Q1. Do you agree that we should plan for an extra 550 homes per year, so that new housing keeps up with the increase in jobs in our area?

Q2. Do you agree that new development should mainly focus on sites where car travel, and therefore carbon emissions, can be minimised?

Q3. We think a major new neighbourhood can be developed at Cambridge East, on the current airport site. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces do you think this site should provide?

Q4. We think that the area east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge (including the current waste water treatment plant) can be developed into a lively and dense city district, after the waste water treatment plant relocates. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces do you think this site should provide?

Q5. We feel that we should support the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus (Addenbrookes) with space for more healthcare facilities, research and housing. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces should be created around the campus?

Q6. We think East-West Rail provides the opportunity for Cambourne to grow up into a proper town. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces do you think should be developed in and around Cambourne?

Q7. We think that the ‘southern rural cluster’ of villages near the rail line and the business parks south of Cambridge, could see some limited development. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces do you think this area should provide?

Q8. We think we should be very limited about the development we allow in villages, with only a few allocated sites in villages with good public transport connections and local services. Which villages do you think should see new development of any kind?

Q9. What housing, jobs, facilities or open spaces do you think should be provided in and around these villages?

Q10. Are there any sites which you think should be developed for housing or business use, which we haven't got on our map so far?

Q11. What kinds of home do you think you will need in the next 20 years? Choose as many as you think may apply to you.

Q12. What should we prioritise when planning homes for the future? Choose 4 from the following:

Q13. Is there anything else you would like to tell us about what Greater Cambridge should be like in 2041?

Q11.1. Family home

Q11.2. Home for one or two people

Q11.3. Student housing

Q11.4. Co-housing

Q11.5. Sheltered housing

Q11.6. Retirement home

Q11.7. Wheelchair adapted home

Q11.8. Space on a Gypsy or Traveller site

Q11.9. Affordable rent home

Q11.10. Shared ownership home

Q11.11. Market rent home

Q11.12. Market sale home

Q12.1. Energy and water efficiency

Q12.2. Compact development that uses less land

Q12.3. Private gardens

Q12.4. Balconies and shared gardens

Q12.5. Secure cycle parking

Q12.6. Private car parking

Q12.7. Accessibility and adaptability for wheelchair users

Q12.8. Safe streets where children can play outside

Transport infrastructure around the area is insufficent to support any new development.

The redevelopment of the waste water treatment plant should not go ahead as it requires the plant to be relocated to a greenfield site elsewhere!

This development should not sprawl onto the green belt.

These developments should not sprawl onto the green belt

Without significantly improved public transport - none.

A densified and completly private vehicle free city that has not sprawled onto the green belt.

I feel very apprehensive about the possibility of a 'dense city district' in terms of the worries about this city over-expanding.

In the light of the development in this area I think this needs to be approached with some care and a readiness to set limits on the development.

Residents of Cambourne should have the major say here, but I would question whether more jobs are a necessary corollary of the East-West rail link.

Here too I wonder whether the development has nearly reached saturation point

If you are going to be limited in villages, I would ask why in villages and not elsewhere?

Jobs and open spaces, yes, but probably not housing

No and especially not Trumpington

Radical action is needed to ensure that the massive build up of motor traffic is reduced. That must be a priority for us all and for the councils as they plan for the future with attention to climate change near the top of their agenda

None- don’t think you need to build in this area. Traffic and infrastructure cannot cope

Nothing - sort out existing infrastructures first before adding to issues.

Open space of any kind should be preserved

Nothing - I oppose the rail link

See above- we don’t want or need this rail link!

Show me a village that is already well served by existing infrastructure and I’ll name where you should develop.

Preserve our precious green spaces and landscapes

More facilities that will contribute to a circular economy in the city e.g. allotments, recycling centres, community centres, sport facilities e.g. a new athletics track (As the only one is on the west side of Cambridge) and a new public swimming pool.

A CAR FREE development

As above, facilities that will contribute to a circular economy in the city e.g. allotments, recycling centres, community centres, sport facilities e.g. a new athletics track (As the only one is on the west side of Cambridge) and a new public swimming pool.

CAR FREE development

More healthcare and research facilities - no more housing needed

A safe cycling route to Cambridge that doesn't involve the old A428.

Foxton, Coton, Stow cum Quy, Girton, Fulbourn, Barton

but only if all new developments are CAR FREE and have safe cycle routes to Cambridge

More open green spaces with improved walking and cycling routes.

North of Barton Road - South of M11

Strongly disagree

I don’t think we need another new housing estate. You are destroying the Cambridge landscape.

Lots of open spaces and room for nature to thrive.

Housing should be made available for those who are working at the hospital. It should be attractive and affordable. The housing development at the Trumpington site is really ugly and expensive.

Absolutely categorically oppose EWR. By putting a railway into Cambourne you are also planning to decimate the local rural villages. We don’t want it and don’t need it.

Cambourne is turning into the old Arbury with its crime levels and lots of dysfunctional families, please don’t increase its size even further.

Cambourne needs facilities now -it desperately needs another doctors surgery, another dentist, probably another school. It’s needs less housing and more facilities like a community swimming pool, a climbing centre, another pub. The lack of facilities there is laughable.

Please also don’t make the assumption that people will drive less if you build a railway. Assume every household will own two cars and plan on that basis. Cambourne has no local jobs or facilities and almost everyone who lives there relies on a car and will continue to do so.

No absolutely not. Highfields Caldecote has received far more than its fair share of development. Go away, we don’t want any more houses!!!! People are living in these rural villages because they want to live in a rural landscape amongst nature and you keep building more and more ugly housing estates.

Limited development? Yeah right!! I can only say please DO NOT allow any more housing estates in Highfields Caldecote - it is an absolute joke what you are doing to our village. Bourn Airfield Development should be abandoned too, it is a terrible idea!

Open spaces and nature should be prioritised.

If this is your vision for Cambridge in 2041 I’ll have long left. You are destroying the character of the area and you should be ashamed of the legacy you are leaving. Once destroyed it will never be the same again.

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing

Community spaces and green spaces. Affordable housing. Spaces and travel.routes which encourage active transport. Low emission zones.

NHS dentists, doctors surgeries, nurseries, schools, sport’s facilities, indoor/outdoor play parks for children AND teenagers, a communal hub to create a community, coffee shop/newsagent

So EWR is definitely going through Camborne then? If it is to benefit Cambourne it should be placed centrally to Cambourne and further building of family homes should surround it. That way more commuters could access it by foot/bike/bus. Then other surrounding villages could also access it via bus, bringing more people to shop etc, in turn boosting the local economy. There should be a clear natural border between Camborne ‘town’ and surrounding villages to respect the nature of established villages and to ensure that they are not swallowed up by this perpetual building of new housing.
For Cambourne to operate as a town it will need vastly improved services. Doctor’s surgery, access to dentistry, more schools primary and secondary. A post office, more shops including a hardware shop and a large swimming pool with a training pool for children.

As much open space as possible. To keep the feel of nature.

I can only speak for Caldecote which has no public transport at all, yet 100’s of dwellings have been built.

As much open space/natural habitat as possible. Borders between villages to be kept clear and defined perhaps by corridors of trees/woods so that new walk ways can be established. Good for both humans and wildlife!

Hopefully still occupied mostly by green open spaces. Low rise 3/4 levels, including basements and roof top gardens, allotments

I thought that site had already got planning permission.

All the open spaces seemed to be filled with the development of Addenbrookes. Certainly all the fields I knew as a child have been built on.

I didn't realise the development of Cambourne was dependent on East West Rail. East West Rail just seems to be a housing enabler. NO to East West Rail.

Well, if the railway is routed to the south I don't expect the development will be 'limited'. There will be hardcore lobbying by developers and other interested parties to asset strip the area and cram in as many houses as they can get away with.

To answer this would require detailed knowledge of every village in South Cambs. Any village picked for some of these allocated sites should be sustainable.

See my answer to question 8

To not disappear under a sea of concrete! This is a rural area on the whole and it should stay that way. Housing need will never satisfy demand in this area not least because of it's proximity to London.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

Affordable housing; country park, out of town facilities to ease congestion in central cambridge

Flat, out of town shopping, cinema complex - this is an ideal area for people to go and have shops and entertainment as it is serviced by the GBW. Country park, water facilities and an open area that can be multi use for outdoor shows, farmers markets and events. Cambridge City is congested so it is important that people coming from the surrounding villages can access facilities without going right into town

Research faciities that solve the current climate crisis and water shortage issues in this area. The biomedical campus needs to broaden out into a main stream science research area - not just for medical issues. Housing should be affordable for nurses and local people working in Cambridge. There should be large areas of bio diverse habitat - we simply cannot continue to keep building over our countryside.

There is no need for a 'proper town' between St Neots and Cambridge. This area has an issue with water and is the main part of the country for farming to produce food. We need to reduce transport miles for food and that cannot be done if we build over this country's most productive land. Housing needs must be spread across the country to areas that need inward investment. These areas also need to have the supply of water needed to cope with mass development.

