+
+
+ Summary
+The responses to the South Cambridgeshire Council’s proposed development plan reflect a complex and multifaceted sentiment among residents. While there is notable support for the development of a vibrant city district east of Milton Road and the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, significant opposition exists regarding the potential impacts on local infrastructure, green spaces, and the character of existing villages. Many respondents emphasize the need for sustainable practices, affordable housing, and improved public transport to accommodate growth without compromising the quality of life for current residents. Concerns about overdevelopment, particularly in rural areas and the southern cluster of villages, are prevalent, with calls for preserving the green belt and ensuring that any new developments are accompanied by adequate infrastructure and community facilities. The overarching theme is a desire for balanced development that prioritizes environmental sustainability, community well-being, and the preservation of local identity.
+OPPOSE: 59.14% (110) | SUPPORT: 34.41% (64) | NEUTRAL: 6.45% (12)
+Aim Breakdown
+The aim breakdown identifies which aims are mentioned within each response. A single response may discuss multiple topics.
+| Aim | +Percentage | +Count | +
|---|---|---|
| Homes | +19.23% | +125 | +
| Infrastructure | +19.23% | +125 | +
| Wellbeing and social inclusion | +15.85% | +103 | +
| Great places | +15.23% | +99 | +
| Biodiversity and green spaces | +12.92% | +84 | +
| Place | +Count | +Mean Sentiment | +
|---|---|---|
| Cambourne | +113 | +4.61062 | +
| Cambridge Biomedical Campus | +109 | +5.68807 | +
| Milton Road | +71 | +4.80282 | +
| Cambridge | +41 | +3.65854 | +
| Greater Cambridge | +35 | +5.25714 | +
Key points raised in support
+Homes
+-
+
- Support for the development of affordable housing around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus to accommodate healthcare workers. +
- Advocacy for a mix of housing types in the proposed city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for community-focused living spaces. +
Jobs
+-
+
- Emphasis on creating job opportunities within the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and surrounding areas to support local employment. +
- Support for the development of business parks and local shops to enhance economic activity in Cambourne and other areas. +
Infrastructure
+-
+
- Support for improved public transport connections, including a tramway-style link to Cambridge city centre, to facilitate access to jobs and amenities. +
- Advocacy for the development of community facilities, such as schools, healthcare services, and recreational spaces, to support new housing developments. +
Biodiversity and green spaces
+-
+
- Support for the inclusion of ample green spaces and parks in new developments to promote community well-being and environmental sustainability. +
- Emphasis on the need for wildlife conservation and the creation of green corridors in urban planning. +
Key points raised in opposition
+Infrastructure
+-
+
- Strong opposition to further development in areas like Cambourne and the southern rural cluster due to existing traffic congestion and inadequate public transport. +
- Concerns that new developments will exacerbate current infrastructure issues, particularly regarding healthcare and education facilities. +
Homes
+-
+
- Opposition to the proposed housing developments, arguing that there is no need for additional homes given the existing supply and the impact on local resources. +
- Criticism of the focus on high-density housing, which is seen as detrimental to the quality of life and character of the area. +
Biodiversity and green spaces
+-
+
- Strong opposition to any development that encroaches on green belt land, emphasizing the importance of preserving open spaces and natural habitats. +
- Concerns that the relocation of the wastewater treatment plant and other developments will lead to the loss of valuable green spaces. +
Climate change
+-
+
- Opposition to developments that do not adequately address environmental sustainability, with calls for carbon-neutral housing and infrastructure. +
- Emphasis on the need for improved water management and the preservation of natural resources before any new developments are approved. +
Summaries
+TODO
+The response expresses a mixed stance on the SCDC Local Plan, supporting the Green spaces policies but opposing the housing site off New Rd and the decision not to include certain housing site options. It argues that the proposed development does not meet local needs and suggests there are better alternatives.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response supports the inclusion of public bridleways in the Green Infrastructure policy, emphasizing their value for leisure and community enjoyment. It suggests that well-designed bridleways can benefit all users (walkers, riders, cyclists) and reduce traffic flow, creating a positive impact for the community. Additionally, it advocates for the inclusion of bridleways in the Longstanton policy, highlighting the importance of conservation areas and green separation.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed developments at Bourn Airfield and West Cambourne, citing concerns over disproportionate housing growth, traffic congestion, and environmental impacts. It argues that the area cannot support the additional homes and that the burden of development should be more evenly distributed across South Cambridgeshire. Additionally, it supports the rejection of the North Cambourne development due to its impact on agricultural land, landscape, drainage issues, and traffic problems.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response includes attached representations regarding the planning application proposed by South Cambridgeshire Council.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed housing developments H/1:b and H/1:c by South Cambridgeshire Council, citing inadequate local infrastructure, conflicts with national policy regarding greenbelt land, and potential negative impacts on local traffic and community vitality. The respondent supports development on brownfield sites but believes the proposed developments would strain existing resources.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the policy H9 on affordable housing proposed by South Cambridgeshire Council, which mandates that developments increasing the number of homes by three or more must include 40% affordable housing. However, it expresses concern that the policy may not be effective in practice within a group village context.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response supports increased housing development in villages, particularly Fen Ditton, arguing for its designation as a Minor Rural Centre to allow for up to 30 dwellings while enhancing green belt and open space. It highlights the village’s proximity to Cambridge and the potential for sustainable growth without harming the green belt.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the inclusion of Lupin and Merton fields as local green spaces, suggesting that a section of Merton field could be developed into a fenced play area for children. The respondent emphasizes the importance of maintaining these green spaces amidst new housing developments, proposing that Lupin field could be managed as a wildlife area.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The site meets the criteria for Local Green Space designation, supported by SCDC and the Parish Council. It is an integral green area in the village, surrounded by significant features and listed buildings. Development would harm the village’s character and remove a valuable amenity.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response from RES UK and Ireland Limited, represented by Barton Willmore, critiques the South Cambridgeshire Proposed Submission Local Plan, particularly its approach to renewable and low carbon energy. RES emphasizes the need for a positive planning policy framework to support renewable energy development, arguing that the current objectives do not adequately promote such initiatives. They propose amendments to the Local Plan to better align with national policy on sustainable development and climate change. While they support certain policies related to climate change mitigation, they express concerns about the decommissioning requirements for renewable energy projects, suggesting that decisions on this should be made closer to the end of a project’s life.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+RES strongly opposes the proposed minimum separation distance of 2km between wind turbines and dwellings in Policy CC/2, arguing it is overly restrictive and contrary to national policy aimed at promoting renewable energy. They assert that such a distance is unnecessary and would hinder the development of onshore wind energy. RES supports Policy CC/3, which encourages the use of on-site renewable energy technologies in new developments, and suggests rewording objectives to better reflect the importance of renewable energy in addressing climate change. They also find the requirement for decommissioning details at the planning stage to be excessive.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response argues that the proposed policy is unsound because it imposes inflexible rules on separation distances, which contradicts the Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy. It claims the policy is not positively planned, justified, or consistent with national planning policy.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development due to concerns about insufficient infrastructure to support the increased population, including traffic, schools, and healthcare facilities. There is also a belief that the development is unnecessary for the area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response from Sue Rogers, representing the Swavesey & District Bridleways Association, expresses concern that the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan draft neglects the needs of horseriders and other Non-Motorised Users (NMUs). The letter advocates for the inclusion of equestrian access in the Local Plan, highlighting the benefits of improved facilities for NMUs, such as reduced road traffic, economic development, and enhanced community wellbeing. The response opposes specific policies in the draft that do not align with national planning guidelines and calls for a commitment to secure countryside access for all NMU groups. Rogers emphasizes the success of the guided busway bridleway as a model for future developments and urges revisions to the Local Plan to better accommodate equestrian needs.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the redevelopment of the waste water treatment plant unless it is relocated to a greenfield site. It also opposes any development that would encroach on the green belt, including around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and in the southern rural cluster of villages. The response advocates for no new development in villages without improved public transport and suggests that Greater Cambridge should aim to be a densified, vehicle-free city without sprawl into the green belt.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses apprehension about the proposed dense city district in North East Cambridge, emphasizing concerns over city over-expansion. It advocates for careful development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, suggesting limits on growth. The response calls for local input from Cambourne residents regarding development linked to the East-West Rail, while questioning the necessity of additional jobs. It raises concerns about saturation in the southern rural cluster and questions the rationale for limiting development in villages. The respondent supports jobs and open spaces in villages but is against housing. They oppose any new housing or business development in Trumpington and stress the need for radical action to reduce motor traffic and prioritize climate change in future planning.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for facilities that support a circular economy, such as allotments, recycling centers, and sports facilities. