Policy 16: Sustainable Connectivity

Comment

Representation ID: 52917

Received: 26/09/2020

Respondent: Mr Jon Pavey

A smart / mobile ticketing arrangement like London's Oyster card - or better Hong Kong's Octopus card - has much to recommend it. You don't need a bank account (hence bank issued debit/credit card) so it is inclusive, it needs to be accepted on all forms of available transport (including taxis and cycle hire/parking). It should be of unlimited duration, regardless of amount of use.

Object

Representation ID: 53310

Received: 02/10/2020

Respondent: Mrs Jane Clarke

The idea of walking and cycling is a good one but fails to recognise that people don't often work where they live and often need a car to access other aspects of their lives. Yes there may be public transport into Cambridge, but how frequent and how late will it run? People may need to get to villages beyond Milton for work, to see family members who live elsewhere etc and cycling is not always practical, especially in winter. Public transport in Milton is poor and school catchment areas often meant we needed to get to places not far away but totally impractical to reach using public transport/bicycles. Unless you allocate more car parking I can't see this working at all well. Some people need a van for their work, for example and unless you recognise that need the new neighbourhood won't be the pleasant place to live you are aiming for.

Object

Representation ID: 53432

Received: 03/10/2020

Respondent: Fen Ditton Village Society

Assumes everyone is fit and active
Good connections to Cambridge North Station and Science Park but not realistic for travel to South and further east of city, e.g. Biomedical Centre
Access to green spaces reduced by this development
Too many residents for Milton Park to cater
Local roads will not cope with increased vehicular traffic

Comment

Representation ID: 54521

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

Camcycle strongly supports the goal to design North East Cambridge around a comprehensive walking and cycling network with seamless connections to adjoining areas. However, we believe that more improvements are needed to the pedestrian and cycle connections described in order to provide routes which cater for the large number of people that will be using them. For example, redirecting motor traffic away from the Fen Road level crossing via an alternative route out of Chesterton Fen would free up roadspace on Fen Road. This could then become a ‘cycle street’ suitable for the high numbers of people riding into the the city from the new district, and relieving the already-crowded towpath by providing more space for those walking. This would also enable a better connection to the Abbey-Chesterton bridge and Chisholm Trail.

Innovative solutions to reducing motor vehicle use are welcomed, but these should not replace immediate actions to reduce motor vehicle use in the area and build up sustainable transport facilities before construction begins. This could include demand management measures such as a congestion charge or workplace parking levy.

Comment

Representation ID: 55690

Received: 02/10/2020

Respondent: St John's College

Agent: Savills

Neutral:
Safe crossing of Milton Road is important but this does not necessarily need to be a new bridge as referenced in Policy 16 and shown on Figure 36, or the two new crossings (one likely to be an underpass and one likely to be a bridge) plus an improved junction where Milton Road meets the guided busway as indicated on the plan on page 14 and Figure 37 on page 190. Further work should inform the most appropriate solution(s).

Improved connections to the wider network, and specifically improvements to the links to and from the existing Jane Coston Bridge over the A14 to reduce the current conflicts with motor vehicles, are supported.

Comment

Representation ID: 55727

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Brookgate

Agent: Bidwells

Neutral:
Brookgate support the basis of Policy 16. There is a need for area wide non-car
interventions to cater for these trips and ensure sites can come forward in
accordance with AAP car trip/parking budgets.
Creating new and improved walking and cycling connectivity to the NEC is
essential in creating a development that is not reliant on the car as the primary
means of transport. These measures are welcomed. There appears to be an over
emphasis on new walking and cycling routes and not enough consideration of
improving existing walking and cycling infrastructure in the area.
In particular:
● Improving existing links to Milton P&R site to Milton Village and the NEC by
improving the existing footbridge over the A10 to allow cycle access. Improvement
to cycle and walking routes on Milton High Street and connectively to Jane Coston
Bridge and the NEC.
● A greater emphasis on the existing very well used walking and cycling route
to the south of the site via Moss Bank and the River Cam. This is by far the most
direct and safe ‘off road’ route for pedestrians and cyclist from Cambridge City
Centre to the whole of the NEC. And will only become more popular when the
Chisholm Trail is opened allowing high quality ‘off road’ access to the east and
south of Cambridge.
~
□
□
□
□ ~ □
In terms of new cycle links we note that there are no proposals to provide better
permeability between the NEC and East Chesterton between the existing Nuffield
Road / CGB footway / cycleway link to the north and Moss Bank to the south. This
creates an impenetrable barrier along the south western side of the NEC in excess
of 600m.
Brookgate consider this to be a missed opportunity and maintains the current
barriers between the NEC and established residential areas. We strongly suggest
that a footway / cycleway link is provided through the Bramblefields area (not just
wayfinding to the site which would be a very long walk and impractical for most
people).
This will not only provide better connectively between the established residential
areas of East Chesterton and the NEC but will also provide easy access to
residents and workers on the NEC to enjoy the established areas of public open
space at Bramblefields.
This is a similar approach to the proposals to provide a link from the north of the
NEC to Milton Country Park. Clearly any footways and/or cycleway through
Bramblefields would need to be design sympathetically within the established
parkland, as would be the case for the proposed links to Milton Country Park. We
would suggest that a route adjacent to the southern boundary of the allotments
(minimising any impact on the established wildlife area) linking in with the
established network of path through Bramblefields is included in the NEC
proposals.