None - it would appear that there is a policy to build houses everywhere irrespective of the issue of water, biodiversity etc. With mass developments at Northstowe, Waterbeach, Cambourne etc there is simply no excuse to keep building houses, depleting water resources and tarmacing over countryside that is needed to grow food.

You should be sharing development when NECESSARY equally amongst all villages so no one village bares an unfair burden as is being seen at Longstanton, Oakington, Waterbeach etc. These massive developments that have been given planning permission should be fully built out before any more land is allocated for development. Time to start thinking about saving the planet and not supporting developers making huge profits or councils getting more council tax receipts. Greater Cambridge seems to be a very destructive grandiose vanity project.

Leave land alone - it is a finite resource that is needed to feed the population of this country. Water is an essential resource for humans and nature and this area is not coping with development levels as they are without adding any more.

Brownfield sites only should be developed.

It should reverse the plans - prioritise research into climate change and water safeguarding issues. It should maximise the reuse of brownfield sites, make sure that empty properties and derelict buildings are brought back into use. All communities should share the burden of any housing needed so that as little countryside as possible is built on and local farmland can be used to provide local food for local people. We need to shift prioritises to saving the planet and saving this region from a collapse in biodiversity and a collapse in water in our rivers and streams. A totally new approach is needed - not just more of the same tired and out of date desire to build, build build

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the airport site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and for the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the waste water treatment site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the waste water treatment site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the waste water treatment site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the waste water treatment site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Community facilities for shared recreation for all ages and genders, cemeteries, libraries, allotments. Splash pools and playgrounds for children, community gardens, free outdoor exercise facilities, biodiversity planting of all scales including reforesting the waste water treatment site. Insect hotels. Spaces for recycling and the repair of broken and damaged goods, including workshops and shared tools. Spaces for informal outdoor camping and for the traveller community to use as a transit stop. GP surgeries and small-scale local convalescent/ respite care. Cycle paths. Space for small starter workshops for new businesses. Space for local craft and farmers markets. Lots of public benches and picnic tables. Hang-out spaces for teenagers. Youth clubs.

Yes. (A) Policy 60 in the existing 2018 Cambridge Local Plan must - in any and all iterations of the Local Plan - be not only retained 100% in full but also strengthened to make it more easily observed and enforced. Also (B), in any updated version of Policy 23 of the 2018 Cambridge Local Plan, the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’ must be redrawn to exclude both the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and the allotments on New Street.

School, doctor, sports, community spaces (halls, playing fields)

School, doctor, sports, community spaces (halls, playing fields)

Some green space. A forest would be good.

Sorry getting bored of this question now. About the same as the above.

Strongly disagree

Only villages which already have local services including access to healthcare

Cycling and pub transport links to the rest of the area. Without them it’ll just be another naff modern estate.

Housing. Build it high, but with fast, efficient links to the rest of Cambridge, plus some good cycling links to Milton and the Country Park there. Give it a reasonable centre with a few good independents: bakery, a couple of restaurants… It’ll do fine.

Transport, transport, transport!! Cambridge South railway station needs to have capacity to deal with the site.

Easy/fast/cheap Bus, walking and cycle routes to any station. Otherwise everybody will just get in their car.

Good transport links that aren’t cars!!

Just look at the Netherlands and do that.

The homes are the critical thing. Also crucial are green space and infrastructure and for public and active transport. Proper bike stands please, also proper separate bike lanes and communal bike sheds for street residents.

Cycling infrastructure, green space and houses as per 3.

There are already loads of jobs in the campus so prioritise the homes. Prices are ridiculous. Prioritise bike lanes over car access.

Lots of housing. The jobs are bringing people here already.

Why do you think this? There's loads of space around the villages, seems like an ideal location. Villages on the train line like Duxford seem ideal, same goes for the guided busway.

Lots of housing and good bus and rail connections.

The car centric shopping area on Newmarket Road (beehive centre etc.) seems like a huge waste of land. There are acres of car parking next to a region where a single bedroom in a houseshare will cost you £700. Free this up for housing and pubs and stuff.

The vision in the plan is exactly right. We should have high environmental standards, lots and lots of new homes, and a region where almost nobody uses a car to drive to work.

The site is a vital link in a corridor of natural and semi natural habitat running through the city. Linking Barnwell East LNR with the Cherry Hinton lakes. This link should be maintained, ideally by the creation of a new LNR or some other listed site.

Semi natural areas linking to Hobson's park

Scrap the current east west rail route

Better, bigger and more joined up wild areas.

Strongly disagree

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

None. Please don't stretch our beautiful city and its already constrained infrastructure any further.

Stop it. Please stop expanding Cambridge's population. No-one wants it.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

Plenty of parking for residents

Yes
Ensure people have enough parking

Only open space. It’s already over-developed to the extent no one can park at their workplace.

EWR should be scrapped. If it has to be done make it electric not diesel

Open space only, no more housing and save the green belt

None, leave us alone and save the green belt

No

Scrap the unelected GCP

The same as it is now but without the unelected GCP

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

There is an urgent need to stop this plan to build more houses in Cambridgeshire. No more houses are required - excessive development is ruining this once lovely place. Eddington, Darwin Green, Waterbeach, Northstowe... why more? Just developers' avarice. Why close a functioning airport which has been a source of engineering jobs for decades? Stealing common land and over-managing green spaces until they are sterile 'parks' boundaried by house estates is wrong.

Dense city district!! What housing, jobs, facilities...? None. Re-wild this space and allow water to seep through the soil again before we all disappear beneath the rising seas and rivers. If you think that is far-fetched or over-stated, why not look at what happened in Germany last year? You really must take these warnings seriously and stop masking all this as being "consultation".

Even more...?! Just open spaces is fine. It is already home to the largest oncological research centre in Europe.

I cannot speak for the people of Cambourne. What on earth is a 'proper' town?

This is beautiful, valuable land which should be protected at all costs. We have few enough hills and trees in Cambridgeshire - this is almost the last bastion of rural life - please leave it alone and protect it. Look at the disgusting pollution in the Hobson's Conduit which flows from the springs at Nine Wells and down into Trumpington Street. In 60 years I have never seen it in this appalling state before. "Limited development" must be zero development if we are to have anything left worth living for in this area.

Waterbeach has lost its battle to survive as a village even though its arterial road is not fit for purpose and a baby from the village tragically lost its life last year as a result of the dangerous conditions on the A10. I would not impose development on any village that objects to it but clearly young people need places to live so it is up to individual villages to identify their housing and other needs.

Open spaces? Fields, forests, water courses, fens - nature provided them.

Why not think about the city's high streets where shops are closing and the flats above are often in terrible condition? Why can't people be encouraged to downsize and allow families to occupy larger houses with gardens? Cambridge has become a victim of its own success but lockdown has shown us that travelling to work is optional for many. Why not use policy to encourage people to commute less and revitalise rural and coastal communities? Cambridge will drown, literally or figuratively, if we don't do something to stop all this development.

It should be full of trees! We are the most treeless county in the UK. I'd love to see more footpaths open to the public.

The problem is that Cambridge now very much a commuter city for London workers so more housing in this area will not in reality going to lesson car travel. Do you really think more schools will see more parents/pupils walking/cycling to school? This is 2021. It just does not happen. For proof I suggest you come see the traffic stacked up in the area every morning. Adding more houses just adds to the local pollution to the area.

None. Again you need to get real. You are just adding to the already choked streets of this city. Filling every available space with yet another development is just stupidity.

Previous comments.

Build your new town away from Cambridge if you must but stop the over development of the city itself. Its already jam packed with new housing down every little alleyway and tiny piece of land.

Strongly disagree

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

Increase in green, natural parks with trees and lakes.

The housing should be socially inclusive, eg there should be room for a plumber or electrician and other tradespeople to park their vans safely near their houses on this developments so they can support the new local community. Do not focus solely on attracting people in office-based occupations.

The housing should be socially inclusive, eg there should be room for a plumber or electrician and other tradespeople to park their vans safely near their houses on this developments so they can support the new local community. Do not focus solely on attracting people in office-based occupations.

The housing should be socially inclusive, eg there should be room for a plumber or electrician and other tradespeople to park their vans safely near their houses on this developments so they can support the new local community. Do not focus solely on attracting people in office-based occupations.

Villages surrounding Cambourne should be developed to provide local destinations for new residents. This could include speciality retail, craftwork and heritage industry. These in turn provide local employment and a reason foe the surrounding villages to exist. It also ensures villages do not become mono-cultural havens for the richer admin-class, as is happening now.

Villages surrounding Cambourne should be developed to provide local destinations for new residents. This could include speciality retail, craftwork and heritage industry. These in turn provide local employment and a reason foe the surrounding villages to exist. It also ensures villages do not become mono-cultural havens for the richer admin-class, as is happening now.

All villages should be developed to provide local employment for their residents. Otherwise, they become dead dormitories for the retired and admin classes. If the ecosystem of village life can be maintained, with a mix small employers and tradespeople, the need for travel to and from the villages is reduced.

All villages should be developed to provide local employment for their residents. Otherwise, they become dead dormitories for the retired and admin classes. If the ecosystem of village life can be maintained, with a mix small employers and tradespeople, the need for travel to and from the villages is reduced.