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more healthcare and research facilities but opposes additional housing. The response calls for safe cycling routes to Cambridge and limited development in villages, with a focus on car-free initiatives and improved green spaces. It suggests potential development sites and envisions a car-free Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for community spaces, green spaces, and affordable housing across various proposed developments in Greater Cambridge, including areas east of Milton Road, around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. It also advocates for active transport routes and low emission zones for a sustainable future by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district in North East Cambridge after relocating the waste water treatment plant, emphasizing the need for housing, jobs, and open spaces. It supports the East-West Rail project in Cambourne, suggesting central placement to enhance accessibility and boost the local economy, while also calling for improved services like healthcare and education. The response favors limited development in rural areas, prioritizing open spaces and natural habitats, and stresses the importance of maintaining clear borders between villages. Overall, it envisions Greater Cambridge in 2041 as a green space-rich area with low-rise buildings and community gardens.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of community facilities in various areas, emphasizing the need for shared recreational spaces, biodiversity initiatives, healthcare facilities, and support for local businesses. It suggests creating inclusive environments for all ages, with specific amenities like playgrounds, gardens, and workshops. The response is consistent across different areas, highlighting a strong focus on community well-being and sustainability.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for diverse community facilities, including recreational spaces, gardens, and support for local businesses. It advocates for the retention and strengthening of existing local policies regarding land use and development boundaries. The respondent does not suggest any additional sites for housing or business development.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses a desire for the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road, including schools, healthcare facilities, and green spaces. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional healthcare and research facilities, and suggests similar developments around Cambourne and the southern rural cluster. However, the respondent shows disinterest in further questions and specifically opposes development in Milton village.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 4
+TODO
+The response advocates for limited development in villages, suggesting that new development should only occur in villages that already have local services, particularly access to healthcare.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response supports the development of various areas in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for high-density housing with efficient transport links, particularly for cycling and public transport. It advocates for the development of independent businesses, healthcare facilities, and good transport infrastructure to reduce car dependency. The response also suggests looking to the Netherlands as a model for future development.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to further development in the Greater Cambridge area, advocating for the preservation of open spaces and the green belt. It supports the idea of developing a lively city district east of Milton Road only if adequate parking is provided, but opposes additional development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, suggesting it is already over-developed. The response also calls for the scrapping of the East-West Rail project unless it is electric, and firmly states that no new housing or business development should occur in villages, emphasizing the need to protect green spaces. Additionally, it criticizes the unelected Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) and desires to maintain the current state of Greater Cambridge without its influence.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed developments in North East Cambridge, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster, advocating instead for re-wilding, preservation of rural land, and increased green spaces. It emphasizes the need for open spaces and nature over urban development, and suggests revitalizing existing urban areas rather than expanding into rural ones. The respondent expresses concern about climate change and the loss of biodiversity, calling for more trees and public footpaths in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of various areas in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for more housing, improved cycling infrastructure, and green spaces. It advocates for prioritizing homes over jobs in the Cambridge Biomedical Campus area, suggests significant housing development in Cambourne, and encourages limited but strategic development in villages with good transport links. The response criticizes the current use of land in areas like the Beehive Centre for car-centric shopping and calls for high environmental standards and reduced car dependency by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes any further development in Cambridge and its surrounding areas, citing concerns about the already constrained infrastructure and the negative impact of population growth. The respondent believes that no additional housing, jobs, facilities, or open spaces should be created in the proposed areas, including the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and rural villages.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for green, natural parks with trees and lakes in various proposed developments around Cambridge, including the area east of Milton Road, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. It expresses a strong preference for limited development in villages and advocates for an increase in green spaces by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of socially inclusive housing and local employment opportunities in various areas, including North East Cambridge, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and Cambourne. It emphasizes the importance of accommodating tradespeople and creating vibrant communities rather than focusing solely on office-based jobs. The response also calls for the development of surrounding villages to maintain their ecosystems and prevent them from becoming exclusive to wealthier residents. Additionally, it raises concerns about future electrical power generation and resilience against potential threats.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of affordable housing and essential facilities in various areas of Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for sustainability features like solar panels and EV charging stations. It highlights the importance of good public transport links, local amenities, and recreational spaces. The response expresses concern about the current capacity of local services in expanded villages and calls for improved connectivity for rural areas to urban centers.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to the development of a dense city district east of Milton Road, citing a preference for outdoor garden spaces post-pandemic. It advocates for local job creation around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and suggests Waterbeach as a village suitable for limited development, emphasizing the need for better shopping facilities. The respondent is uncertain about the current state of Cambourne and the southern rural cluster, indicating a lack of information to provide input.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the area east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge into a vibrant city district, emphasizing the need for parks and open spaces after the relocation of the waste water treatment plant.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses skepticism about the proposed developments in North East Cambridge, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and surrounding villages. It emphasizes the need for affordable housing, proper public transport, and community-focused planning. The respondent criticizes the East-West Rail project and suggests that development should prioritize local needs and sustainable transport solutions, rather than catering to external speculators or commuters. Overall, the response advocates for careful consideration of community impacts and infrastructure before proceeding with development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 4
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to development in various areas until certain conditions are met, such as ensuring adequate water management and public transport. It emphasizes the need to preserve the character of rural villages and prioritize green spaces over new housing or facilities. The respondent is generally against dense urban development and seeks to maintain the attractiveness of existing areas.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for affordable and social housing in the proposed developments, particularly in the area east of Milton Road and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. The respondent expresses concerns about the impact of development on existing residents’ quality of life, including issues related to congestion, clean drinking water supply, and infrastructure. They are uncertain about specific developments in Cambourne and villages, and do not suggest any additional sites for development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response advocates for more open space in the proposed development area east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge. It emphasizes the need for improved transport infrastructure, including bike parking, safe pedestrian routes, and reliable public transport services, as well as electric car charging facilities.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to housing developments in various areas, emphasizing the need to preserve green spaces and agricultural land. It supports the development of healthcare facilities and businesses but opposes additional housing at the Cambridge Biomedical Campus due to overcrowding. The response advocates for limited housing in villages and suggests focusing developments in Cambridge to promote sustainable transport options. Overall, there is a desire to maintain farmland and natural open spaces in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed development plans by South Cambridgeshire Council, arguing that relocating the waste water treatment plant is unnecessary and financially unfeasible. It criticizes the potential destruction of green belt and agricultural land, labeling the plans as harmful to the local community and conservation areas. The response also dismisses the need for additional development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, expresses skepticism about the affordability of rail travel, and calls for limited development in villages, emphasizing the importance of listening to local populations. Overall, it warns against transforming the area into a metropolis, suggesting that such growth is shortsighted and detrimental to community cohesion and democratic engagement.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed developments in North East Cambridge, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and Cambourne, citing concerns about density, the need for biomedical-only use, and the strain on existing infrastructure. It emphasizes the importance of sustainable housing, necessary facilities before new housing, and preserving green spaces.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response opposes new development in Melbourn, citing recent housing growth that has outpaced local infrastructure, particularly in healthcare and education. The respondent believes the village should remain unchanged as it has already contributed to housing needs.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses support for developing the area east of Milton Road and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, emphasizing the need for housing, jobs, and facilities. However, it questions the notion of Cambourne growing into a proper town, advocating for more retail and restaurant options without major developments north of the A428. The response agrees with limited development in villages, suggesting specific locations, and stresses the importance of maintaining village character. It also emphasizes prioritizing brownfield development over greenfield sites for housing.