, without sufficient justification.
Scale, infrastructure, and comparison with existing towns
The proposal envisages 6,000–8,000 dwellings. Even using a conservative estimate of 2.5 occupants per household, this would result in a population of approximately 15,000–20,000 people; using a more realistic average of three occupants per household, the population would rise to 18,000–24,000 people. In effect, this would constitute a town, rather than a village or settlement.
Comparable settlements in Cambridgeshire include Wisbech (approximately 34,000 residents), St Neots (approximately 33,000), Huntingdon (approximately 25,000), Ely (approximately 20,000), and March (approximately 22,000). However, the proposal does not include any meaningful comparative analysis of the facilities, amenities, public services, open space, or infrastructure required to sustain a population of this size, nor how these would be delivered in an area currently characterised by rural villages and agricultural land.
Landscape, rural character, and employment rationale
The proposed settlement would be situated within an agrarian landscape, surrounded by village communities that have developed organically over time in response to local geography, agriculture, and employment patterns. Introducing a town of this scale into such a context risks permanently altering the rural and historic character of this part of Cambridgeshire.
Furthermore, the most recent figures indicate that the Babraham Research Campus comprises over 60 companies, employing approximately 2,000 staff, alongside around 300 academic researchers, all of whom are presumably already accommodated within the existing housing market. On this basis, there does not appear to be a clear employment-driven need for a settlement of this size in this location.
Conclusion
In summary, the Grange Farm proposal appears to represent a short-cut to large-scale development, rather than a carefully considered strategy of incremental and organic growth aligned with existing settlements and infrastructure. As such, it risks causing irreversible harm to transport capacity, rural character, and community cohesion, without sufficient evidence that the scale or location of the development is either necessary or sustainable.