Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

• Cycling and walking infrastructure must be safe, convenient, accessible, widely available and built to high-quality standards. • Developments must provide their cycling network, both on-site and with connections to the wider area, before any dwellings are occupied, in order to ensure that new residents get off to the most sustainable start possible. • The cycling network must be the basis of the transport plan for sites, along with public transport routes, and it should be the grid upon which building sites are oriented. • Any large roads in the vicinity of the site must not become cause for walking or cycling severance. • There must always be safe and convenient crossings to ensure that people walking and cycling have full permeability across roads. • The Local Plan must take an explicit stand in opposition to the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway, and should also oppose any plans by the county council or Combined Authority to expand roads. • All congestion relief plans must come from reduction of car traffic and the shifting of travel from cars into walking, cycling and public transport. This is the only way to achieve the climate emergency, air quality and social inclusion goals that the Local Plan has put forth. • The plans for East-West Railway and South Station should be supported but only on the proviso that these projects include full permeability for walking and cycling, provide high-quality and attractive cycling bridges and underbridges, and help drive mode shift out of cars and onto foot, bike and public transport.

Schemes to increase car traffic in the region must be scrapped. The Local Plan should oppose road expansion projects like the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway or the dualling of any road. Any new railway lines or stations must provide excellent cycling links. The Local Plan should support the construction of safe cycling and walking routes as highlighted by the LCWIP process. • Developments must be planned from the very beginning with the safe, convenient and high-quality walking and cycling networks • All buildings, parks and public spaces must be fully integrated with the cycling network. • Cycle routes in the built-up area should always be accompanied by a separate and dedicated footway alongside them. • Cycle routes must be free of dangerous obstructions and always be planned with smooth curves and full consideration of forward visibility and visibility at every junction or crossing point. • The cycling network and connections to the wider area, and any public transport, must be delivered and open before buildings are occupied in order to ensure new occupants get the most sustainable start possible. • Cycle routes must be given priority both in planning terms and on the ground where they cross roads. • Cycle routes must be ubiquitous, continuous, high-quality, safe, convenient, legible and fully accessible to people of all abilities. • Schools must be fully accessible to people on foot or bike and not be located on through-roads. Access to schools by car should be very limited apart from serving the needs of people with disabilities who might need to drive there. • New housing and development sites must only be located in places where car traffic can be kept to the absolute minimum. New sites should be rejected if the Transport Assessment cannot realistically propose to keep car traffic generation to the absolute minimum. • Highway junctions onto development sites must be kept small, being no larger than absolutely necessary for basic access, in line with the pledge to minimise car traffic generation. Should the county council or Combined Authority attempt to propose excessively large junctions then the planning authority must challenge them and refuse to accept designs that induce additional car traffic. • Buildings must meet an improved standard for cycle parking, with increased quantity and a higher quality of design, including space for inclusive cycle parking that supports cargo cycles, adapted cycles, tricycles, e-bikes and other types of cycles. • Train stations and major bus stops must have secure, convenient and high-quality cycle parking facilities. Camcycle should be consulted about the standards required for these facilities. • Cycling logistics depots should be supported at the edge of built-up areas and provide opportunities for longer-distance shipping to transload cargo onto more appropriate cargo cycles for local delivery. • The planning committee and officers must be prepared to reject development proposals that do not sharply reduce car traffic in favour of walking, cycling or public transport.

• Safe, convenient and high-quality cycle routes everywhere, providing everyone with the opportunity to safely cycle for everyday transport purposes if they want, or to combine cycling with public transport. CAZ with Euro 6 standards as minimum in 2021, thereafter only electric veehicles/buses within the CAZ. .

Densification of existing urban areas, Edge of Cambridge: Outside Green Belt, Dispersal: New Settlements, Edge of Cambridge: Green Belt, Dispersal: Villages, Public Transport Corridors

• Sites and developers should be chosen on their ability to satisfy sustainable transport goals and shift the overwhelming majority of everyday journeys out of cars and into walking, cycling and public transport. If a realistic Transport Assessment cannot achieve that goal then the site is not suitable for development

NO high rise, max 4 stories flats, 2 stories semi-detached- Large green spaces with play grounds.

Preferably along the coming railroad net work including businesses and smaller industrial areas

That must be up to the people living in the villages.

If along railroad yes

• Policy 80 in the Cambridge Local Plan is continually ignored by the county council highway authority, who force car-dominant road schemes onto developments, thus killing any chances of walking and cycling priority or quality. This must be fixed. We cannot continue to allow developments to become dominated by car-centric highway designs • Policy TI/2 in the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan is even worse because it does not commit to walking or cycling priority at all. That is not acceptable going forward. • Policy 82, Appendix L and the Cycle Parking Guide SPD together form the Cambridge cycle parking policies and guidance. These should be updated to be brought up to date with inclusive guidance and presented in a clear and unambiguous fashion. Camcycle must be consulted during the updating process. The South Cambridgeshire Locadesigns l Plan does not have a cycle parking guide at all, which means that developments in South Cambridgeshire often produce very poor quality cycle parking.

All ideas and themes tht lead to a net 0 carbon emmission in 2030. Double the Tree Canopy in 2025. Correct all the mistakes made in the already contgracted infrastructure designs and Re-Do before 2025. Developments should commit to implementing the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). • Maintenance and protection of cycle routes must also be included. Transport Assessments and Travel Plans should include commitments to clean, clear, de-ice and maintain cycle routes. • Policies in the Local Plan must protect existing cycle routes from being harmed by development, both during construction and after completion of the development. The convenience, safety and quality of cycle routes must be maintained or improved by development in their vicinity. • The cycling network is just as strategic as the public highway network and must be protected in the same way. In some cases, the cycling network is part of the public highway network, but where it is not, some other method of protection must be sought. This is necessary in order to achieve carbon reduction, air quality, placemaking and congestion reduction goals.