Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

• New developments must have a safe, convenient and high-quality cycling network that connects every home, business and public transport stop. • Every child should be able to easily access their schools, local parks, and friends’ homes by foot or bike. Parents should feel safe and confident that, once their children reach a suitable age, they can allow them to walk or cycle on their own in the community • Cycling should always be the quickest and most convenient transport option for local journeys within new developments, • It must be less convenient to drive through the new development for short journeys than to cycle. Driving routes on new sites should be circuitous and directed towards the exterior of the site away from where people live and gather. • Within the site, extensive deployment of filtered permeability gives freedom to people walking or cycling to take direct routes, while preventing drivers from rat-running and endangering the public. Public transport can also benefit from filtered permeability, using bus gates or dedicated rights-of-way. • Making walking and cycling accessible for people with mobility issues will enable many more people to improve their physical health through active travel and improve their mental health and wellbeing by reducing isolation. • New developments must be designed to prevent parking on pavements • High-quality cycle parking must be provided with all buildings. • Better rubbish management should ensure bins don’t litter the landscape and block paths. • Priority over side roads must be given to people walking and cycling. • Junctions must be designed to enable people of all abilities to cycle safely through them. • The Local Plan must acknowledge that cycles are also mobility aids for many people. There should never be any situation where ‘cyclist dismount’ signs are installed. • The NHS recommends 150 minutes of cardiovascular exercise per week for adults to maintain health into old age. New developments which are planned with cycling as a priority will make this easy for people to achieve by being able to cycle as a means of transport. “Street layout and design strongly influences how people make their daily journeys. Travel by noncar modes is highest in pleasant ‘liveable’ streets with low levels of traffic, trees, interesting features, attractive shop-fronts and convenient direct lines of access to facilities like public transport.” (Taylor, 2011) “In cities such as Freiburg, Groningen and Zwolle the principle of filtered permeability is acknowledged as a key element in their success in restraining car use and promoting alternatives. Through traffic is channelled onto a limited network of main roads. Suburban developments are often designed as giant culs de sac for cars, while short cuts provide a far more permeable network for the sustainable modes. People use these modes — particularly cycling — because of the time and convenience advantage compared to travelling by car.” (Melia, 2008) “Cycling to work is linked to a substantial decrease in the risk of developing and dying from cancer or heart disease.” (Torjesen, 2017) “While the UK is spending more on the National Health Service, it should also aim to reduce illness through investing in healthy environments. In many towns and cities in Western Europe, priority has been given to the quality of the environment and to inclusive accessibility, and the culture allows children to play in and roam their public realm. [. . .] The comparative study of child health and well-being in OECD countries puts British children as amongst the least healthy and least happy. Spatial planning in its broad sense, and the character of settlements, are part of the UK problem, and need to become part of the solution.” (Barton, 2009) “[There] are immense quality-of-life improvements that come with prioritizing the bicycle as a mobility device, especially among the young and elderly. A 2013 study conducted by UNICEF found that Dutch kids topped the list for overall well-being when compared to children in the world’s 29 wealthiest countries, in part because of their ability to roam freely without parent supervision.” (Bruntlett, 2018) “The basic layout of [Houten] consists of two train stations, each surrounded by a ring road with a radius of approximately one kilometer. The rest of the city is covered by an extensive, 129 kilometer network of bicycle paths. There are 31 residential districts, each of which is only accessible to cars via the peripheral ring roads encircling the town. However, the network of paths for cyclists and pedestrians includes a thoroughfare that passes directly through the town center, providing fltered permeability for cyclists and pedestrians. The majority of schools and important buildings are located along this thoroughfare. Due to this design, cycling is the most direct mode of transportation and is often even faster than travel by car. Houten’s innovative design features along with the city’s persistent policies to favor cyclists and pedestrians have resulted in numerous measured benefts, including improved cyclist and pedestrian safety, increased activity levels of residents, and reduced use of motorized vehicles. Furthermore, this case study demonstrates that innovative design features are not limited to new districts within a city, but can be applied to new cities as a whole.” (Foletta, 2014) Evidence for our response to Question 19. • Taylor, Ian and Sloman, Lynn (2011). Thriving cities: integrated land use and transport planning. • Melia, S (2008). Neighbourhoods should be made permeable for walking and cycling — but not for cars. Local Transport Today, Jan 23 2008. http://www.stevemelia.co.uk/ltt.htm • Torjesen, Ingrid (2017). Cycling to work has substantial health benefits, study finds. BMJ 2017;357:j1944. • Barton, Hugh (2009). Land use planning and health and well-being. Land Use Policy. • Bruntlett, Melissa and Bruntlett, Chris (2018). Building the Cycling City: The Dutch Blueprint for Urban Vitality. Island Press. • Foletta, Nicole (2014). Case Study: Houten. ITDP Europe.