Support

Representation ID: 55908

Received: 02/10/2020

Respondent: GCR Camprop Nine Ltd

Agent: Carter Jonas

Figure 36 shows proposed strategic walking and cycling routes in the North East Cambridge area,
including routes through Cambridge Science Park and along Milton Road. The site at 127- 136
Cambridge Science Park would be located on and close to these strategic walking and cycling routes,
and also in close proximity to the existing mobility hub on the Cambridge Guided Busway. The
aspirations for sustainable connectivity across the North East Cambridge area is supported.

We note under 16a that a bridge connection crossing over Milton Rd is identified as part of the
pedestrian and cycle connections to be made. No further details on the parameters of a bridge are
provided within the draft AAP document. More information should be provided in this regard as now
is the appropriate time to be defining the parameters for such infrastructure.
Notwithstanding this, we do not consider that the provision of a bridge in this location would
conflict with the existing building at 127-136 or indeed the proposed replacement building.

Comment

Representation ID: 55930

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Ridgeons Timber & Builders Merchants and Turnstone Estates

Agent: Carter Jonas

Figure 36 shows proposed strategic walking and cycling routes in the North East Cambridge
area, including a new route from Nuffield Road across the Cambridge Guided Busway to Cowley Road.
It is likely that the strategic walking and cycling route would continue south along Nuffield Road
beyond the AAP area. However, it should be noted that Ridgeons operate a builders merchant from a
site with the main vehicular access on to Nuffield Road, immediately adjacent to the southern
boundary of the AAP. There are delivery and customer vehicles, typically vans and HGVs, entering
and exiting the builders merchant throughout the day. Therefore, the design and layout of the
proposed strategic walking and cycling routes along Nuffield Road, including parts of Nuffield Road
beyond the AAP area, should avoid potential conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists and vehicles
accessing existing businesses include the builders merchants at the
Ridgeons site.

Support

Representation ID: 55978

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Hawkswren Ltd

Agent: Carter Jonas

Figure 36 shows proposed strategic walking and cycling routes in the North East Cambridge
area, including new routes along Nuffield Road and Cowley Road. The proposed development
parcel that includes the Barr Tech site would be located on these strategic walking and cycling
routes, and also in close proximity to the proposed mobility hub at the Cambridge Guided
Busway/Cowley Road intersection. The aspirations for sustainable connectivity across the North
East Cambridge area is supported.

Object

Representation ID: 56000

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Turnstone Estates Limited

Agent: Carter Jonas

Figure 36 shows proposed strategic walking and cycling routes in the North East Cambridge
area, including new routes along Nuffield Road and Cowley Road. The proposed development
parcel that includes the Tarmac site would be located on these strategic walking and cycling
routes, and also in close proximity to the proposed mobility hub at the Cambridge Guided
Busway/Cowley Road intersection. The aspirations for sustainable connectivity across the North
East Cambridge area is supported.

Comment

Representation ID: 56153

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: U+I PLC.

Agent: We are Town

Support the policy objectives, the measures to reduce car-based travel, the wider connections including green space.
However the concept of net neutrality will not be possible either 1) for the Core Site alone (because of very low levels of
existing traffic) or 2) in the short term across NEC. This has been recognised by officers of Cambridgeshire County Council.
The draft AAP needs to acknowledge this and not introduce dependencies on the Core Site in relation to other users
reducing their volume of parking or trips.