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with a focus on healthcare facilities, housing, and open spaces. It advocates for the growth of Cambourne into a proper town with healthcare jobs and facilities. The response suggests that the southern rural cluster, particularly Shelford and Stapleford, should have mixed/lower-cost housing and recreational facilities. It also emphasizes limited development in villages, recommending Shelford, Stapleford (east), and Duxford for new development. Additionally, it highlights the importance of maintaining the distinction between city and villages, improving planning for electric vehicles, and addressing public transport challenges in small villages.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of social housing accessible to all, including those without local connections. It suggests more one-bedroom housing for singles near the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and emphasizes the need for additional housing and small businesses in Cambourne. The response supports development in Cottenham and Willingham, highlighting the importance of good transport links and local services. It calls for fewer restrictions on who can move into villages, arguing for more inclusivity and the expansion of local amenities and businesses.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of Cambourne into a proper town with amenities such as a swimming pool, adventure playground, and more retail options. It suggests limited development in villages, specifically naming Gamlingay and Bourn as suitable locations due to their existing services. Barton is identified as a potential site for housing or business use. Additionally, the response emphasizes the need for affordable parking, out-of-town shopping areas, and the creation of country parks to enhance the countryside experience by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response highlights the lack of essential facilities and infrastructure in Cambourne, such as a high street, swimming pool, and adequate public transport. It emphasizes the need for more jobs and entertainment venues to reduce reliance on travel to Cambridge. The respondent advocates for improved infrastructure before further development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for development in North East Cambridge and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, advocating for schools, healthcare facilities, shops, and off-road cycle links. However, it strongly opposes large-scale development in Cambourne and the southern rural cluster, arguing that it would harm green spaces and rural communities. The response supports small-scale development on brownfield sites but rejects any development on green land, highlighting the importance of preserving the countryside and rural villages for mental and physical health.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more healthcare facilities, research, and housing. It emphasizes the need for affordable housing and jobs in Cambourne to retain graduates, improved connectivity and amenities in the southern rural cluster, and careful development in villages to avoid impacting local services. Suggestions include developing a site in Meldreth for housing and a new pedestrian route, and creating a new village at Heydon Golf Course. The overall vision for Greater Cambridge by 2041 includes making it more affordable for young people and providing more family-friendly activities.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district with year-round outdoor entertainment for families and young people, as well as sports facilities to promote health and fitness around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It emphasizes the need for environmentally sustainable transport and housing in Greater Cambridge by 2041, criticizing the current situation.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for development in specific areas while maintaining the rural character of Greater Cambridge. It advocates for the inclusion of essential facilities such as schools, healthcare, and leisure spaces in urban developments, particularly around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Cambourne. However, it opposes development in the southern rural cluster and stresses the importance of using brownfield sites over green spaces. The response calls for improved transport links and infrastructure, while expressing a desire to preserve the rural identity of the region.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for more schools and GPs in the southern rural cluster of villages near the rail line and business parks south of Cambridge, suggesting that limited development in this area should focus on these facilities.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, advocating for a mixture of housing, jobs, facilities, and open spaces. However, it opposes development in the southern rural cluster of villages and suggests limited development in villages, emphasizing the need to address traffic issues in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to further development in the congested area east of Milton Road, while advocating for improved public transport, local shops, and diverse housing around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It suggests more shops and a cottage hospital in Cambourne, housing along the Cambridge-Royston railway, and development in specific villages with good transport links. The response emphasizes the need for improved services in these areas and calls for more housing in the southwest with good transport access. It envisions Greater Cambridge as a leading center of technical excellence by 2041.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response supports the development of various areas in North East Cambridge, around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and certain villages, emphasizing the need for diverse local shops, affordable housing, and facilities that cater to the community’s needs. It advocates for the inclusion of faith centres, healthcare facilities, and improved public transport connections, while also suggesting potential development sites along the A1307.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for more parks and safe play areas in and around the villages.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Works, arguing that it is unnecessary and that the North East Cambridge proposal should not depend on this relocation.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes any further housing development in Cambourne, citing existing issues such as resource shortages and increased traffic. It argues that Cambourne has already evolved beyond its original concept of three connected villages with some town attributes, and is now functioning as a town.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response supports high-density housing development in various areas of Greater Cambridge, including the east of Milton Road, around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster. It emphasizes the need for housing to alleviate the current housing shortage, reduce commuting, and enhance sustainability. The response advocates for limited development in villages with good transport links and suggests specific sites for housing and business use, such as the Beehive and Newmarket Rd retail parks. Overall, the vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041 is a dynamic and prosperous area focused on active travel.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed developments in Greater Cambridge, expressing concerns about urban sprawl, pollution, and overdevelopment. It advocates for green spaces, better cycling paths, and public transport, while rejecting further expansion of Cambourne and the southern rural cluster. The respondent believes that existing housing plans exceed needs and expresses a desire to move away from the area due to these developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response supports the development of Cambourne into a proper town with the East-West Rail, emphasizing the need for solar panels and centralized water storage in new housing. However, it strongly opposes further development in the southern rural cluster and villages, advocating for minimal housing and facilities to preserve village life and individuality. The respondent expresses concern about the impact of development on the older generation’s enjoyment of Cambridge and the surrounding areas.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses a desire for the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road, including healthcare facilities and parks around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. However, it opposes further housing development in Cambourne and any new development in villages, advocating for the preservation of open spaces. The respondent also criticizes the planning process for lacking transparency.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response supports the development of various facilities and housing in North East Cambridge, around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and southern rural clusters, emphasizing the need for doctors, schools, retail, and affordable housing. It highlights the lack of medical services and amenities in Cambourne due to ongoing developments and suggests that any new development in villages should be limited to those with existing good local amenities. The response also calls for less emphasis on large luxury homes in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with a focus on affordable housing for essential workers. It advocates for limited development in the southern rural cluster of villages, emphasizing the need for a large development in the South to balance the overdevelopment in the North and to improve transport links. The response suggests that villages along main railway lines and the East-West rail link should be prioritized for development. It also highlights the necessity of accommodating car use until public transport becomes more reliable and affordable.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge, advocating for a mix of housing types, job opportunities, schools, and recreational open spaces. It also endorses the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional healthcare facilities and housing, while emphasizing the need for recreational spaces. For Cambourne, the response suggests improvements to mitigate bleakness, and expresses skepticism about new developments in villages, indicating potential resistance from residents.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for a major cultural venue, artists’ studios, and large outdoor spaces for sports and fitness. It supports the growth of Cambourne with leisure facilities and green spaces, while opposing the transformation of border villages into suburbs, suggesting instead to expand standalone villages with good transport links and local employment opportunities. The response also highlights the importance of facilitating local recruitment for businesses.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus by advocating for more affordable housing in proximity to job opportunities.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed developments in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for more open spaces, affordable public transport, and cleaner air. It criticizes the idea of dense city districts and high-rise apartments, citing past mistakes. The respondent advocates for better infrastructure, parks, and facilities for essential workers, while opposing any new development in villages. Overall, the response calls for a focus on sustainability and community well-being.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for ample public open space in the development east of Milton Road, while opposing further development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus due to existing green belt concerns. It suggests Sawston as a suitable location for limited village development and advocates for a network of travel hubs to promote car-free travel into Cambridge instead of more park-and-ride facilities.