We can achieve enormous improvements in air quality transitioning away from car dependency towards very high levels of cycling and walking. • Transport Assessments must demonstrate how developments will improve air quality. • Developments should be designed so that there is minimal car traffic near homes, schools, and places where people gather. In existing developments, traffic management should be introduced to remove and minimise car traffic. • Electric cars will still lead to significant pollution from tyres, road wear and brakes and will not resolve the issue of congestion or road danger. • Any electric car charging infrastructure that is provided in new and existing developments must not undermine walking and cycling accessibility. “Cars must be driven out of cities to tackle the UK’s air pollution crisis, not just replaced with electric vehicles, according to the UK government’s top adviser. Prof Frank Kelly said that while electric vehicles emit no exhaust fumes, they still produce large amounts of tiny pollution particles from brake and tyre dust, for which the government already accepts there is no safe limit.” (Carrington, 2017) Evidence for our response to Question 20. • Carrington, Damian (2017). Electric cars are not the answer to air pollution, says top UK adviser. The Guardian: Aug 4th, 2017. www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/04/fewer-cars-not-electric-cars-beat-airpollution-says-top-uk-adviser-prof-frank-kelly

We should reduce car parking and car traffic in our historic spaces and provide more room for people walking and cycling. • Fewer cars and more walking and cycling will result in less air pollution, noise, road danger and erosion and damage to our historic buildings and areas. • Reallocating space from roads and cars to walking and cycling will make our cities and villages more accessible and pleasant places to spend time. • Cycling is part of Cambridge culture and is what people expect to see when they come and visit our city and region.

• New developments must follow design standards for high-quality cycling and walking infrastructure that is accessible for people of all ages and abilities. See Parkin (2018) for details. • The design of new developments must be led by a requirement to achieve a fully-permeable, highquality, first-class cycling and walking network, including safe and attractive surroundings, along with direct and convenient public transport routes. • Where new developments or changes touch existing cycle routes, those cycle routes must be protected and must maintain their quality, priority and accessibility. If diverted, the diversion must be of high-quality and fully accessible to people of all abilities throughout the construction process. Any damage to the original cycle route must be fixed once it is reopened. • Cycling infrastructure should be separate from walking facilities. People walking, cycling and driving motor vehicles all have significantly different speeds from each other. Substantial flows of one mode must not be mixed together with the others, because it would be unsatisfactory and unsafe for all modes. • Too many poorly-designed developments are being granted permission (Carmona, 2020). The Local Plan is only as strong as the people who defend its principles. The planning committee and officers must be ready and willing to refuse permission to poorly designed developments. We especially emphasise that the planning authority must challenge car-centric road designs that come from the highway authority and refuse to accept car-dominated plans from the county or Combined Authority. “Designing cycle infrastructure means working on an accessible, sustainable, healthy, habitable and attractive living environment. Consequently, cycle infrastructure is inextricable from its spatial planning and social context.” (CROW, 2017, p. 37) “Cycle infrastructure designed in an integrated fashion will unite the traffic function with the spatial quality and the economic and social potential of cycling. This will enable cycle facilities to go beyond their primary traffic function and have a structuring, enriching effect on their environment in their entirety.” (CROW, 2017, p. 38) “We consider that British local authorities should be encouraged to develop a vision for highly sustainable developments on important sites, similar to European best practice, with thoroughgoing integration of land-use and transport.” (Taylor, 2011) “Generally shared use pedestrian / cycling paths alongside the carriageway are not favoured by either the City Council or the Cambridge Cycling Campaign. The City and County Council Cycling Officers raised objections to the designing in of ‘pavement cycling’, particularly of an inadequate width and requested that the route through the site should be segregated from pedestrians.” (Cambridge City Council, 2009) “Following advice set out in the NPPF (2012 and 2019), over one in five of the audited schemes — those scoring poor and very poor — should have been refused planning permission outright. Given that the national aspiration is for ‘good design’ as ‘a key aspect of sustainable development’, the mediocre projects — over half the audited total — fail the national threshold of schemes likely to prove acceptable to their communities. The design of these schemes should certainly have been improved before relevant permissions were granted.” (Carmona, 2020) Evidence for our response to Question 23. • Parkin, John (2018). Designing for Cycle Traffic. Institute of Civil Engineers Publishing. • CROW (1996–2017). The Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic. CROW-Fietsberaad. Ede, Nederland. • Wheels for Wellbeing (2019). A Guide to Inclusive Cycling. 3rd Edition. • Taylor, Ian and Sloman, Lynn (2011). Thriving cities: integrated land use and transport planning. • Cambridge City Council (2009). Review of the Orchard Park Development and Lessons to be Learnt for Future Major Developments. • Carmona, Matthew, et al (2020). A Housing Design Audit for England. Place Alliance.

