Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Infrastructure should be in place before permission is granted for development. Too often this is not the case and the S106 agreements secured do little to alleviate the problems that are inflicted on existing residents.

New development should be very close to frequent and reliable public transport services. Developers will often argue that a development some 15 or 20 minutes’ walk from a rail station or bus service is sustainable but that distance is sufficient to push most people to drive instead of use public transport. Public transport needs to be significantly improved so that it does not take people much longer than travelling by car.

Water is a finite resource and the Cambridge aquifer is already under stress. There has to come a time when it cannot meet the ever growing demands put on it by the amount of growth in this area. Eventually the result will be that water has to be imported from other parts of the country which cannot be sustainable and/or restrictions placed on water usage by residents. We surely have to live within our means.

Yes

This may be a sensible option but only if an equivalent area of land further out from Cambridge is designated as Green Belt. Otherwise we will end up with a circle of development immediately outside the current Green Belt adding to infrastructure and traffic problems.

Keep the current approach

Large scale development of either houses or businesses on the edges of small, infill only, villages is not appropriate. Such development would change and damage these villages with ribbon development out of keeping with the location. These villages should retain their existing infill only category. The current categories work well.

Densification of existing urban areas, Edge of Cambridge: Outside Green Belt, Edge of Cambridge: Green Belt, Dispersal: New Settlements, Public Transport Corridors, Dispersal: Villages

If areas of the Green Belt are developed, an equivalent area should be added to the Green Belt further out from Cambridge.

This is a sensible option providing development respects and is in keeping with the historic environment.

This could be a good option if it is close enough to the centre of Cambridge and there is frequent reliable public transport on the doorstep. If it is allowed all round the Green Belt, there is a danger that it will end up with Cambridge having a circle of urban development all around it some of which is not sustainable and will generate more car journeys, traffic congestion and climate changing emissions.

This makes sense in terms of sustainability and meeting climate change objectives if there is frequent reliable public transport on the doorstep. However, if land is taken from the Green Belt, an equivalent area should be designated as Green Belt further out from Cambridge so the Green Belt is not reduced or lost altogether.

New settlements should be built on brown field land not on green field and quality agricultural land. It is difficult to see where, after Cambridge airport, another large area of brown field land could be found.