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses skepticism about relocating the wastewater treatment facility and emphasizes the need for more housing and green spaces around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It suggests re-establishing rail stations in Cherry Hinton and extending connections to nearby villages, while advocating for improved public transport to benefit more villages.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response to the planning application expresses no opinion on various proposed developments in the Greater Cambridge area, including the development of a city district east of Milton Road, expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, growth of Cambourne, limited development in southern rural villages, and potential new sites for housing or business. Additionally, there are no suggestions for what Greater Cambridge should be like in 2041.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response expresses uncertainty regarding specific developments in various areas, including the East of Milton Road, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster. It suggests limited development in villages, focusing on larger villages with good public transport. The importance of public transport and healthcare facilities is emphasized, and the current plan for development in larger villages and towns is deemed sensible.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes development in the southern rural cluster of villages, emphasizing the need for preserving the quaint character of the area. It criticizes the current lack of effective public transport and insists that improving public transport should be the priority before considering any development. The respondent advocates for local amenities within walking distance and a reliable, affordable public transport system to reduce car dependency and traffic congestion. They stress the importance of frequent transport services, especially during peak hours and evenings, to enhance accessibility and quality of life.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but raises concerns about the need for improved transport infrastructure and healthcare capacity to accommodate the growing population. It suggests that all villages should be open for development consideration due to available space and manageable road conditions. The response emphasizes the strain on healthcare services due to population growth and the necessity for sustainable transport solutions.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for all developments in Greater Cambridge to be carbon net-zero, with a strong focus on creating green spaces and ensuring housing is suitable for wheelchair users. It advocates for a mix of housing, jobs, and facilities in various areas, including the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Cambourne, while expressing concerns about potential commuting issues in rural areas. The response also stresses the importance of public transport accessibility for all, particularly for disabled individuals.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for essential leisure and medical facilities in new developments, expressing concern that residents will have to travel to Cambridge for these services. It advocates for affordable housing that local residents can afford and suggests that all villages should be included in development plans to prevent overcrowding in Cambridge. The response calls for investment in areas outside Cambridge, such as the Fens, and stresses the importance of ensuring infrastructure is in place before any new developments occur. Overall, it critiques past planning efforts for lacking adequate infrastructure.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road after relocating the wastewater treatment plant, and encourages the growth of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more healthcare facilities and housing. It advocates for Cambourne’s development into a proper town due to East-West Rail, while suggesting limited development in villages with poor public transport and infrastructure. The response emphasizes the need for more open spaces, community renewable energy projects, and a vision for Greater Cambridge to be carbon neutral with a vibrant natural environment by 2041, embracing Doughnut economic principles.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes new development in villages, suggesting that only a few sites with good transport and services should be considered. It emphasizes the need for developments to have character, criticizing recent projects for lacking this quality.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 4
+TODO
+The response advocates for mixed-use development in North East Cambridge, emphasizing the need for housing, healthcare, education, leisure, and open spaces to foster community. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional healthcare and housing. Cambourne should develop self-sufficient community services to minimize travel. Limited development in villages should focus on brownfield sites or infill to maintain character, with essential facilities like schools and healthcare. No additional sites for development are suggested.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for cycle lanes, easy access to green spaces, and local shops to create a lively community. It supports limited development in villages, suggesting they should serve as hubs with essential services like pubs and shops. The response also highlights the importance of public transport connections to tourist sites outside Cambridge.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed development in Great Shelford, arguing that it threatens the green belt, increases traffic issues, and puts pressure on local schools. The respondent believes that housing should be planned outside of the green belt and expresses concern over the overall number of homes planned near Cambridge.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response to the planning application expresses support for the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road after the relocation of the waste water treatment plant, and advocates for a railway station to support the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It suggests reinstallation of the railway line between Haverhill and Cambridge to alleviate traffic issues, and emphasizes that new development should focus on new communities rather than altering existing villages. The response also highlights the need for improved broadband in rural areas to support remote work and addresses the rising housing demand due to the influx of skilled workers in the region.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development in the green belt area of Shelford/Stapleford, citing concerns about the merging of the villages, erosion of green belt protection, increased traffic, and safety issues. The respondent suggests that housing should be planned in a more distant village to promote rail use instead of encouraging car dependency.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of housing that is not overly dense and is carbon neutral, with a focus on starter homes for young families. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus while preserving the Nine Wells nature reserve. The response emphasizes the need for local community hubs, cafes, and access to greenery in Cambourne, while expressing concern about overdevelopment in rural villages and the importance of accommodating remote work. It suggests repurposing the Grafton Centre into housing with a design that fits Cambridge’s character. Overall, the vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041 includes safety from rising sea levels and a commitment to environmental sustainability.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response criticizes the planning application for lacking genuine sustainability and suggests better use of existing rail routes. It emphasizes the need for sustainable transport links to reduce car reliance in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response advocates for a lower threshold for Water Level Control (WLC) assessments in new developments, suggesting that all projects with over 10 homes should require such assessments. It also opposes the inclusion of new car parking facilities in these developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development in Shelford, citing concerns about the importance of the green belt in preventing the merging of Great Shelford and Stapleford, as well as potential traffic issues at the level crossing. The respondent fears that allowing this development could lead to further encroachment into green belt areas.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed development site in Shelford, arguing that it does not meet the criteria for exceptional circumstances to remove land from the green belt. It highlights that the site has been previously rejected for development, and new homeowners are likely to rely on cars rather than public transport. The response expresses concern about the potential merging of Shelford and Stapleford, which the green belt is intended to prevent, and notes that the nearby busway could lead to further encroachment on this area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response suggests that the southern rural cluster of villages near the rail line and business parks south of Cambridge could accommodate limited development, specifically mentioning the need for doctors. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of maintaining the village identity in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response opposes the relocation of the sewage works, arguing it would harm green belt land. It also opposes further development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus due to existing traffic congestion. Additionally, it explicitly states not to relocate the sewage works to Honey Hill.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more diverse, human-scale buildings, particularly shops and cafes. It suggests that Cambourne needs a better town center with more amenities. It supports limited development in villages like Cottenham to maintain their identity and emphasizes the need for improved public transport, potentially a metro system, to reduce reliance on cars.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the relocation of the waste water treatment plant, emphasizing that waste should be processed where it is produced. It raises concerns about the capacity and financial struggles of Addenbrookes Hospital, suggesting a long-term plan for a new medical school. The respondent questions the classification of Cambourne as a proper town and highlights the need for clarity on the East-West Rail objectives. They advocate for a pause on further development in Meldreth and Melbourn due to capacity issues, while suggesting the need for more recreational facilities for youth. The response also criticizes the relocation of City Council offices to Alconbury due to lack of public transport access. Overall, the response is critical of proposed developments and emphasizes the need for careful planning and consideration of local needs.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response opposes the relocation of the sewage works for housing development, advocating for limited housing and the preservation of green spaces. It suggests recreational facilities around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and emphasizes the need for consultation with villages regarding development. The response stresses the importance of protecting the green belt, promoting health and wellbeing, and ensuring sustainable practices in future developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to dense developments in the area east of Milton Road due to concerns about water supply. It supports low-cost housing around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but has no suggestions for Cambourne’s development. The respondent believes the southern rural cluster should remain untouched and that villages lack adequate public transport for new development. They emphasize the need for additional water supplies before any development and do not identify any new sites for housing or business use.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed housing development in Stapleford/Shelford, citing concerns about increased traffic, safety for children, lack of school capacity, and the loss of the village’s identity. The respondent feels that the planners have not adequately considered these issues.