• Businesses and industrial spaces need to be connected to the high-quality cycling network, as well as public transport, in order to ensure that people have the opportunity to get to work without driving. • New developments should always include some space for adaptable businesses and light industrial uses, in order to provide employment in the community that is easily accessed on foot or bike, and a healthy mix of activities in new developments. • The Local Plan must not allow car-dependent ‘dormitory estates’ where everyone is forced to travel long distances to access everyday activities like jobs, schools, surgeries and shopping.

• Businesses and industrial spaces need to be connected to the high-quality cycling network, as well as public transport, in order to ensure that people have the opportunity to get to work without driving. • New developments should always include some space for adaptable businesses and light industrial uses, in order to provide employment in the community that is easily accessed on foot or bike, and a healthy mix of activities in new developments. • The Local Plan must not allow car-dependent ‘dormitory estates’ where everyone is forced to travel long distances to access everyday activities like jobs, schools, surgeries and shopping. • Absolutely no employment site should be developed or expanded in any location before sustainable transport links have been established. Cycling, bus and train links must be there before a single employee starts work and forms the habit of driving a car to work. • Planning needs to consider trip-chaining that occurs on the way to work. Are there shops, childcare facilities and places for lunch that are easily accessed by walking and cycling on the way to and during the work day? • Large campus developments without good sustainable transport links can be isolated and leave people stranded if they don’t have a car. Campus transport that focuses on 9–5 workers leaves part-time workers stranded, and offers no opportunity for people who have to leave suddenly in the middle of the day (e.g. for a child’s emergency). “Investment in walking and cycling infrastructure is still needed, but the continued success of walking and cycling environments also depends on the extent to which new and existing residential areas are able to develop a critical mass of destinations (such as workplaces and facilities) within short distances.” (Bertolini, 2003) Evidence for our response to Question 28. • Bertolini, Luca and le Clercq, Frank (2003). Urban development without more mobility by car?. Environment and Planning A 2003, volume 35, pp 575–589.