All legacy villages should be developed into semi-autonomous hubs

Don’t forget about electrical power generation. Where is it all going to come from, and how resilient are the systems in place to unusual weather and/or malicious attack?

High school and church centre should be provided.
Affordable housing - that is actually affordable…unlike the ‘affordable’ housing at Marleigh which is £500k plus!!

I don’t think this is sensible building a dense city district particularly in the light of the pandemic where so many people wanted outdoor garden spaces in homes as opposed to living in flats.

Jobs for local people and not just world leading doctors.

Unsure of what is currently there so I’m not in a position to comment.

Better shopping facilities.

More than national minimum green area/resident capita. Developers and Council always only go to the legally min requirement or just over. That doesn’t protect or promote the environment or human wellbeing. Be brave, be innovative, build new communities that have a garden city design ethos- so much evidence from hundreds of years that it is an excellent design standard

This is purely and utterly profit motivated.
The sewage works was invested in not long ago and does not need replacing. Any upgrade could happen in incremental stages, which would incurr less capital investment- Anglian Water’s own reports confirm that. Their reports show we have a fully functioning sewage works with capacity until 2050!
The sewage plant move is nothing but profit motivated concrete eastern block style housing development by councils.

Furthermore, to quote this consultation “Local Plans are the basis of decision-making on planning applications, alongside national planning policy and other supplementary guidance.”


The sewage works move has questionably been afforded status as a nationally significant infrastructure project .
Why does Cambridge City and South Cambs District Councils not think a nationally significant infrastructure project (the sewage works move) moving to Green Belt outside a small village of Horningsea, is significant enough to mention in this Local Plan?
Not one single mention of it being a nationally significant infrastructure project in the local plan consultation for North East Cambridge!No mention that North East development is dependent on moving the sewage works to Green Belt at Honey Hill.
Why hide this from public in a public consultation? That’s withholding relevant and important information and breaches the democratic process of ‘public consultation’.

The wider public have a right to know about the intrusion to Green Belt that the sewage works relocation will have if it goes ahead.

It is scandalous that £227 million of taxpayers' money is being spent to shift the sewage works a mere 1.5km to the left - it will still be on the Cambridge boundary - the village of Horningsea and the green belt there gains absolutely nothing by this move; Cambridge loses Green Belt for nothing.

That’s a thinly worn vail of a statement. This has zero to do with expansion of Cambourne which I shall remind folks, was once a proposed development of 5000 homes and once outline permission was granted it doubled. The E-W arc rail is about building £1m homes on countryside - a tick box exercise to meet excessive land mad housing quota
Why does no one in planning ever see the value of permitting small development creep in ALL settlements (village-towns). That way housing provision is met, countryside protected better (especially from mass build and dump of soulless ‘communities’) and communities actually grow stronger socially through gradual integration and expansion and embracement of diversity.
It’s really not rocket science- it’s how connected and socially supportive communities have developed since the dawn of time!

They won’t . They’ll be mass developed as is always the case with villages on rail lines because as you have said in this consultation (‘we want to build communities with minimal need for car travel’)

??? That’s not true- look at your ‘minimal development’ that has been granted permission as Waterbeach . A village of 2500 homes going to a city equivalent to the size of Ely or Welwyn Garden City

See my comment about not mass developing but using age old successful evidnece of how communities really grow and develop by gentle creep everywhere

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

An airport for the Cambridge area

Leave the sewage works where it is. No over development require. All these extra people will swamp the tiny, beautiful city of Cambridge which will become the area everyone gravitates to.

This area is already over developed!

This area is already over developed!

Just carry on ruining the villages of South Cambs

So destroy Cambridge City and keep the villages for the elite!

Stop all over development. You are destroying our lovely City!

I think it’s an awful plan which will destroy and swamp the city of Cambridge and surrounding areas. Why are you so desperate to build so many ugly, pokey, packed in houses to destroy our lovely county.

We should be focusing on increasing woodland and other green carbon reducing areas,

How much water will now be extracted from an already overburdened aquifer. How much absorbent surface will be lost?

Again no development until and unless water capture equates to additional water extraction and is returned to the aquifer or a new reservoir .

If dense means yet another huddle of closely packed flat roofed blocks please rethink

No more development until and unless sufficient on site housing and appropriate public transport is in place.

Just leave them alone as the attractive places they are and a welcome respite from the newer over developed sites.

Don’t know them well enough to say

Just focus on the open spaces and making those even greener

Affordable homes 3 bedroomed homes, not large expensive ones.
Apartments and maisonettes
Many people have 2 cars so plenty of parking with EV pods for residents and visitors
New homes to have solar power panels and heat source pumps, fully insulated
Facilities for recycling especially for electrical items
More EV charging stations
Good digital connectivity such as broadband and speeds
Local shops such as grocery, hardware, pharmacies
Dentist, opticians, doctors, library, restaurants, pubs, night life facilities
Primary and secondary schools
Recreation area or park with children's playground, adult outdoor fitness equipment, walks through woodlands
Regular, reliable transport links between the new town and Cambridge city (which is distinctively lacking in South Cambridgeshire)
Park and Ride
Link to the rail network?
Look at improving Newmarket Road to reduce congestion - get people on buses

Affordable homes 3 bedroomed homes, not large expensive ones.
Apartments and maisonettes
Many people have 2 cars so plenty of parking with EV pods for residents and visitors
New homes to have solar power panels and heat source pumps, insulation
Facilities for recycling especially for electrical items
More EV charging stations
Good digital connectivity such as broadband and speeds
Local shops such as grocery, hardware, pharmacies
Dentist, opticians, doctors, library, restaurants, pubs, night life facilities
Recreation area or park with children's playground, adult outdoor fitness equipment, walks through woodlands
Primary and secondary schools
Regular, reliable transport links between the new town and Cambridge city (which is distinctively lacking in South Cambridgeshire)
Park and Ride
Link to the rail network?

Affordable homes/flats for staff
Flats/apartments for families to live in while supporting and for convalescing patients
Cheaper parking and better public transport
Good digital connectivity such as broadband and speeds
Local shops with restaurants, grocery, pharmacy
Reliable public transport links to and from the City Centre, Park and Rides, railway

Same as for most towns, affordable three bedroomed homes, with solar panels, heat source pumps, insulation, EV charging points/pods, shops, schools, doctors, opticians, recreation areas for children and adults.

Affordable homes with solar panels, heat source pumps, fully insulated.
Recreation areas
Local shop

Not sure as most villages here in South Cambridgeshire such as Linton and Great Abington have been expanded a lot recently. Currently the transport system does not cope with this expansion neither does the primary schools or Linton Village College or the Granta Medical Practice in Linton.

More capacity in the primary schools and Linton Village College as well as the doctors surgery.

Greater Cambridge needs to have much better connectivity to areas outside of the Greater Cambridge area. South Cambridgeshire (villages such as Balsham, West Wickham, West Wratting, Weston Colville) need better public transport to Addenbrookes and the City Centre for our elderly, students and those who work on the biomedical site and city centre and for our young adults to reach leisure facilities in the Greater Cambridge area.

Strongly disagree

Locals don't want it

Just leave it as it is none

As it is now rural and happy

More Social Housing, afforable housing shops, doctors and buses all needed. Shops are an important part of daily life and a good transport system are need health care is needed toosome open spaces and maybe childrens play areas.

Social housing for all not just locals and not just people with local connection

more 1 bedroom housing for single people

I think Cambourne has enough play areas and open spaces so more housing and ltte ls hops and a psot office

No housing near rail lines but more places for smaller business

I think Cottenham could have a lot more hosuing as its got so much un used land. The village has good transport and shops and could do with more people from other erea. But to make so many restrcitons on who can move nto a village isnt a fair way to deal with it. People who have a local connection i.e a family member living there should be enough. Willingham has a lot of places too that could be deveolped.

There are enough open spcaes around the villages but many would benefit from more social housing without the restriciotn put on for people to live there. more shops and better parking

It needs to accept that people who have family here already want to move closer and stop restricting peole who want to move here to be closer to the family. To suggest a person needs to work 16 hours or more in a village like Hardwick is a stretch with so little there. Villagers have to accept that the villages need to espand and also allow others to move to them without making it so difficult. be nice to see more shops and business too

doctor, dentist, library, shops, parks

parks/open spaces

In question 2 you say "car travel should be minimised. These sites should be connected to public transport so there is NO car transport. Housing should accommodate NHS staff and bright young people who are our future meaning this definition of affordable housing. Good public service connection to Cambridge North and South including the Addenbrooke's/Royal Papworth needed.

Assume this housing is for the Science Park etc so needs to have the appropriate green content since the residents will not be rich but deserving of a nice area. If you plan it to service elsewhere you need to replace the metro with something of equivalent concept and green. The new Mayor's vision of "compassion, cooperation and community" is meaningless.

