Monopoly

Cambridge University is proposing to build a huge estate on a stretch of farm land North West of the city, 45 hectares of which is green belt land:

The University’s specs. for the development.

Obviously (!) I’m against the development,  but rather than just being a nay-sayer, I thought I’d offer up an alternative solution for their forecast growth:

Given that students are now being asked to pay for their degree, (and by so doing will probably be in debt for a considerable length of time) numbers of students applying for a place at University are decreasing.  And that’s no bad thing,  but the subject of another post.

And given that some universities are therefore going to struggle to keep their roll…

Wouldn’t Cambridge University be better off just buying another university’s campus,  and using it as an annex?  The University of Cambridge in Bedford or Buckingham or wherever?

That way they’d have purpose-built rooms for lectures, seminars and for boarding and refectory.

And that way they wouldn’t spoil the lovely rural feel of the North West of the city, or infict a huge rise in population on the city whose infrastructure can ill afford it.

And perhaps it would enrich the economy in another part of the country too…

Advertisements

One thought on “Monopoly

  1. 3arn0wl Post author

    My letter to the Planning departments:

    Whilst convinced that our concerns, resistance and sadness won’t make the slightest bit of difference to the outcome, I nevertheless offer the following questions:

    1. Is it ethical or wise to build on 45 hectares of green belt land? Have you really studied the impact on the environment?

    2. Do you really wish to destroy the rural feel of the city?

    3. Have you considered the impact on Cambridge City Centre’s resources and facilities in what is in effect a doubling of the city’s physical size (when also taking into account the David Wilson Homes and Madingley Road developments), mainly with residential accommodation?

    4. Do you consider that the proportion, diversity and size of facilities provided for the development are adequate?

    5. What are your plans for Huntingdon Road? The two large-scale developments on either size of the road will create a great deal of traffic in both directions, and the erection of a few sets of traffic lights will do nothing to ease that congestion.

    6. Have you considered the impact of thousands of extra cars in Cambridge?

    7. What is the Utilities impact – electricity, water and sewage – of the three developments? (An all-encompassing audit needs to be conducted)

    8. The development will be enveloped by the noise and pollution of three major roads. Do you consider that it will be a desirable place to live?

    9. Will the design of the properties be in-keeping with the houses already in the area – not counting the David Wilson Homes, which have turned out to be a carbuncle on the face of an historically important road.

    10. Have you considered the fact that the value of houses in the area will be diminished by this (and the David Wilson Homes) project?

    Given the evidence of the lamentable mistake of the David Wilson Homes development, my confidence in a correct response to any of the above questions is limited.

    This application must be refused.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s