Very flexible

We should be very flexible about the uses we allow in our city, town, district, local and village centres. Communities should provide a diverse range of employment, shopping, leisure and educational opportunities as close as reasonably possible to homes to enable shorter and more sustainable journeys. • The Local Plan should embrace the notion of ‘compact development’ that reduces the distance that people have to travel for typical everyday needs, keeping them within easy cycling reach. “Hidalgo has been leading a radical overhaul of the city’s mobility culture since taking office in 2014, and has already barred the most polluting vehicles from entry, banished cars from the Seine quayside and reclaimed road space for trees and pedestrians. Now, she says, Paris needs to go one step further and remodel itself so that residents can have all their needs met—be they for work, shopping, health, or culture—within 15 minutes of their own doorstep.” (O’Sullivan, 2020) “The meta-analysis shows that mode share and likelihood of walking trips are most strongly associated with the design and diversity dimensions of built environments. Intersection density, jobshousing balance, and distance to stores have the greatest elasticities.” (Ewing, 2010) Evidence for our response to Question 29. • O’Sullivan, Feargus (2020). Paris Mayor: It’s Time for a ‘15-Minute City’. CityLab: Feb 18th, 2020. www.citylab.com/environment/2020/02/paris-election-anne-hidalgo-city-planning-walksstores-parks/606325/ • Ewing, Reid and Cervero, Robert (2010). Travel and the Built Environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76:3, 265-294.

• Poor standards of cycle parking prevent people from cycling. Accessible, high-quality, secure and plentiful cycle parking is a critical element of high-standard housing and will enable more people to cycle regularly. • Good cycle parking is a factor in house buying and renting decisions. • Cycle parking standards (Cambridge City Council, 2010) must be updated to increase the number of cycle parking spaces required for developments, and the design standards have to be updated with modern, inclusive cycle parking specifications (Wheels for Wellbeing, 2019). • Cycle parking policies must be absolutely clear about the need for accessible cycle stands that can be used by people of all abilities and specific about the design and installation requirements (Wheels for Wellbeing, 2019). • There must be a proportion of cycle stands that are suitable for cargo cycles, tricycles, adapted cycles and recumbents (Wheels for Wellbeing, 2019). • Vertical and semi-vertical cycle parking racks must be absolutely prohibited (Wheels for Wellbeing, 2019). • Two-tier racks must not be allowed for residential uses, and must be accompanied by a suitable proportion of Sheffield stands in non-residential uses for people who cannot use the two-tier racks. • Cycle parking should never be referred to as ‘cycle storage’, because ‘parking’ implies frequent usage and ‘storage’ does not; we want the design of cycle parking to be as convenient as possible in order to enable frequent usage. • Cycle parking should be at least as close to entry doors as any car parking. Convenience for everyday usage is paramount. • Highways design and car storage arrangements must not be allowed to dominate the design of housing (Carmona, 2020). “[A] lack of [parking] for bicycles can make this highly sustainable and healthy mode of travel all but impossible for residents.” (Carmona, 2020) Evidence for our response to Question 35. • Cambridge City Council (2010). The Cycle Parking Guide for New Residential Developments. Transport Initiatives, LLP. • Wheels for Wellbeing (2019). A Guide to Inclusive Cycling. 3rd Edition. • Carmona, Matthew, et al (2020). A Housing Design Audit for England. Place Alliance