Develop Biomedical Campus agreed BUT much of Addenbrooke's despite not being old is already tired and needs replacing. New housing around this area a a big problem. Look at what has happened with prices in Trumpington Meadows due I assume to speculators and properties being marketed for commuters as London exports its housing problems.. How much do Astra Zeneca people earn compared with say MRC staff and NHS staff. You have to find a way of controlling this?

East -West rail link is a disaster. Typical UK back of an envelope design. Carving up the countryside and local village communities. The East Midland of Leicester, Derby, Nottingham and the Sheffield are 100% diesel trains as will the new line. I think it is "cheep" to suggest this is to help Camborne

Don't agree it is being built to help the communities. I have limited knowledge of these villages. I lived at one time in Linton and then Abington. This was at the time the Cambridge Haverhill railway line was being closed presumably since there was not enough usage. Granta park and Babraham are businesswise successful and they need connecting to housing populations. An East-West railway is not the answer. Look at continental Europe, they use TRAMS

You already have decided in South Cambs, so stay with Linton, Sawston and Fulbourn in the eastern part of South Cambs so stick with them and come up with satisfactory public transport separate from cars.

The three I mention are developing nicely according I assume to the needs of the local community as defined by the local electorate

Seems to me you are running the process backwards. Are you looking for sites and then looking for companies to st up there?

Strongly disagree

If any houses are built,

There should not be any further housing at addenbrookes site. It is too crowded in its current state. It makes sense to have more heart/science related businesses moving at the site and some provisions for the people working there - shops/cafes, more parks closer to the place of work.

Provide enough health care facilities and schools, as well as shops, so people can meet most of there needs without the need to travel.

Please don't build any more houses in the green belt. Please don't destroy perfectly good agricultural land. There is absolutely no need to build houses around the 'business parks'. You know only too well that only a small fraction of these homes will be inhabited by the people working in the business parks.

Please do not use the proposed new 'travel hub' near Babraham as an excuse to populate the green belt around Babraham, Sawston, Stapelford and Shelford with hundreds (or even worse - thousands) of new homes. Limited developments of 10-20 homes would be acceptable, anything more than this is destroying our countryside.

There is currently plenty of natural open spaces around these villages, you don't need to 'provide' any.

Concentrate most developments in Cambridge, where people can walk/cycle/use the public transport.

I hope we would still have farm land around

this proposed development would profoundly alter the south east of the city forever and i dont agree with it, it will increase congestion in an already congested city

affordable and social housing not just luxury unaffordable flats

depends exactly where the locations are

i worry about the impact of all this development on the quality of life for existing residents and those who need to drive for work in the city, especially in terms of increased congestion, supply of clean drinking water and the necessary infrastructure and utilities

Strongly disagree

More open space than on the proposals I have seen so far.

Better transport infrastructure (bike parking, safe pedestrian routes, electric car charging) and affordable and reliable public transport services are desperately needed.

Strongly disagree

This is too dense a development. This is going to create a slum of the future if too many people are crowded into this area.

No housing should be included in this site. This should just be developed for Biomedical uses only

There shouldn't be any more development of Cambourne. This area has taken more than it's fair share of housing - every new additional development has come with the promise that this will be the last but this rear seems to me seen as 'fair game' by developers and councillors alike. IF there has to be more housing, then any new facilities must be in place BEFORE any additional housing is built as the area is already creaking. Additional medical facilities MUST be provided, a proper Town Centre with a proper high street with shops must be provided. All housing must be 100% sustainable and the current 'leisure' areas (i.e. country park) MUST be kept. The existing business park is still under-utilised so there is already enough business/office space available

Strongly disagree

Greater outdoor recreation facilities - BMX park and track / bridleways, dog walk areas, skate boarding ramps, lake, - not just bits of green that pretend to be parks and do nothing to encourage outdoor activity and life with a focus other than work.

The BMC is now dictating the nature and growth of Cambridge and this has to be halted. There is no justification for ever increasing expansion - Start to develop a second site north of Cambridge and spread the investment, work opportunities, and transport infrastructure more democratically.

East West Rail is a white elephant as a commuter model. It should run coast to coast and through areas where local transport is currently not adequate. The focus on linking Oxford and Cambridge research sites is not in the wider public interest - but improved coast to coast provision would be beneficial and could lead the way in green freight movement. The current proposal for use of diesel trains is beyond ridiculous. For Cambourne to benefit - the route should connect northern populations in Bedford, St Neots, Cambourne, Northstowe and Milton, providing commuting potential for those living across the E/W band of Cambridgeshire.

These villages are being killed off by gradual infill. The transport infrastructure has to be improved before anything else happens - not a guided bus - but a short-term electric bus lane running alongside the A1307, folowed by a light rail transport provision.
A commuter ring-road has to be built to replace the use of narrow village streets by commuters and HGVs and this should be carbon balanced by the pedestrianisation of some village centres, LTNs and the extension of mobility schemes to cover the villages.

There are no southern villages with 'good' public transport connections. Bus routes are slow, train routes limited and therefore people have to use their own transport. This transport /traffic infrastructure has to be replaced before any further development.

Greater outdoor recreation facilities - BMX park and track / bridleways, dog walk areas, skate boarding ramps, lake, - not just bits of green that pretend to be parks and do nothing to encourage outdoor activity and life with a focus other than work.

The St Neots / Cambourne / Northstowe arc needs to be developed as a business / manufacturing area to balance Cambs almost exclusive dependence on biotech industries. This focus reduces the attraction to our area for those not in the sector and is creating an imbalanced society with narrowing education and employment horizons for our young people.

Greater Cambridge should be leading on environmental action and demonstrating how a locality can support sociological well-being, not just economic growth.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

The current airport site already provides perfectly adequate of the above facilities. The removal of the site will displace many SKILLED folk. Sir Arthur Marshall must be turning in his grave after creating so much for Cambridge.

The movement of the waste water site is totally unnecessary and cannot possibly be achieved within the budgets that have been estimated. I believe that the reclamation of the site is fiscally untenable for anything other than industrial use.
The location of the proposed site did not offer a fair consultation and is set to ruin green belt area and valuable agricultural land, not within it will have (and is already having) a devastating effect on local community and valuable and beautiful conservation area. NOTHING BUT WANTON VANDALISM OF THE AREA.

They already exist.

Rail travel is only affordable for those on high incomes (the minority).

No comment. You should LISTEN to the local population of the villages which you intend to enforce development on.

Are there any left?

Most of the population appear to feel that to turn the area into a metropolis is a short sighted approach given that the UK is a relatively small island in the big scheme of things. Communities are being eroded and the population is being distanced from democracy.

Mixed housing including smaller starter homes BUT not cookie cutter, high quality individual, allow lots of smaller developers the contracts. Must all include unobtrusive solar roof tiles etc. Green landscaping to include trees a must.

What on earth do you mean by Cambourne growing into a proper town. Be specific what is NOT proper right now? Cambourne has got room to grow BUT not at the expense of major development happening north of the A428 into a completely new Ward. Cambourne needs far more retail and restaurant/cafe outlets. Why does all of this rely on having East-West Rail??? If you want to site a new railway station at Cambourne then it should be south of the A428 and not North. Why not the siting of the old Varsity Railway line which would mean a station a couple of miles south of Cambourne.

What do you mean by a souther rural cluster of villages? Where exactly are you talking about?? If you mean south of the A428 I agree.

Completely agree. Royston, Gamlingay, Melbourn, Bassingbourn, Meldreth

Needs to reflect the village charcter and not end up as a ring of concrete round each village

We should be focusing on brownfield development for housing before any use of arable/greenfield sites.

Not Melbourn! We have had so many houses built recently, it’s now a big village without the infrastructure to support it. The doctors is at almost collapse and the the school is rammed. Please leave the village as it is - we have done our bit.

Green space, less condensed housing, solar panels everywhere, electric car charging, walking paths separate from any roads.

The water treatment plant shouldn't be moved to green belt land that is used as open outdoor space. It should stay where it is. It is an absolutely hipocritical waste of money and green belt land to move It. It was only just upgraded!

Addenbrooks needs to be safer for padestrians and cyclists.

Help Replace all the oil with greener technologies in these villages.

There are sites you shouldn't have on your map. E.g. green belt land.

Fen end road could probably be improved considerably.

More green. More trees. Less ugly new builds that look like shipping containers. More space between cars and people/cyclists. More/wider padestrianisation of the centre. Free/cheaper public transport. Solar panels on all buildings. Help to remove be the Reliance on burning oil.

Supermarket, excellent rapid transport links to town, station, Newmarket,

Open space. Retail/dining

Healthcare jobs - community hospital/minor injuries unit?

Shelford/stapleford would benefit from mixed/lower cost house as access is good for the biomedical campus. A supermarket and high quality recreation facilities (think cambourn sports centre but with a pool) might work well.

Shelford/stapleford (east)
Duxford

Should keep differentiation between city and villages,. Both have value. Need to improve planning for electrical vehicles, and other low carbon, private transportation (electric bikes, etc). public transport is always going to be challenging in small villages.

Schools, adventure playground with parking and cafe community centre like at clay farm Trumpington.

Swimming pool, adventure playground, another supermarket, more retail, more entrance points to the town.