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge, emphasizing the need for adequate parking. It strongly backs the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with a mix of high-tech facilities and open spaces. However, it opposes the current East-West Rail route and suggests limited development in the southern rural cluster. It proposes housing and business development in Duxford and along the A505, and advocates for a sustainable metro system to connect Cambridge with surrounding villages.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the expansion of the Park and Ride (P&R) facility and the establishment of regular bus and train services to create a more integrated travel system, addressing current inefficiencies.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response supports the development of various areas in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for segregated cycle paths, mixed-use neighborhoods, and improved access to services. It envisions a city with minimal car usage, affordable housing, and vibrant communities, with a focus on active travel and connectivity between neighborhoods.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with a focus on housing for campus employees. It expresses a desire for more thoughtful planning, emphasizing the need for amenities and permeability in new developments rather than unchecked growth.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the relocation of the waste water treatment plant and any further development in Cambridge, emphasizing the need to prioritize the environment and combat climate change. It argues that the current site is functioning well and that additional housing and facilities are unnecessary. The respondent advocates for better public transport and the preservation of green spaces instead of more development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development in Great Shelford, citing concerns about poor access, increased traffic congestion, and the impact on local services and village separation. It emphasizes the importance of maintaining open land for future busway development and highlights the potential strain on village resources, particularly schooling.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for schools, shops, and green spaces. It supports the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but insists that development should remain within its boundaries to protect surrounding areas. For Cambourne, it suggests similar community facilities. However, it strongly opposes development on greenbelt land in the southern rural cluster, advocating instead for better access to green spaces. The respondent expresses discontent with unconsulted economic growth plans, calling for the protection of greenbelt, reduced congestion, and more affordable housing options for downsizing.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The respondent expresses uncertainty about supporting the relocation of the wastewater treatment works, indicating a lack of clear endorsement for the proposed development of the area into a city district.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 4
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge after relocating the waste water treatment plant. It advocates for the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more healthcare facilities, research, and housing, including jobs and training opportunities. The respondent is unsure about the current offerings in Cambourne but acknowledges the potential for growth. They suggest limited development in villages with good transport links, proposing essential services like shops, healthcare facilities, and community spaces. Overall, the response is neutral regarding specific sites for development and future visions for Greater Cambridge.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for balanced development in Greater Cambridge, advocating for affordable housing, adequate facilities, and open spaces while avoiding excessive density. It highlights the importance of supporting the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with affordable housing, suggests an outdoor market in Cambourne, and stresses the need for careful development in rural areas to prevent them from becoming mere commuter towns. The response also identifies specific sites for potential development and underscores the ongoing necessity for driving and tradespeople’s access.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to various development proposals in Greater Cambridge, advocating for a focus on infrastructure improvements before any new housing or business developments. It suggests creating a quality green recreation area in North East Cambridge but opposes further development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Cambourne, recommending a light rail network instead of East-West Rail. The response emphasizes the need for improved medical and education facilities in villages, while rejecting any new development sites. Overall, it calls for a slowdown in development until proper infrastructure is established.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response opposes the relocation of the waste water treatment plant due to environmental concerns and suggests developing low-density housing around the current site. It also states that the Cambridge Biomedical Campus is already overdeveloped, advocates for limited development in villages, and calls for more recreational facilities. Additionally, it emphasizes the need for improved bus services and the creation of wooded areas and parks for recreational use.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for limited development in villages to preserve their character, advocating for the reuse of brownfield sites with environmentally friendly buildings. It envisions Greater Cambridge in 2041 as a clean, green space rich in wildlife, where residents take pride in their community.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses a preference for developing a lively city district with a focus on nature reserves, recreational facilities, and local amenities rather than dense housing. It emphasizes the importance of open spaces, schools, and community resources while opposing excessive housing development in villages, advocating for their preservation. The respondent is neutral about Cambourne due to unfamiliarity and suggests that all areas should have access to quality facilities.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed developments in various areas around Cambridge due to existing congestion and inadequate public transport infrastructure. It emphasizes the need for improved public transport before any new housing is built, particularly in congested areas like Milton Road and Cambourne. The response also highlights the lack of green spaces around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and calls for more green areas. Overall, the sentiment is against further development without addressing transportation issues first.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road with affordable housing and open spaces, emphasizes the need for adequate housing for staff around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and highlights the importance of public transport to reduce congestion. It advocates for affordable housing in the southern rural cluster and expresses caution regarding development in villages. The response stresses the need to consider climate change and local transport issues for future development in Greater Cambridge.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed development in Greater Cambridge, arguing that there is no need for more housing, jobs, or buildings due to existing adverse effects on water supplies and air quality. The respondent calls for a halt to economic growth and development, emphasizing the need for maintaining current open spaces and limiting population growth. They advocate for job growth in Cambourne without increasing housing, and express frustration that local government is not listening to residents’ concerns.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development by South Cambridgeshire Council, advocating for limited development only on brownfield sites and emphasizing the need to protect the green belt. It rejects any additional sites for housing or business use, arguing that current proposals are excessive and detrimental to the city and surrounding areas.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response criticizes South Cambridgeshire Council for misidentifying car travel as the primary source of carbon emissions, arguing that new housing construction releases significantly more CO2e. It highlights the overlooked issue of embodied carbon in buildings and suggests that housing and growth projections are outdated due to changes in policy.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development in Shelford, arguing that it is unlikely to encourage train commuting due to low current usage of the station. The respondent believes that new housing should be located further from Cambridge to promote train use. Additionally, they criticize the site selection, citing poor access and existing traffic issues.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for developments that minimize car dependency by ensuring all amenities are within walking and cycling distance. It advocates for wildlife conservation and green living in proposed developments around North East Cambridge, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. The respondent supports limited development in villages with good public transport and expresses a vision for a future with no private cars, focusing on green and accessible local spaces.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge after relocating the waste water treatment plant, suggesting it should provide housing, jobs, facilities, and open spaces akin to a small town. It advocates for limited development in villages, specifically recommending Melbourn due to its existing employment and transport links. The response emphasizes the need for high-value jobs and ample green space in developments, catering to those who prefer proximity to work without the social resources of a city. Additionally, it expresses a general vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041 without specific details.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to the proposed developments in various areas, citing concerns about overdevelopment and the adequacy of existing facilities. It suggests that the area east of Milton Road could be developed into a vibrant district after relocating the wastewater treatment plant, but emphasizes that the Cambridge Biomedical Campus has enough development already. It also argues that the East-West Rail route should respect existing village connections and criticizes the southern rural cluster for being overdeveloped. Finally, it warns against overestimating housing needs, attributing it to the greed of building firms rather than actual demand.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 4
