Waterbeach New Town Supplementary Planning Document

Object

Representation ID: 167296

Received: 12/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

5.2 MOVEMENT AND PLACE
Objection to lack of reference to bridleways / horse access.

The SPD executive summary mentions 7.1 provision of development that prioritises cycling and pedestrians. Pages 16, and 70-78 of the Draft SPD show non-motorised access routes including a circular route around the proposed new town, restoration of the ancient Roman Causeway, through green spaces and woodland areas, and along a series of networks within the proposed new town and beyond toward other areas and across the railway line and River Cam.

However, nowhere in the SPD is equestrian access mentioned, yet walking and cycling access is clearly defined. This omission is neglectful and discriminatory.

Object

Representation ID: 167297

Received: 12/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
PRIMARY MOVEMENT AND ACCESS
Objection to impacts on horse riding routes / access

We object to the obstruction by default of intense buildings and vehicular traffic, of the ancient and important equestrian access route at Bannold and Cross Drove

Object

Representation ID: 167474

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

1. INTRODUCTION
The SPD has a number of deficiencies in respect of soundness for the reasons set out which mean that we recommend non-adoption of it as submitted.

We are gravely concerned that the SPD has been drafted and determined before the Local
plan was adopted. This makes it impossible for the local plan Inspector's recommendations and modifications to be adopted in the SPD. We have read the inspectors report on Policy SS/5 Waterbeach New Town in the Local Plan and have found many omissions of comments within the SPD.
Concerning to read the comments and issues raised by committee regarding the content of the SPD and lack of time for councillors ( 5 days before the meeting) to be able to make informed judgement.

Letters from the EA, Heritage England and Natural England. Although the council believe that their concerns have been dealt with through the local plan process the EA, Heritage England and Natural England clearly state that additional information has since come to light.

The lack of fair and proper consultation. No direct notification of residents. Bearing in mind all of the above we urge SCDC to consider recalling the current public consultation until it can be proven that the public have all the facts.

Object

Representation ID: 167475

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

2.4 Landscape, Ecology & Water
Policy SS/5 states that the proposed new settlement should reflect surrounding fenland towns in design. The concept of the new design could be warranted in a different (e.g. city/urban) landscape but it is not acceptable on the Fen edge and Fen edge villages of Waterbeach and Chittering which will be dwarfed by the proposed new town. Absolutely no creative thought has been provided. Does not reflect the architecture of the existing village or surrounding fen edge villages.

Object

Representation ID: 167476

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
AMOUNT DENSITY AND HEIGHTS
Heights of up to thirty-metre-high blocks) (being proposed by both developers) cannot be mitigated in the low-lying fens to the North, East and South of the site.. The sightlines chosen by SCDC do not reflect the topography of the land to the East and North and South of the site and should be revised. 3D impressions are also much needed please for general public to understand the density of built form: it is very hard to comprehend this with simple wire lines and illustrations.

Both the urban design and building heights will permanently change and interrupt the characteristic long views, big skies and tranquillity of the fens. The SPD must contain height restrictions that reflect surrounding existing architecture and protect the views from and to Denny Abbey. Without this the SPD is not fit for purpose in directing any development that happens north of Waterbeach.

Object

Representation ID: 167477

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
PRIMARY MOVEMENT AND ACCESS
Although two access points onto the A10 are described, the southern point is not known. More detail is needed to assess the effect of increased vehicular use of the A10, the A14 interchange at Milton and access to Cambridge or the likelihood of traffic diverting through secondary roads such as the B1047 to reach east Cambridge and the ring road, Landbeach Road and Ely Road, Milton and knock on effects at Horningsea too. Entry and exit to private vehicles should only be from DUALLED A10. Currently there is a risk of making rat-runs.

Additional physical measures are required: Clayhithe and Horningsea to prevent drivers turning off the A10 at Car Dyke Road to use the B1047 to travel south and east; within Waterbeach to prevent access onto the B1047

Public transport route not described and funding not guaranteed.

Object

Representation ID: 167478

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

5.7 PRODUCTIVE LANDSCAPE & PLANTING
We have been promised many times over by developers and SCDC that there would be a
designated space between the village and the proposed development. The unique Fenland is worth preserving.

Object

Representation ID: 167479

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
This development and the combined developments of Urban and Civic and RLWE will
produce enormous amounts of household, commercial and building and demolition waste.
The SPD must contain restrictions on the building of anything except the EU's top 3 energy from waste solutions.

We note also that there is no provision for an area air quality management plan. The SPD must include the need NOW for an AQMA and management plan. The SPD as it currently stands, underestimates (totally ignores in fact) the impact on air quality from the numerous sources that will contribute during the build and long term.

The SPD fails to mention how the planned new town will help achieve the new City and County Air Quality Action Plans or the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy or support the Milton AQMAP

Object

Representation ID: 167480

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
GREENWAYS AND CORRIDORS
The SPD is premature in the absence of a coordinated approach for the whole development site across both land ownerships. The SPD must agree first:
-Retention of woodland west of the lake
-Safeguarding of land for special school
-Revision of primary school and special school locations away from the A10 and areas of high air pollution
-Impacts to Wicken Fen
-Ecological assessments (bat, hedgehog, birds and hedgerows)
-Revised flood and drainage risk assessments
-Update of green infrastructure- there is now much need for biodiversity given the hundreds of houses that have been built in the last few years in Waterbeach on greenfield.

Collaborative work with wildlife organisations and the national trust to ensure biodiversity is
maximised within the SPD blue print:

Object

Representation ID: 167481

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
AMOUNT DENSITY AND HEIGHTS
SPD is also non-specific enough about the limits of housing numbers Housing available on the Waterbeach development would be attractive to new employees at the distant employment sites resulting in increased travel.

A large amount of high-rise buildings will be necessary to facilitate the delivery of 6500 homes. This would be unacceptable as it is out of character for the area totally at odds with nearby settlements.

The height of the lakeside buildings (up to six storeys with some up to eight/ 30m) is not in
keeping with the surrounding area, the conservation area and vernacular of Waterbeach village, the listed buildings of Landbeach or the historic buildings of Denny Abbey.