Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Q42 We will address this question on a site by site basis when proposals come forward.

No uploaded files for public display

Densification can give benefits such as ensuring the viability of shops and services. However, success is dependent upon design and up-keep and so the whole life cost needs to be factored in.

CPRE are less concerned about this providing proximity does not lead to denigration of the Green Belt. We have opposed several applications recently for this reason. We are concerned about future flood risk arising from climate change and damage to the character of Cambridge and its surroundings which exist in a very sensitive landscape.

CPRE absolutely oppose it.

The south of the county already has enough new settlements with Cambourne, Bourne, Northstowe, Alconbury Weald and Waterbeach yet to be built out. The effects of these major developments is still unknown and to contemplate more, so quickly, without some experience of the effects of these settlements on their residents and the communities around them seems over hasty.

This question duplicates previous questions.

That is already being done and it is one reason why we think a more integrated approach to East-West Rail and a northern approach into Cambridge should be followed. Due to the risk to human health, especially among children and those with ill health who are compromised by air pollution including harmful particulates, dust and noise created by motor cars and HGV's, development close to fast roads such as the A14 and congested roads such as the A10 should be avoided.

It is unclear for the adopted 2018 Local Plan, how the Inspectors recommendations and main modifications are being implemented, managed and monitored. Is this is being undertaken by the LPA's or are the main modifications being implemented? It is unclear what status the existing adopted Local Plan holds with the Local Authorities in it's importance when deciding planning applications and Supplementary Planning Documents: https://www.scambs.gov.uk/media/12102/south-cambs-report-final.pdf https://www.scambs.gov.uk/media/12103/south-cambs-report-appendix-1.pdf

We think that the following issues have not been sufficiently addressed: • Distribution of national investment between North and South • Flood risk arising from sea level rise due to climate change • Damage to rivers and chalk streams by over-extraction of water • Transport system integration • Effective reduction of car use • Localisation of employment and provision of employment space which reduces commuting • Effect on skilled employment of closure of Marshalls airport. • Provision of facilities and finance for moving new technologies out of R&D and into local pilot and production phases • Impact of already approved developments. Cambridge needs a period of stability. • Protection of the Cambridge Greenbelt and prime agricultural land. • Protection and enhancement of existing biodiversity. • Managing the natural environment to meet climate change. • Protection of the natural landscape character such as chalklands and the fens • Waste management and recycling hierarchy. • Internet coverage especially in the more remote villages in the district. • How a new Plan will be managed and monitored, We are particularly concerned about water supply. The state of the chalk aquifer is absolutely critical to future development in Greater Cambridge. Around 97percent of our water is supplied from this groundwater source. Over abstraction has led to the River Cam and its tributaries coming under severe stress particularly during the summer months with a consequent increase in pollution levels and loss of biodiversity. This situation will only get worse with the increasing impact of climate change. The planning Authority must now put in place a Grampian condition which limits the scale of housing and industrial development to a level that the aquifer can sustainably manage. A study to this effect must the principle priority of the Sustainability Appraisal. The planning authority can no longer rely on the water company’s assurance of connection and must robustly question the Environment Agency projections. The planning authority must follow the precautionary principle.