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes any development in the Greater Cambridge area until a guaranteed water supply is established. This applies to various proposed developments, including those around Milton Road, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and rural villages. The emphasis is on ensuring water infrastructure is in place before considering any housing, jobs, or facilities.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road after relocating the wastewater treatment plant, emphasizing the need for working locations, schools, shops, community facilities, and electric car charging points. It advocates for the Cambridge Biomedical Campus to expand within its current boundaries. The response suggests that East-West Rail should go north of Cambourne to serve existing housing developments. It expresses opposition to development in the southern rural cluster of villages, citing concerns about increased traffic and the nature of commuter homes. The response does not identify specific villages for new development and emphasizes the importance of local jobs and fast broadband. It strongly opposes the EWR Southern route due to its impact on the countryside and conservation areas.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the relocation of the waste water treatment plant, arguing it is unnecessary and detrimental to sustainability efforts. It advocates for more affordable housing for key workers around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but does not provide input on other areas or questions.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge, advocating for a mix of housing types, green spaces, shops, and community areas. It emphasizes the need for improved access through a bridge and suggests that any village development should be sensitive to local character. The response calls for better road surfaces for cycling, more trees and green spaces, and investment in neglected areas to reduce inequality and enhance overall living conditions in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a sustainable and community-focused environment in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the importance of passivhaus standard housing, local businesses, green spaces, and improved public transport. It highlights the need for eco-friendly practices, such as rainwater capture and reduced concrete use, while promoting local food markets and addressing social fragmentation. The vision for 2041 includes a greener, friendlier city with a focus on community well-being and inclusivity.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the importance of high-quality housing to reduce carbon emissions, advocating for passivhaus standards in all new developments. It expresses opposition to further development in villages surrounding Northstowe due to inadequate public transport and amenities. The response also calls for ample green spaces and infrastructure to support active travel in new developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road with larger entertainment venues, advocates for affordable housing for medical staff around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, suggests a safe cycle route into Cambourne, opposes new developments in villages, recommends a new GP surgery and playground in Histon, and emphasizes the importance of green spaces in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the proposed development in Great Shelford, citing concerns about the importance of the green belt for village separation, existing traffic issues, and potential strain on local services. The respondent believes there are no compelling reasons for choosing this site over others and highlights the negative impacts of the development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+Improvements are needed for Newmarket Road as part of the vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response supports the development of eco-friendly housing, zero carbon transport, parks, leisure centres, and parcel drop-off points in various areas including North East Cambridge, around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. It emphasizes the need for spacious localities and limited development in villages, while also suggesting the inclusion of wind turbines for energy generation in rural homes. However, it does not specify which villages should see new development and does not identify any additional sites for housing or business use.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road with mixed housing and offices, advocates for more housing and jobs around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, suggests more shops in Cambourne, calls for dense housing near the railway in the southern rural cluster, and recommends new development in Cottenham, Water Beach, and Land Beach with local shops and schools. It also identifies Shepreth and Meldreth as potential sites for development and proposes a cheap underground railway for Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge, the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with more healthcare facilities and housing, and the growth of Cambourne with additional facilities. However, it opposes any new development in villages, advocating for limited development only in areas with good public transport and local services.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the idea of developing a new town at Thakeham.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response advocates for limited development in the southern rural cluster of villages, suggesting infill housing rather than large-scale projects. It supports development in Melbourn and Foxton, emphasizing the need for family-sized homes and open green spaces, while opposing the idea of a massive new town. There is no interest in additional sites for housing or business use.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for careful development in Greater Cambridge, advocating for the preservation of natural habitats and wildlife spaces over urban expansion. It suggests that new developments should focus on open crop fields rather than meadows or woodlands, and highlights the importance of creating wildlife corridors and promoting cycling. The respondent expresses a strong opposition to the destruction of existing natural areas for development, prioritizing biodiversity and green spaces.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes any new housing development in South Cambridgeshire, advocating for the preservation of the countryside and increased open spaces. It emphasizes the importance of maintaining access to green areas and local produce, with a vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041 that prioritizes limited housing and environmental integrity.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 9
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for Greater Cambridge to be more equitable, with no homelessness and better management of visitor numbers to improve residents’ quality of life. It advocates for improved cycling infrastructure, well-designed and sustainable housing, and a balanced approach to economic growth that does not neglect other areas of the country.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed developments in South Cambridgeshire, criticizing the lack of accountability from developers regarding infrastructure and community facilities. It highlights concerns about the sprawl of Cambridge, the inadequacy of affordable housing, and the need for genuine community planning that prioritizes social and cultural facilities over mere housing expansion. The respondent calls for a halt to further development in certain areas, particularly in Bourn, and emphasizes the importance of preserving traditional village facilities.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed housing development by South Cambridgeshire Council, arguing that it is unsustainable due to a lack of demand, inadequate infrastructure, and failure to provide necessary social and cultural facilities. It criticizes past developments for prioritizing housing over infrastructure, leading to increased commuting and environmental concerns. The response calls for a more imaginative approach to urban design and emphasizes the need for infrastructure to be built before housing. It also highlights issues with water sustainability and the questionable benefits of the East-West Rail project, while lamenting the lack of cycling infrastructure.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response expresses skepticism about relocating the waste water treatment plant to the green belt for the development of a city district east of Milton Road, suggesting other sites should be considered instead. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional facilities, including a train station, more cycle storage, shops, and childcare facilities due to current oversubscription. Additionally, it advocates for better and safer cycle lanes in surrounding villages.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a lively city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for housing, jobs, and facilities near transport links. However, it opposes further development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, suggesting existing developments are sufficient. The response criticizes the East-West Rail project as a vanity project, advocating for upgrades to existing roads instead. It recommends limiting development in villages to new areas and brownfield sites, while suggesting new science/business parks for job creation. No additional sites for housing or business use are proposed.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response expresses concerns about flooding in the proposed development area east of Milton Road and emphasizes the need for improved public transport access to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It suggests that Cambourne should develop a unique business cluster rather than mimic Cambridge. The respondent highlights the importance of healthcare access in villages and notes uncertainty about the future development of Greater Cambridge depending on railway infrastructure.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of a vibrant city district in North East Cambridge, emphasizing a mix of social and private housing designed with climate change considerations. It suggests incorporating green spaces, schools, shops, healthcare facilities, and good transport links in various proposed developments, including around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Cambourne. However, it opposes any new development in villages, advocating instead for the enhancement of existing open spaces. The overall vision for Greater Cambridge by 2041 includes ample green spaces, climate-conscious housing, and adequate parking solutions.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses support for developing the area east of Milton Road into a vibrant city district after relocating the wastewater treatment plant. It emphasizes the need for improved access and parking at the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, while advocating for limited development in villages, suggesting they should remain as they are with parks and open spaces. The respondent shows a lack of interest in the future of Greater Cambridge, indicating a neutral stance overall.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response opposes new development in villages unless there is an improvement in infrastructure and public transport.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response supports the development of a balanced mix of housing, jobs, community facilities, and open spaces in the area east of Milton Road and Cambourne, while emphasizing a primary focus on research and healthcare facilities with less housing around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It suggests that the southern rural cluster should primarily focus on housing and raises concerns about overestimating housing needs due to the rise of remote working.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses concern over the lack of local planning input for Cambourne, emphasizing the need for a clear development envelope and improved infrastructure, including a high street. It supports limited development in villages, advocating for focus on areas with good connectivity. Additionally, it highlights a shortage of smaller affordable properties and questions the value of shared ownership schemes.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response requests clarification on the reasons for support or objection to the policy, paragraph, or site. It also indicates that further representations are enclosed for review, which may contain detailed comments.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response to the planning application includes a list of individuals who were cc’d in the communication, indicating that the Swavesey Parish Council clerk, Shelford Bridleways representative, and British Horse Society Cambridgeshire Access Officer were informed about the matter.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response indicates a preference for prioritizing existing infrastructure improvements before considering new developments in the area east of Milton Road and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It emphasizes the importance of preserving open spaces and green landscapes, expresses opposition to the East-West Rail link, and suggests that any development in villages should only occur where there is already good public transport and local services.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, emphasizing the need for more healthcare facilities, research, and housing, as well as the creation of semi-natural areas linking to Hobson’s Park. It expresses opposition to the current East-West Rail route and advocates for better, larger, and more connected wild areas in Greater Cambridge by 2041.