Gamlingay, Bourn, places with post offices and a cafe

More affordable parking, out of town shopping areas like in Biggleswade. Country parks and areas like Irchester in Northampton, thetford high lodge and willen lake Milton Keynes to encourage people to make the most of the countryside

Strongly disagree

The high street promised nearly 20 yrs ago still nearly non existent despite new developments been allowed.
No swimming pool- needs bigger doctors and sports facilities. Entertainment venues.
No jobs in Cambourne so cars have to drive into Cambridge as the public transport route/bus is shockingly slow.

Sort out infrastructure first such as public transport from cambourbe to Cambridge. Allow permissions for entertainment venues and retail parks so everyone isn’t driving into Cambridge all the time

Strongly disagree

I don’t think the site should be housing. It is far too big. Lacks transport needs and infrastructure. If the area is housing, jobs and its own facilities, and trying not to rely on cars for travelling, why can it not be built away from Cambridge city itself??

Dense city district sounds like an inner London, high rise, compacted lifestyle area. Unliveable and unliveable. Open spaces need to be a priority in Cambridge or it will be unrecognisable.

How can you create more spaces for these facilities when there’s finite space? As the council etc. fill in all the areas around Cambridge with the endless concrete jungle of housing there will be little character left.

None. This rail line is currently proposed to be diesel. If this goes ahead then lots of open spaces will be needed away from it’s pollution.

Nothing should be built near the tail line in the villages if the trains are diesel.

It should flow from its original historical architecture in the centre and colleges to the developments. None of this flat roof, modern buildings everywhere.

School, health care provision, regular non car transport into Cambridge and connections with new east west railway line- could provide links to science park etc. Shops and spaces for other local services to prevent people having to go into central Cambridge. Off road cycle links.

School, health care provision, regular non car transport into Cambridge. Shops and spaces for other local services to prevent people having to go into central Cambridge. Off road cycle links

school, primary care provision, shops and other facilities School, health care provision, Shops and spaces for other local services to prevent people having to go into central Cambridge. Off road cycle links.

I think this area is already large enough with poor connections for travel. The east west railway will not provide sufficient access for such large development.

I strongly disagree with this- this would damage one of the main founding principles of the vision of protecting our current green spaces and environment. The railway line will not stop in any of these areas and so provides only harm with no benefit to South Cambridgeshire rural communities. These are rural villages and should be protected as such.

I would not oppose SMALL scale developement on brown field sites, but we would NEVER support development of green land or spaces. This is utterly contradictory to the climate crisis we are facing. The pandemic has shown how important green spaces and nature is for our physical and mental health and destroying it seems madness.

Dedicated off road cycle paths

Please protect our precious countryside and few remaining rural villages in South Cambridgeshire

Strongly disagree

Schools and nurseries , gp surgeries, dentists, community spaces and facilities, leisure facilities, shops for groceries. Entertainment... Restaurants, pubs, cafés.

Schools and nurseries , gp surgeries, dentists, community spaces and facilities, leisure facilities, shops for groceries. Entertainment... Restaurants, pubs, cafés.

Better transport links and car parking.

"proper town". What does this mean?

Schools and nurseries , gp surgeries, dentists, community spaces and facilities, leisure facilities, shops for groceries. Entertainment... Restaurants, pubs, cafés.

This should not be developed.

Use only brown field sites. Do not use green belt or current green spaces. Any villages that qualify with that statement.

Better transport links. Better roads.. Roads are awful.

None that I know of.

We should not be ruining the rural aspect of the county. That's part of our identity.

I think the area needs a large out of town park. There is a lot of Greenspace in Cambridge but lots is owned by the colleges.

Lots of high quality jobs and houses.

Whilst working in Cambridge we struggled to keep grads as housing was so costly. There needs to be a lively interesting town that grads can afford and commute from.

The area south of Cambridge needs 1- good links between villages 2- circular walks. 3- less wiggly roads, straighten them and use the land to the old road for housing 4- much better paved walks for buggies and wheelchairs. As I said before a large country park.

The villages are getting full, new developments should avoid impacting the village amenities, so develop a village without a school and build a new school and shop.

As noted before access between the villages is poor.

There is a plot in meldreth by the dodgy railway bridge on the south of the village. The bridge is dangerous to walk over. The railway land adjacent with the industrial estate could be developed with a new pedestrian route and cycle path over the railway.
I also thought the new village at the heydon golf course that straddles the county boundary was a sensible location for lots of new homes.

A more affordable place for young people. More wet weather things for young families.

the traffic issues need solving

Off grid housing - with a learning centre teaching others how to build sustainable communities. Rewilding at the edges. Underground delivery points for goods and maintenance coming in.

Outdoor enterainment all year round for families and young people.

Sports facilities to help ill / obese people get fit and healthy.

World leading environmentally sustainable transport and housing. Right now it's a joke.

More schools and GPs needed!

Provision for faith centres to help build local identify.
Diverse shops, not one superstore. Give some encouragement to local foods and goods on sale.

Provision for faith centres to help build local identify.
Diverse shops, not one superstore. Give some encouragement to local foods and goods on sale.

Housing appropriate to on-call staff and transient (1-3 year studentships) staff/ researchers.
Provision of affordable hotel accommodation for families visiting patients to replace the sterling service once offered by the 'Papworth Landladies'

More diverse local shopping opportunities.
Maintain and develop the 'rural' walks in and around the development.

Villages along the guided busway could develop.

With the development of the A14, there would appear to be scope to develop alongside the A1307 - Huntingdon to Swavesey

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

No more housing taking over land anywhere. Definitely no expansion to our lovely little villages

low cost homes, rental units for single people and families, doctors surgeries, community / sports centres, homes for sale in all price brackets, good bus services, enterprise area,

this congested area is inappropriate for further development

the area needs better public transport, more local shops and a range of housing provided for all income levels. a new pub would be good

Cambourne currently has a good mix of housing. More shops and a new cottage hospital would be ideal.

more housing along the Cambridge Royston railway would be a good idea a new regional shopping / sports centre

Melbourne, shepreth, Dullingham, Whittlesford

improved shopping, sports centres , regular interval bus and train services which are well advertised

More homes to the south West of the country which has good roads and railway links

a world leading centre of technical excellence, with homes and environment to match

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

An underground station. The buses are far too infrequent to provide an alternative for a car. Or think outside the box, maybe a massive fleet of hireable cars. That is unless you expect everyone to stay home and shop online?

It's good you intend to over populate Cambridge so current residents can move out and get a good sale price.

Housing for the workers only.

This plan is flawed because it is not necessary for the Waste Water Treatment Works to be relocated.

I would like the North East Cambridge proposal not to be be dependent on the unnecessary relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Works to green field Green Belt Land. Indeed I would go further and say it should not.

Social housing for locals that have lived here from birth!!! This is a must, affordable rents….private rents are disgraceful!

Lots of parks, spaces to play safely!

Strongly disagree

Cambridge is already heavily congested by traffic. To build yet more housing regardless of what amenities it has congestion will be much worse

The current waste water treatment plant has sufficient capacity until 2050 thanks to previous government funding and to move this spending some 250 million pounds to green belt to build yet more housing just does not make good economic sense. Leave it there but make good use of land that AWA does not need.

Healthcare and research creates jobs. Access to this site is already adequate but some housing for people engaged in those could be provided. Other than that improve access into city centre where there is plenty of unused retail centres due to closures that can provide the facilities needed

Disagree with the whole proposal

Necklace villages around Cambridge should be protected not ruined by development!

As stated in previous question 7. All villages should be protected from further development

Open spaces have been shown to be essential during Covid-19 times and there is just not enough of these around Cambridge. Rather than development, improve the environment for healthy walking and biking by creating green corridors with good quality air and a thriving biodiversity plan. Let’s keep Cambridge and surrounding villages “Green”

No. Stop greedy developers ruining Cambridgeshire.

Strongly disagree

Housing needs to be seriously better environmental standard. More open space for other species. People need parks and trees for mental health. Retain the green belt nearby at Honey Hill - absolutely disgusting that SCDC and City raised no objection to move of sewage plant to precious Green Belt.

Passive haus level development- not more greenwash. Lower density, more green space. Milton Country Park already at capacity. Not enough water resources to support this intensive development. Cambridge is turning into a horrible place to live. Poor public transport, congested roads, poor health services, ugly boxes being built with no environmental consideration. Developer greed means promises of affordable housing watered down. Water treatment plant being moved to destroy green belt utterly unacceptable. Undemocratic and very misleading to leave this out of the Local Plan

More open space, less unimaginative development, so much ugliness and war on nature.

How about better public transport? Mini hopper buses on circuits. Electric buses. Park & Ride finishes too early and this encourages car use. Congestion charge. Discourage car use. More speed cameras on village roads.

Protect the green belt- this is very precious.

Stop focusing on the areas that are overdeveloped and overwhelmed with building and traffic already. What about some levelling up? Cambridge has been overdone. Other areas need support to grow. Put some money where it is really needed.

