Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020
Search form responses
Results for Fen Ditton Parish Council search
New search- Some degree of growth is important due to the way our society functions. It does not follow that if growth is ‘good’, more growth is ‘better’. Doubling real GVA over 25 years implies a, possibly high, growth rate of around 2.8% percent or more. - Increased GVA must rely on a combination of more people or more GVA per person. GVA per person can be misleading depending if only the resident working population is considered or if the number of net inward commuters is also taken into account. GVA per person (and productivity?) may depend on staff costs and therefore housing costs. In turn, housing costs and transport availability may drive the number of inward and outward journeys to work or the proportion of low paying jobs. Demographics will also be relevant as this is aa factor in both the inward and outward migration taking place between City and other GC areas and the GC area and the rest of the country. - We suggest it is therefore important that the LDP sets out clearly what is the current situation and how these factors are assumed to be linked in the future.
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
- Many major destinations appear to find tourism a mixed blessing and are taking steps to avoid excessive visitor numbers or methods of increasing the value to the local economy. The LDP approach should provide a comparison with steps taken in Bath, York, Oxford etc. and avoid the pitfalls of a laissez faire approach which may simply lead to overcrowding and little value to our communities.
No uploaded files for public display
- We somewhat disagree with this proposal within this LDP since there are several major new settlements and transport proposals under development at present and the details, impact or timescale of some of these is not yet certain. For example, although the preferred option for the East-West rail link has been announced, is there sufficient certainty to plan for new homes on this route? Will Cambridge South have a significant impact on car use? - We have suggested elsewhere that the 2021 census may provide a much firmer basis for planning. - We suggest that the LDP process should examine the relationship between the cost and types of housing to be provided, inward commuting from nearby areas of lower cost and the potential for the GC area to act as a magnet for people seeking to commute to London. Commuting out provides flexibility for many families and businesses in the GC area but there is a perceived risk that some development will act to serve London’s needs not Cambridge’s.
No uploaded files for public display
- We have previously responded to South Cambs, the County and the City about transport related consultations. A few summary points are listed below. - More use should be made of the Annual Travel to Work Surveys to judge what is happening in different areas and to investigate through specific questions on this very point. We have been able to see reports for the TP+ area in north Cambridge. Members of our community working in the Station Road area have completed similar questionnaires although we have not seen reports similar to the TP+ analysis. - The TP+ area has reported low (<5%) use of the railway for Travel to Work in the first two years that Cambridge North was open; the Oct 2019 report may not yet be available. Some of these trips may have been displaced from Cambridge main station. Anecdotally, cost, reliability, timeliness, availability of seating, complex ticketing arrangements over multimode journeys and the nature of the journeys from home to departure station and from workplace to destination station are said to be factors. Cost and availability of parking at stations is also a factor. - In the case of coaches, buses and the Guided Bus, although there are still many of the above factors, overall journey time is exacerbated by congestion which is in some areas in turn exacerbated by cars queuing to park. ‘Smart’ parking should be considered. - The proposed CAM system would contrast with the existing railway service pattern since the latter are currently based on through services. - We noted above that car use will be much less dependent on fossil fuels in the future. - We suggest the LDP’s contribution to mode shift might be a focus on the nature of the journeys from home and destination points to and from public transport connection points whether for work, shopping, education or recreation.
No uploaded files for public display
- We disagree strongly with idea of removing land from the Green Belt. Improving the sustainability of travel is better since it benefits of the existing population and just the planned new homes.
No uploaded files for public display
- The approach should take into account the circumstances of the village such as its size, whether or not it is in the Green Belt and the wishes of the existing community.
No uploaded files for public display
- The approach should take into account the circumstances of the village such as its size, whether or not it is in the Green Belt, its conservation status, the green space contribution of the sites in question and the wishes of the existing community.
No uploaded files for public display
No uploaded files for public display
Q42. Where should we site new development? - Major new developments appear to be the main component of meeting the growth targets for housing and employment. It follows that sites with good transport connections are preferable.
No uploaded files for public display