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response indicates that the area east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge could be developed into a vibrant city district after relocating the waste water treatment plant. It supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus for additional healthcare facilities, research, and housing. However, it expresses opposition to significant development in Cambourne and the southern rural cluster of villages, advocating for limited development only in villages with good public transport and local services. Overall, the response emphasizes a desire to maintain the current rural character and happiness of Greater Cambridge.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional healthcare facilities, research, and housing, but calls for a halt to its unchecked expansion. It advocates for a more equitable distribution of investment and transport infrastructure, suggesting the development of a second site north of Cambridge. The response criticizes the East-West Rail project as inadequate for local needs and emphasizes the necessity of improving transport infrastructure before further development in southern villages. It highlights the need for diverse outdoor recreational facilities and a balanced economic focus that includes business and manufacturing areas beyond the biotech sector. The vision for Greater Cambridge by 2041 includes leadership in environmental action and social well-being.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response opposes the relocation of the wastewater treatment plant to green belt land, arguing it should remain in its current location due to recent upgrades and the waste of resources involved in moving it. It calls for improved safety for pedestrians and cyclists around Addenbrookes and suggests transitioning to greener technologies in nearby villages. The respondent expresses a desire for Greater Cambridge in 2041 to have more greenery, trees, and better pedestrian spaces, along with a reduction in reliance on oil and improved public transport options.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response raises concerns about the development of a dense city district east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for open spaces to maintain the character of Cambridge. It supports the expansion of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but questions the feasibility of adding more facilities due to limited space. The response opposes any development near diesel rail lines, particularly in villages, and advocates for preserving historical architectural styles rather than modern designs.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 6
+TODO
+The response suggests that the area east of Milton Road in North East Cambridge could be developed into a vibrant city district after the relocation of the waste water treatment plant. It emphasizes the need for housing, jobs, and facilities in this area. Additionally, it supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, specifically advocating for housing for workers in the vicinity.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed developments in and around Cambridge, emphasizing the need to protect existing villages and green spaces from further development. It argues against relocating the waste water treatment plant, stating that it has sufficient capacity until 2050 and that funds should not be diverted to build more housing. The response advocates for enhancing open spaces and creating green corridors to promote healthy living, rather than allowing new housing developments. Overall, the sentiment is one of preservation and caution against overdevelopment.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 10
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed development in North East Cambridge, emphasizing the need for passive house-level development, lower density, and more green spaces. It criticizes the current state of Cambridge, highlighting issues such as poor public transport, congestion, and inadequate health services. The respondent is particularly concerned about the relocation of the wastewater treatment plant, viewing it as a threat to the green belt and indicative of developer greed. There is a call for better public transport options in villages and a plea to protect the green belt, with a vision of a future Cambridge that avoids overdevelopment and prioritizes livability.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response raises concerns about the proposed housing density in Cambridge, suggesting it is too high to maintain a good quality of life and could detract from the city’s character. It emphasizes the need for cultural and social spaces in developments, particularly around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, which currently feels lacking in these areas. The response advocates for a mix of employment opportunities in Cambourne and suggests that parish councils should handle small amounts of development rather than concentrating it all in Cambridge. Overall, it expresses a desire for more balanced development across the region.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response indicates that any proposed developments in the area should prioritize a significant number of affordable homes built to high environmental standards. It expresses concerns about the scale of developments, particularly in relation to environmental impacts, such as those affecting Milton Country Park and biodiversity. The response supports limited development in rural villages, emphasizing the need for improved public transport and infrastructure while preserving the rural character of these areas. It also mentions the potential for high-tech development around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, with a focus on minimizing car facilities.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses opposition to the proposed development in Stapleford, highlighting concerns that it will worsen traffic and further merge Stapleford with Great Shelford. The respondent argues for stronger protection of green spaces, particularly given other developments like a retirement village and busway planned for the same area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for a tramway-style connection to Cambridge city centre and advocates for world-class walking and cycling infrastructure that is well-connected to the transport network. It supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and suggests that new housing should be located in areas with good public transport links. The response expresses a desire for a significant improvement in transport infrastructure that does not rely on cars and buses, envisioning a future where people can use environmentally friendly public transport instead of owning private cars.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses support for the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, emphasizing the need for more healthcare facilities, research opportunities, and housing in the area.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of fully self-contained sites across various proposed developments, emphasizing the importance of minimizing travel. It supports limited development in areas with good public transport and local services, while suggesting that villages lacking these amenities should not see new housing or business sites. The response also calls for a robust challenge to anticipated growth in the region.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to further development in the Greater Cambridge area, arguing that the existing urban environment is already dense and vibrant. It suggests that the Cambridge Biomedical Campus has consumed enough land and resources, advocating for development in less populated areas instead. The response highlights concerns about the southern rural cluster of villages losing their rural character due to previous developments and states that further housing would transform them into suburbs. It calls for minimal development in villages and emphasizes the importance of preserving farmland and maintaining some wild areas for wildlife.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses concerns about the development plans in Greater Cambridge, particularly regarding the relocation of the sewage works and the impact on local green belt areas. It emphasizes the need for low-cost housing with local purchase criteria and highlights the importance of providing adequate facilities for schools and healthcare. The response also critiques the overdevelopment of Cambourne and rural areas, advocating for the use of brownfield sites instead of encroaching on green spaces. It calls for careful planning to ensure that infrastructure can support any new developments, as current local facilities are already overstretched.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response consists of a series of questions regarding potential development areas in Greater Cambridge, including the east of Milton Road, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. The respondent does not provide any specific feedback or suggestions for these areas and expresses a strong opposition to any further housing development, particularly emphasizing a desire to protect existing villages from expansion. The response indicates a preference for very limited development in villages that have good public transport connections and local services, and it firmly states that no additional housing should take over land in any area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to further development in Greater Cambridge, emphasizing the need for local government to prioritize community needs over commercial interests. It advocates for a shift away from the growth model towards a focus on repurposing and sustainable practices, urging councillors to have the courage to reject excessive development in favor of a more thoughtful approach to planning.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to new housing and development in the Greater Cambridge area, suggesting that minimal housing is needed and that many people will continue to work from home. It emphasizes that existing facilities are sufficient and advocates for a reconsideration of development plans in light of changing living preferences post-COVID, particularly the desire for remote work.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to the proposed development of 100 houses between Great Shelford and Stapleford, highlighting concerns about the lack of public awareness and communication regarding the plans. The respondent notes that many local residents were unaware of the proposal and were horrified by it. They emphasize the importance of maintaining the separate identities of the two villages and argue that the development would contribute to urban sprawl, contradicting the purpose of the green belt. Additionally, the respondent criticizes the assumption that residents would use the train for commuting, stating that they and their friends prefer to drive due to convenience and concerns about the train service.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response to the planning application includes a series of questions regarding potential development in various areas, such as East of Milton Road, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambourne, and the southern rural cluster of villages. However, there are no specific suggestions or input provided for housing, jobs, facilities, or open spaces in these areas, as all questions received no responses. The document is seeking public input on these topics.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response indicates no opinion on the development east of Milton Road and the southern rural cluster. It supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, emphasizing the importance of protecting the Magog hills. As a resident of Cambourne, the respondent highlights the potential of the East-West Rail to improve transport links but criticizes the current lack of local facilities and the need for a proper town center with essential services. They express concern over the cramped nature of housing developments in Cambourne and advocate for more green spaces. The response also calls for improved public transport services to enhance access to employment opportunities and reduce car dependency.