I imagine it will be covered in concrete ugly boxes , and drinking water will be rationed. There won’t be any green belt left, and no one will want to live here.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

Light commercial is needed everywhere. Low cost retail units. Stop building houses you are screwing up the best of Cambridgeshire

None. Should remain the same. Greedy councillors can not wait for the elections stop building

No more housing see above.

It's a giant housing estate with very little personality and what is good about it is being destroyed by this council. Again we need low rent units small to medium retail and light commercial could rent. No more office blocks and houses. Look at the metro and a sub station in the existing town centre. Stop building more houses for people of London to move into.

Stop now take a breath

Stop building more houses. Go somewhere else and leave Cambridge as it is. Do more to change ppl owning multiple homes.

Absolutely NO more housing for Cambourne.
Already there is lack of resources, traffic is increasing (adversely) & the original concept of 3 "connected:" villages with some town attributes has been thrown out of the window. It is very much a town already.

I was very disappointed at the low numbers of housing proposed on this site, i’m sure previous estimates suggested scope for 10k-12k new homes. To my mind this site represents a real opportunity to ease the housing crisis in Cambridge. Please consider increasing the density of this development significantly to help increase housing affordability, reduce long-distance commuting, and support efficient public transport provision.

The housing should be very high density to help ease the current housing shortage, reduce long distance commuting, and increase the general affordability of the local housing market.

To help the British economy and medical science succeed, please allocate space to meet the requests of the firms on the Biomedical Campus in full. Plenty of dense housing should be provided nearby to reduce traffic generation and increase the sustainability of this important site.

The railway will help to alleviate traffic so this ambition is sensible, please build housing at high density around the future station.

Plenty of housing and jobs space should be provided near the railway as this will help to reduce commuting by car.

Only the larger villages with good public and active transport links should see development. I’m glad the plan prioritises development in Cambridge and on the edge of city but I think there is scope for more ambitious house building targets. This would make the plan more sustainable as long distance commuting would be reduced.

Dense housing to provide plenty of custom for the high streets and pubs.

The Beehive and Newmarket Rd retail parks, put the car parking in multi-storeys or underground to free up the current surface car parking space for lots of housing. Following Covid19, there is also an opportunity to restore the Kite by converting the Grafton Site back to housing and reopening the old alignment of Fitzroy St with retail pared back to the scale you see on Mill Rd

The Greater Cambridge area in 2041 should be dynamic, prosperous and orientated around active travel.

A mix of housing typesand a variety of jobs - office, retail, etc.
Schools.
Open spaces suitable for recreation: children's play area, skateboarding/cycle track for older children and facilities for teenagers. Meeting places for adults.

A mix of housing typesand a variety of jobs - office, retail, etc.
Schools.
Open spaces suitable for recreation: children's play area, skateboarding/cycle track for older children and facilities for teenagers. Meeting places for adults.

Schools.
Open spaces suitable for recreation: children's play area, skateboarding/cycle track for older children and facilities for teenagers. Meeting places for adults.

Something to stop the wind! It is bleak.

I doubt the residents would like anything.

First priority should be ensuring the local water supply can cope with the increased demand. Cambridgeshire needs to increase its sustainable water supply, through new pipelines to wetter parts of the country and by increasing local supply through new reservoirs or even desalination plants along the regions coast. The airport area has good road links to major employers such as Addenbrookes so liaising with them to ensure the right kind of housing for potential employees of these locations is essential.

No opinion of this development.

Ensuring no development infringes on the Magog hills is essential.

I am a resident of Cambourne. The east-west rail is an opportunity to greatly improve the transport links to Cambourne and should go ahead (preferably following the 'Northern' route linking up to Northstowe). Cambourne at the moment is effectively a commuter town with limited local employment opportunity. Building yet more houses without more facilities only benefits the developer. We need a proper town centre with more shopping/leisure/health facilities - why has a town this size not got a post office??? They're have been plenty of promises about creating more facilities but little gets done: The area opposite the council offices has now been earmarked for yet more housing - why not build a leisure facility here with swimming pool, cinema complex etc.? Also the area that was provisionally earmarked as a golf-course in Upper Cambourne should be turned into a forest and parkland rather than being threatened with more development. A project like this would offset the massive carbon-footprint of continuous house building in this area.

Villages should remain villages and not be over developed. However, some may benefit from a planned expansion such as Hardwick which has good transport links, although it needs its own doctors surgery. Also the Citi 4 bus which serves this area has been drastically reduced since the pandemic with little sign it is to be returned to the previous level of service. As somebody who relies on this bus, the priority should be increasing bus services again, and to not keep talking about sustainability etc. whilst stealthy cutting the services we have. Overcrowded buses at peak-times and large number of people not wearing facemasks is hardly going to help cut covid rates in the area.

Housing growth in this area is inevitable, however do they need to be crammed together so tightly as they are in Upper Cambourne - with tiny, overlooked gardens and limited green space? Why can't new developments in these rural areas have a more spacious feel, larger gardens etc. As widely reported - gardens are a haven for wildlife as well as excellent for mental health so they're is no excuse for cramming houses together in this area - apart from developer greed.

Trying to reduce car use whilst building large scale commuter towns such as Cambourne and Northstowe is nonsense, without first expanding and improving public bus services and other transport means to likely employment destinations. You need to encourage work opportunities outside of Cambridge City and think about how to increase employment opportunities in these development areas.

Agree - though the route needs to service the majority of the proposed developments in this plan. I.e it should be pushed that the EWR route needs to go North through Northstowe as well.
Every house should some come with solar panels - no exceptions. They should be mandated to have centralised water storages across these developments.

Very limited development! There is no need for additional facilities, jobs or open spaces here. Stop attempting to make a case for them to push through additional housing developments.

To the absolute minimum. People live in villages for village life - not for a sudo-town. There are plenty of new towns and infill areas in Cambridge to ultislise.
Also, not everyone who works here needs to live here. Better and cheaper rail network solves for this without ruining South Cambs.

No need for jobs in the villages - people like to live away from work.
Open spaces - they already have lots. No need to new
Facilities are already pretty good around the villages.

The older generation do not enjoy going into Cambridge anymore due to the development and traffic - please don't spoil it for my generation and the next.
The surrounding villages should keep the beauty and individuality.

Strongly disagree

Green spaces, better cycle paths and public transport

Green spaces, better cycle paths and public transport

Already too built up - concentrate on expanding the Milton science park

Absolutely not. I object to the railway - and the urbanisation of West Cambridge. No to expanding Cambource, a huge no to anything Tahkenham are planning.

Where? Absolutley not

Cottenham Willingham and Bar Hill

No more sites - you've already got more housing planned than is needed. You are wrecking Cambridgeshire with your stupid plans. Can't wait to retire and move well away from the urban jungle and concreting you are planning.

I don't want it to be an urban sprawl with pollution and more people. But I'll have moved to rural somewhere else by then to get away from this sort of thing so, fortunately, whatever you do to wreck the place I have lived in all my life it won't be my problem.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

I think until a major redevelopment of current infrastructure, specifically the road transport system is achieved, no further housing should be considered.

None. The wastewater treatment plant has recently been upgraded and deemed fit for purpose for a significant number of years going forward. The carbon and financial cost of relocating this site is huge - if housing is needed then the housing should be situated in the proposed site for the relocated treatment plant, the new homeowners would certainly enjoy their life in the greenbelt, those living nearby would be grateful and £227 million pounds and many tonnes of carbon saved.

Vast open spaces should be employed. Community centers are important, including support for children and mental health. National chains should be banned from owning shops or property in the area.

Cambourne should remain isolated and become self sufficient. If anything, more cycle only routes should be set up.

None. These villages should remain as they are.

Barton and Newnham

Underdeveloped and preserved

There should be a lot of affordable housing for lower paid workers who are essential to the efficient running of the site

I think there is too much development to the N and W of the city. Essentially, the vast majority of new homes will be in Cambourne, Bourn, Eddington, Darwin Green, NE Cambridge, Northstowe, Waterbeach and Cambridge East. There should be at least one large development in the South that has good transport links to key sites such as the Biomedical Campus, the city centre and the Science Park. Without more development in the South, we will be left with small villages dependent on persons transport (cars). This will be a more desirable area to the overdeveloped North and will become even more unaffordable for most people

I think there is too much development to the N and W of the city. Essentially, the vast majority of new homes will be in Cambourne, Bourn, Eddington, Darwin Green, NE Cambridge, Northstowe, Waterbeach and Cambridge East. There should be at least one large development in the South that has good transport links to key sites such as the Biomedical Campus, the city centre and the Science Park. Without more development in the South, we will be left with small villages dependent on persons transport (cars). This will be a more desirable area to the overdeveloped North and will become even more unaffordable for most people

Villages in the north, such as Waterbeach, Bourn, and Longstanton have had to tolerate very large developments nearby and there is therefore no reason why the same should not happen to some villages in the South

Villages that are situated on the main railway lines to Kings Cross and Liverpool Street would be good places to start. There could also be significant development planned along the East-West rail link as it travels South from Cambourne to the Biomedical Campus.