+Stance: NEUTRAL
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response opposes the development of the area east of Milton Road, arguing that the wastewater treatment plant is fit for purpose and should not be relocated due to high costs. It supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with a focus on vast open spaces and community centers. Cambourne should remain isolated and self-sufficient, with an emphasis on cycle routes. The response opposes development in the southern rural cluster of villages, supports limited development in Grantchester, and suggests that road bypasses are needed. It identifies Barton and Newnham as potential sites for development. The overall vision for Greater Cambridge in 2041 emphasizes preservation and limited development.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to further housing development in Cambourne and Highfields Caldecote, emphasizing the need for more open spaces and essential facilities such as healthcare services and schools. It criticizes the current state of housing in Cambourne, highlighting the reliance on cars due to a lack of local jobs and services. The response also firmly opposes the East-West Rail project, arguing that it would negatively impact local rural villages and worsen existing issues in Cambourne. Overall, the response advocates for prioritizing nature and open spaces over additional housing developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response advocates for the development of specific areas such as the east of Milton Road and the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, emphasizing the need for affordable housing, research facilities, and open spaces. It expresses concern over the impact of mass housing developments on water resources and biodiversity, arguing for a focus on brownfield sites and the equitable distribution of housing needs among villages. The response calls for a shift in priorities towards addressing climate change and safeguarding natural resources, while also highlighting the importance of preserving farmland for food production.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response discusses the potential for development in Greater Cambridge, particularly around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and the East-West Rail project. It expresses concern that the East-West Rail may primarily facilitate housing development rather than improve transportation. The respondent is wary of the possibility of overdevelopment in the southern rural cluster of villages, fearing that lobbying from developers could lead to excessive housing. They advocate for very limited development in villages, emphasizing the need for sustainability and good public transport connections. The response also reflects a belief that housing demand in the area will not be fully met due to its proximity to London, and it calls for the preservation of the rural character of the area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes further development in Cambridge, arguing that the city is already overcrowded and that adding more developments will exacerbate existing issues. The respondent suggests halting overdevelopment in the city and indicates that if new towns are to be built, they should be located away from Cambridge.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes the proposed relocation of the sewage works, arguing that the current facility has sufficient capacity until 2050 and that the move is driven by profit motives rather than necessity. It questions the classification of the sewage works relocation as a nationally significant infrastructure project, highlighting a lack of transparency in the local planning process regarding its impact on Green Belt land. The response emphasizes the need for public awareness about the implications of the sewage works move and criticizes the expenditure of taxpayer money on what it views as an unnecessary relocation.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to further development in Cambridge and its surrounding areas, emphasizing that the city is already overdeveloped and warning against the negative impact of additional housing and infrastructure. The respondent specifically mentions the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and the southern rural cluster, arguing that continued development will ruin the character of the city and its villages. There is a call to stop all overdevelopment to preserve the charm of the area.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response expresses strong opposition to any further housing development in the Greater Cambridge area, insisting that no additional housing should be built. The respondent emphasizes the need to preserve the existing character of the area and calls for a halt to current development plans, advocating for a focus on maintaining the current state of the community rather than increasing housing and office space.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 2
+TODO
+The response indicates that there should be no further housing and factory developments in the southern rural cluster, as such actions are not compatible with climate change requirements. It emphasizes the importance of preserving green and open spaces rather than replacing them with urban development. The response also supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with minimal housing and the inclusion of open park areas. Additionally, it expresses concerns about the overall planning approach, suggesting a need for more green spaces and tree planting instead of urban expansion.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for a strong, well-lit cycle network and the provision of small homes in areas such as North East Cambridge and around the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. It expresses full support for the East-West Rail project to facilitate growth in Cambourne. Additionally, it highlights the urgent need for more wild areas in the region, with local residents interested in investing in forest creation, and suggests that Greater Cambridge should aim for more forested areas and increased biking while reducing car usage.
+Stance: SUPPORT
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus but opposes any additional housing in the surrounding area, emphasizing the need to support existing communities and amenities. It calls for the cancellation of the East-West Rail project, arguing that resources should be redirected to less affluent areas rather than enhancing already prosperous regions like Cambourne. The response firmly rejects any further development in the southern rural cluster of villages and insists on no intrusion into the greenbelt. It highlights concerns about water availability for future plans and advocates for Greater Cambridge in 2041 to focus on improving existing conditions rather than expanding.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes further development on green belt land, particularly at Addenbrookes, advocating instead for the use of brownfield sites and the redevelopment of run-down areas in Cambridge. It criticizes the council for yielding to developer interests, which has led to the loss of important green spaces like the Gogg Hills. The respondent emphasizes the need to preserve these areas and highlights the poor condition of many existing neighborhoods in Cambridge, calling for regeneration efforts rather than new developments.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response expresses concerns about the development of the area east of Milton Road, emphasizing the need for more staff parking at the Cambridge Biomedical Campus due to current parking shortages for healthcare staff. It critiques the transport infrastructure, particularly the A10 and train services, and raises issues regarding the limited development in villages, citing extensive building in recent years. The response advocates for preserving open spaces and suggests that any new development should not compromise agricultural land. Additionally, it mentions the need for improved public transport and facilities, including electric car charging points, while expressing a vision for a car-free Cambridge with efficient Park and Ride services.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 7
+TODO
+The response strongly opposes any further development in Cambridge and its surrounding villages, emphasizing the need to preserve the green belt and the rural character of these areas. The respondent believes that development has already negatively impacted the quality of life in Cambridge and insists that there should be no new housing or business developments in villages. They advocate for the establishment of science parks in satellite areas around Cambridge to alleviate travel and housing pressures, but firmly oppose any development in the green belt and villages.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 1
+TODO
+The response suggests that the Cowley Road wastewater treatment plant should remain in its current location to avoid negative impacts on the green belt and unnecessary taxpayer expenses. It supports the development of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus with additional healthcare facilities, research, and housing. The response also emphasizes the need for affordable housing in Cambourne and mentions the potential development of Cambridge Airport for housing, shops, a post office, and a secondary school.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 5
+TODO
+The response emphasizes the need for a focus on remote working to allow flexibility for residents. It critiques the original planning of Cambourne for not establishing a proper town center and expresses concern that current developments, such as Northstowe, are not learning from past mistakes. The respondent highlights the negative impact of ongoing development on mental health and wellbeing, citing constant building as a source of anxiety for residents. There are significant concerns regarding local infrastructure, particularly in Longstanton, where drainage and sewerage systems are inadequate. The response strongly opposes any further development in Longstanton and Northstowe, advocating for the protection of local wildlife and green spaces, and suggests that new housing should be limited to primary residences only.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 8
+TODO
+The response indicates support for the development of specific areas in Greater Cambridge, including the eastern area of Milton Road, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, and the southern rural cluster, while advocating for very limited development in villages. The sentiment reflects a desire to maintain the character of the region, with a strong emphasis on keeping the current state of Greater Cambridge intact and limiting the influence of developers.
+Stance: OPPOSE
+Constructiveness: 3
+