There will be a significant need for private cars doing the period covered by this plan. Not all journeys can or should be made by bike or walking. For example, dropping someone at work, then going to the gym and then on to the supermarket before returning home. Until the public transport system can provide affordable, reliable and frequent journeys that support peoples' individual lifestyle choices, provision for the car should not be sacrificed. Infrastructure before demolition.

Doctors, schools, retail, affordable housing

Doctors, schools, retail, affordable housing

Doctors, schools, retail, affordable housing

Insufficient medical services, retail and secondary school capacity in Cambourne due to West Cambourne and South Cambs Council housing development. Further development is not viable without more such services. A swimming pool should also be provided.

Doctors, schools, retail, affordable housing

Those with existing good local amenities.

Increase capacity in amenities

Less large luxury homes

Strongly disagree

No more housing. The area north of Cambourne should be left un touched with its ancient wood lands and farm land.

Open spaces or there not villages

It would be nice if the planners where honest instead of asking for input on a deal they have already agreed behind closed doors.

Strongly disagree

This area should not be developed as the local infrastructure cannot support more housing and people. It would be far better for the local community if the area was given over to the building of a new forest and park.

Minimal housing plus open space park areas with new Forrest

Tram link into Cambridge

No more housing and factories
Building more and destroying green areas is not compatible with climate change requirements

Totally flawed concept and does not address the challenges of the climate emergency. Why are we considering replacing green and open spaces with houses, industrial units, roads, concrete and the pollution generated by them during the building phase and after completion. Plant trees and make more green open spaces.

Strong, easy, well-lit cycle network. Small homes for those that want them.

Strong, easy, well-lit cycle network. Small homes for those that want them.

Strong, easy, well-lit cycle network. Small homes for those that want them.

We're in full support of EWR past Cambourne.

Strong, easy, well-lit cycle network. Small homes for those that want them.

We are one of the least forested areas in the UK. We desperately need more wild areas. We have local residents willing to invest £300k in buying areas to turn into forest, but are struggling to talk local land-owners (often Cambridge colleges) into discussing it. So, would you be able to provide an intro and some pressure.

More forested, possibly with pesticide-free areas enforced by local councils, more small homes available, closer together, more bikes and fewer cars.

Local shops, Resteraunt / pub, coffee shop. Primary schools, dr surgery, dentist. Bus route from tescoes, through housing area, and along to beehive shops, cycle paths. Some open green space and play areas. Aim for minimal impact on traffic volume on coldhams lane, especially on cherry hinton part. A train station near cherry hinton.

Plenty of local shops/supermarket + leisure facilities. How about a new cinema?

A major theatre/concert hall, as Cambrige is an international city with a tiny and inadequate cultural infrastructure. How about some artists' studios. make it exciting and different and reflective of the young population. Cambridge city centre is 'the old' culture, so how about this site being 'the new' . See how they do that in Valencia, with the Old Town centre and new 'City of Arts & Sciences' - the two sit beautifully together. Also, some big outdoor spaces for sport, health and fitness.

Leisure and sports facilities for all, as well as decent neighbourhood shops. But also green spaces.

Please do NOT under any circumstances try to turn border villages like Coton, Milton, Histon etc into suburbs of the city. They and Cambridge itself would suffer if the demarcation lines were to be blurred. Better to expand stand-alone villages out of the central Cambrdige areas, and especailly those with business parks that could provide employment - and those that are lilnked to areas of employment with a decent rail or bus service into town.

Facilitate local businesses to try and recruit locally - it's difficult to target recruitment advertising to local populations, but that would mean staff could walk or cycle to work.

Schools. A swimming pool and other sports/exercise facilities, both indoor and outdoor. Green open spaces. A planted and maintained garden with seating. Children's play areas. A hall or indoor space with kitchen facilities for different clubs and groups to make use of or available to hire for special events. Cycle paths throughout and space for bikes to park in communal areas. Mixed housing (bungalows and town houses, detached and terraced) grouped together rather than big blocks of one type of housing (and thus one type of resident) only. A care home for the elderly and sheltered housing. Perhaps a hotspot/open office workspace that local people could choose to use instead of working from home or going in to work. A local outpost of the library. A GP surgery. A post office. A pharmacy. Units available for use as shops. Bus connections to Cambridge.

I'm not convinced by the proposal to move the water treatment facility.

More housing. A large park with garden section, open space, children's play area, picnic area and sufficient space for walking and running.

I'm not familiar with Cambourne.

Why not re-establish rail stations in Cherry Hinton, and extend railway connections to Teversham and Fulbourn?

Why not increase public transport connections so that more than two or three villages can be said to have good links?

Strongly disagree

I think that there needs to be consideration for where ordinary people of Cambridge can get jobs to replace the type that will disappear when Marshalls leave. NO good building houses for 1,000s of people to move to the city, but leaving behind its current residents.

I think the housing density being suggested for this development is way beyond what can be built there while still maintaining a good quality of life. Trying to squeeze in all of this development will turn Cambridge from a lovely place to live, with lots of green space, to an overly-metropolitan area; ruining the very essence of what the city is all about.

At present the development feels soulless and barren. Cultural and social spaces should be developed to help counteract this.

Towns should have a mixture of employment opportunities within them, there should be more consideration given to industrial and commercial space.

I think that there should be a small amount of development in more villages, rather than concentrating it in a few places.

Ask all parish councils to take on a very small amount of development, rather than focusing all the development in cambrisde itself.

You are trying to force too much development in Cambridge.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

Not worried about the jobs, facilities. More worried about Cambridge changing to an unrecognisable city with no infrastructure to support it.

Dense city district, just the words say it all. Have the council not learnt from crowded high rise apartments previously built in the 60s and 70s? Repeating this error is a travesty. The more open spaces the better, cycling links and good affordable public transport.

Housing should have criteria to avoid segregation.

Tell me that this rail line will not be used by diesel?

Why provide open spaces if train system is diesel? We need cleaner air.

I think the development suggested is doing enough damage to Cambridge city, there is already too little infrastructure, not enough reasonable priced public transport. It is going to ruin the City as we know it.

Lots of parks, leisure areas, cheap transport, electric busses, homes for essential workers, better funding to eco proof older properties. Cheaper parking, accessible sports facilities. Colleges should free up land to sell for building on, so much of their land is unused and central.

I’m very concerned about the tripling in size of this development. In combination with plans to reduce vehicle access from eastern Cambridge to the city, via closures to cars of Mill Road, Coldhams Lane And reducing access via Newmarket road, where will traffic go? I’d like to see detailed and new public transport proposals. Maybe a light railway like DLR in London. Otherwise even if 80% travel by bike or public transport it’s a disaster!

More and affordable housing here, close to jobs.

none there. it's actually really quaint there. do not build there.

there are currently NO villages with good public transport connections. making public transport Frequent, Reliable and Affordable should be your absolute priority. otherwise people will simply not use it. (I live in a village that officially has two bus links - the citi bus and the guided busway. in reality both are useless so we drive... please please please focus on making public transport Frequent, Reliable and Affordable!!! if there is no bus when we need it and if it costs a fortune to use that bus then we won't use them! if you are confused about why, please run another survey and you'll know.)

people need local shops and caffes, doctors and childcare, gyms and parks AT WALKING DISTANCE. and actually frequent, reliable and affordble public transport links.

it must be a area with frequent, reliable and affordable public transport network through it. people do need to get around easily and quickly without having to use their cars. if you don't focus on transport you will have a nightmare of traffic jams non stop.
buses and trains need to run when people need them. non stop at rush hours (7-10am and 5-7pm) but also frequent enough in late evenings (getting back home after theatres or concerts or pub visits), Sunday evenings (getting back after family day out) etc. the transport links really really need to be frequent - no one is going to wait over 10-15 minutes! and well connected to each other. they need to be affordable - currently it is cheaper to drive a group of 4 to Cambridge than taking the bus! and reliable. No cancellations and delays, they put anyone off using public transport form the first time they have been let down! you'll never improve peoples lives if you don't improve their ability to get around without a car.

In addition to any new housing, there must be lots of public open space -- not just the bare minimum to provide for the new residents of Cambridge East, but enough that the development as a whole provides a benefit to the existing residents of Cambridge.

In addition to any new housing, there must be lots of public open space -- not just the bare minimum to provide for the new residents of Cambridge East, but enough that the development as a whole provides a benefit to the existing residents of Cambridge.

None. There has been enough development in this are of the green belt already.

Sawston is the most promising location.

Rather than continuing to build park-and-rides, which tarmac over large areas of the countryside and yet continue to promote car use, we should be developing a network of travel hubs in the towns and villages surrounding Cambridge to allow practical, fast car-free travel into Cambridge.

Strongly disagree

Good public transport in to the town centre. A GP and dentistry.

Some of the larger villages with good public transport (ideally train).

Public transport and GP is key where development is planned.

The current plan focusing on development in larger villages and towns is sensible.

Mixture of all the above, but everything carbon net zero

Mixture of all the above, but everything carbon net zero. Green spaces very important. There should be housing suitable for wheelchair users, including dwellings big enough and properly adapted for families with a full-time wheelchair user.

Carbon net-zero housing, leisure and retail facilities. Health-related jobs only. Green spaces very important. There should be housing suitable for wheelchair users, including dwellings big enough and properly adapted for families with a full-time wheelchair user.

Mixture of all the above, but everything carbon net zero. Green spaces very important. There should be housing suitable for wheelchair users, including dwellings big enough and properly adapted for families with a full-time wheelchair user.

There is most danger here of people simply commuting into London, rather than the homes being used by people with jobs local to Cambridge. If anything is built, there should be housing suitable for wheelchair users, including dwellings big enough and properly adapted for families with a full-time wheelchair user. An all carbon net-zero.

If there is little or no public transport to the places people want to go, then there should be little or no development in any village. If public transport is good, then ideally what is built should be on brownfield sites only. Everything should be carbon net-zero, and include houses of all sizes suitable for full-time wheelchair users.

Any houses built should be suitable for the type of employees of any jobs created. Brownfield sites should always be used in preference to greenfield, and all development carbon net-zero. Any residential development of more than a couple of houses should include housing suitable for a full-time wheelchair user.

Carbon net-zero, with a public transport system that absolutely everyone can use easily and without conflict. A transport system where a wheelchair users or other disabled person can be left behind because of limited adapted space should become a thing of the past. Not being allowed on the "last bus" of the day can be catastrophic.

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

A road that means traffic on already congested routes is not forced into complete gridlock

Again with more development a route for cars is needed. Sustainable transport must be 24 hours but traffic will increase and it is already very congested in the roads around the hospital

The hospital capacity has not significantly increased especially in the emergency care to account for the population explosion of the last decade. Wait times are excessive. What will be done to address this?

Why? These villages have space and the roads are not overloaded. All the villages should be open for consideration

The city itself is excessively burdened with housing and with a noose around it in terms of access roads. People should have access to sustainable transport but road traffic (commercial and personal ) is unavoidable

The healthcare needs of residents are being massively impacted by the increase in residents in and around cambridge to the point that good quality healthcare is becoming difficult to maintain

Strongly disagree

The roads are already choca blocked so try to create jobs onsite and shops etc + encourage cycling / public transport, access to nature is key and high quality shared open public spaces. Use of Brown field sites to save and preserve nature + plant far more trees and re-wild as many areas as possible. Cut all roadside verges to promote wildflowers County wide. Passive House standard for all new build projects. Encourage Community renewable energy projects, with any profits used for local good causes or to invest in more renewables

Agreed to limit village development, as they do not have to jobs or infrastructure close by forcing people to commute. The public transport is often poor which needs addressing

More open spaces for nature. Encourage Community renewable energy projects

Better than Carbon neutral restoring nature, drawing down Carbon and with a vibrant blooming natural environment. Embracing Doughnut economic ideas and principles

Strongly disagree

This site should not be used for housing due to the already number of houses in this area and the Marleigh site and Land North of Cherry Hinton will increase traffic substantially witout having alternatives.
The airport and associated enginering is the largest maunfacturer in Cambridge not only providing jobs at Marshalls but those firms who trade with them locally.
With the advent of electric vertical take off planes this will be essential for travel in the future.
Oxford is proud of its airport why not us.
If Marshalls did move then the area should become a wooded area like Wandlebury thus enabling local residents not to have to travel to Wandlebury, Wimpole, Angelsey Abbey for there recreation.
The developments at Marleigh and Land North of Cherry Hinton will see an increase in population of at least 10,000 folks and green fingers in developments are not good enough.
Part of Marshalls was in the Green Belt and taken out for them to expand so yet again if moving that land should return to greenbelt.

None of these developments include leisure facilities ie cinema, swimming pools, youth group, so residents will have to travel into Cambridge so essential we provide these much needed facilities.
Will these developments have doctors surgeries ? dentists ? pharmacies are as above locals will have to travel to already oversubscribed medical facilities.
We do not want affordable housing but housing that local folks can afford.

As will happen as we have seen in the past locals will not be able to live in Cambridge so migrate out for cheaper housing thus having to commute back into Cambridge we need to builsd on all the villages thus ensuring they will have local shops, pubs, bus service.
we can not keep squeezing into already congested cambridge, the villages have to be part of the future.

As above all vilages should be included why discriminate that is not democratic.

When looking at Growth we should be opening the Fens and looking at places like March, Littleport, Chatteris, Wisbech that are crying out for investment we talk about levelling up yet we continue to drag folks into Cambridge as no opportunities being provided elsewhere.

Look at replies on Question 8

Not fall into what has happened with the last Local Plan, development that is built without infrastructure.

We must ensure the infrastructure is right and put in place first before any developments are allowed to be built.
Can we honestly say the last local plan is improving Cambridge ?

Strongly disagree

All developments need to have character unlike the recent developments, such as those near Adenbrookes.

Strongly disagree

I don’t think it can be developed. There is a lack of public transport and the roads simply are not designed for that level of traffic. The Foxton station level crossing already causes high volume of traffic this would be worsened with large local neighbour goods being built.

We need wild green spaces - not just planters on the street or a patch of grass, but mature trees, bushes, ponds.
Also, shops. There is a huge difference between new build areas which are purely residential and those that also have shops/takeaways/cafes/bakeries. Areas with shops feel like home, areas without shops feel sterile and soulless

Cycle lanes so people can access the science park easily, ideally separated from the road and with space for bikes to overtake.
Please make sure the houses all have easy access to the river (I.e. they can walk directly down rather than having to meander back and forth around houses). It makes such a huge difference to the feeling of a neighbourhood when you have easy access to green space.
For green spaces away from the river, they need to be wild - mature trees, bushes, ponds, rather than just a patch of grass with a climbing frame.
To avoid the area feeling like a sterile suburb, it's important to have shops - ideally a local shop/post office, takeaways, cafes, bakery, pub.

Cycle lanes so people can access the science park easily, ideally separated from the road and with space for bikes to overtake.
Please make sure the houses all have easy access to the river (I.e. they can walk directly down rather than having to meander back and forth around houses). It makes such a huge difference to the feeling of a neighbourhood when you have easy access to green space.
For green spaces away from the river, they need to be wild - mature trees, bushes, ponds, rather than just a patch of grass with a climbing frame.
To avoid the area feeling like a sterile suburb, it's important to have shops - ideally a local shop/post office, takeaways, cafes, bakery, pub.

This is exactly the right approach. Rather than growing each village by a little bit, some villages should be selected as hubs for more houses, a more regular bus service, more shops/pubs etc.

Jobs not so important. It is vital to have a pub and village shop/post office though.

To avoid people having to use cars, there needs to be a direct route to 'useful' shops (e.g. Tesco superstore, B&Q, garden centre) not just to the city centre. However I'm still not sure how I can get their shopping home without a car - the ideal would be to encourage shops on the cambridge industrial estate to offer a shipping service.

It would be good to have more public transport connection to tourist sites outside Cambridge, not just villages. For example, Wimpole Hall, Wandlebury, Hayley Wood. I currently drive to all of these.

Strongly disagree

It is wrong to concentrate all the world-class biomedical development in the space. There are many areas around the city which can participate. The area around Addenbrooke's cannot and should not support more housing than is already planned. Existing communities need to be supported to digest the development that has already been added. The area is at breaking point (where are the extra supermarkets? GP surgeries? Dentists?) NO INTRUSION ON GREENBELT.

East West Rail should be cancelled and rail investment should instead be used up North to "level up" rather than spending money to make this already prosperous area even more prosperous.

EWR absolutely should not be used to justify additional housing in South Cambs. Not in Cambourne or anywhere else.

Barring cancellation, it should go north of Cambridge on a route that is suitable for freight and that can serve the existing planned growth in Northstowe.

Absolutely NO additional development in this area over and above what has currently been approved. No intrusion on the green belt whatsoever.

The only new facilities and open spaces should be in support of existing development. No new housing or business space should be added. There is enough in the plan already.

There isn't enough water to support existing plans, let alone additing more.

Greater Cambridge in 2041 should be a better version of what we have today, not a bigger version. Leave the green belt alone. Add amenities for existing settlements. No transport through villages that doesn't serve villages.

We need Health care and community services to match development of new housing and local jobs so we are not just creating large housing estates

Focus on development which is mixed and inc health/ education/leisure and open spaces as well as shops/offices so creates community

As per answers above

We must ensure the town is self sufficient in terms of community services if we are to avoid excessive travel to get to schools/ offices / shops and health care rtc

Varied development as detailed above

Where we can develop on brownfield sites or infill areas so we donor change the character of the places

Schools/dentists/doctors are essential and small business parks to encourage local jobs

Strongly disagree

The proposal for building in Great Shelford is a terrible idea. This green belt land is important for maintaining separation between Stapleford and Shelford, and also to mitigate the proposed bus way which will be directly opposite. The access is poor and the increased traffic will make queuing at the railway crossing worse. I don’t know anyone who will use the railway to commute to Addenbrooke’s as suggested. The village schools are also under pressure and this will make things even worse.

I don’t think this development will promote the goals of sustainable travel, it will damage the villages and is only likely to benefit the developers.

There are too many homes planned, and too close to Cambridge. Housing should be planned outside of the green belt.