• Cycling and walking infrastructure must be safe, convenient, accessible, widely available and built to high-quality standards. See Parkin (2018), Dales (2014) and Wheels for Wellbeing (2019) for details. • 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 barriers for walking or cycling. • There must always be safe and convenient crossings to ensure that people walking and cycling have full permeability across 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 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. • The development of railway stations and the railway network should typically 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. [The following items are ‘lessons learnt’ from the Orchard Park development] • “Do not over provide for motorised traffic with multi-lane junctions at accesses into residential developments. • Good quality cycling facilities, such as designated cycle lanes and segregated routes both within a development and linking to external routes, as well as cycle parking/storage facilities, need to be in place when residents move in to achieve the highest possible usage. If proposed routes are not in place on a permanent basis from the start, some provision for temporary or interim measures should be made. • Any changes to the road network associated with new developments should not be to the detriment of existing cyclists and should improve existing routes where possible. • There should be more discussion between parties at an early stage in the planning process. Consultation on changes to junctions as part of section 106 agreements should include all relevant stakeholders, and the Cycle Liaison Group should further develop its focus on new developments. • Continuous footways should be provided alongside carriageways where possible.” (Cambridge City Council, 2009) “To achieve a society-wide move towards sustainable travel patterns it will be essential to make better use of better public transport for medium and long journeys. But it will also be necessary to create a virtuous circle where development design that encourages public transport also encourages the most sustainable of all modes of travel for shorter journeys — walking and cycling. This mutually complementary approach is possible because what is good for public transport use can also be good for walking and cycling: all public transport journeys also involve shorter trips to and from public transport, for which development design can encourage access on foot or by bike.” (Taylor, 2011) “The cities with the highest cycling levels, and those that have successfully grown cycling levels over relatively short periods, generally afford cycling good physical protection or effective spatial separation from motor traffic, unless traffic speeds and volumes are low.” (Dales, 2014) “The Dutch ‘street hierarchy’ strongly reduces cyclists’ exposure to motorised traffic by shifting vehicles away from where there is a lot of cycling. [. . .] Since the 1970s, the Netherlands has achieved an 80% reduction in cyclist’s fatality rate and is now, together with Denmark, the safest country in which to ride a bicycle.” (Schepers, 2017) “Personal safety is undeniably linked with the organization of the space. In places and on connections where there are lots of people, and therefore plenty of monitoring, there is a greater sense of safety. [. . .] [It] is best to route cycle routes as much as possible through areas where social activities take place, preferably in the evenings as well. [. . .] In addition, a cycle route through a suburb which passes the front doors of homes will be much more socially pleasant than one passing fenced-off back gardens.” (CROW, 2017) “A fundamental objective of good urban design is to connect the built environment. Analytical approaches such as Space Syntax have long demonstrated that if residential environments are well connected both visually and physically (what is often referred to as permeable) then they will facilitate more active travel, social exchange and connections, economic opportunities (e.g. for shops and cafes) and a safer built environment with less crime. Connecting new developments to their surroundings allows them to become part of a larger urban area (city, town or village) rather than operating as isolated enclaves.” (Carmona, 2020) Evidence for our response to Question 36. • Parkin, John (2018). Designing for Cycle Traffic. Institute of Civil Engineers Publishing. • Dales, John and Jones, Phil (2014). International Cycling Infrastructure: Best Practice Study. Report for Transport for London. • Schepers, et al (2017). The Dutch road to a high level of cycling safety. Safety Science 92. • CROW (1996–2017). The Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic. CROW-Fietsberaad. Ede, Nederland. • Wheels for Wellbeing (2019). A Guide to Inclusive Cycling. 3rd Edition. • Taylor, Ian and Sloman, Lynn (2011). Thriving cities: integrated land use and transport planning. • Cambridge City Council (2009). Review of the Orchard Park Development and Lessons to be Learnt for Future Major Developments. • Carmona, Matthew, et al (2020). A Housing Design Audit for England. Place Alliance.

• 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 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. • 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 (Parkin, 2018). • 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 (Parkin, 2018). • 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 minor roads. • Cycle routes must be ubiquitous, continuous, high-quality, safe, convenient, legible and fully accessible to people of all abilities (Wheels for Wellbeing, 2019). • 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. Redeveloped sites should be reducing car traffic compared to their previous use. • 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. • All national rail routes, rural bus routes, the Busway, and the future Metro, should include some services that can carry bicycles along with passengers. There should be ways for people with adapted cycles to take their mobility aid on public transport. • 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. “A comparison of residential development around Oxford, showed that new housing located near a motorway junction had higher car use than estates with good bus or train links. Subsequent work showed that all of these estates outside of Oxford have in fact generated higher car use than a new estate built on brownfield land within Oxford itself (53% of trips were by car for the infill estate, compared with an average of 82% for the estates outside the town).” (Taylor, 2011) “[Our] findings indicate that the partially-implemented London mini-Hollands programme has been effective in increasing active travel and improving perceptions of the local environment.” (Aldred, 2019) “[By] far, the most popular mode of travel for trips made within the city is cycling. The majority of Houten residents travel to the grocery store (53%), conduct other shopping (70%), run service related errands like visiting the bank or barber (79%) and visit friends and family in Houten (79%) by bike or on foot. [. . .] Overall, more than half of all trips made by Houten residents (55%) are made by non-motorized modes of travel, which is higher than for the city of Zeist (43%) and Milton Keynes (20%). Further, higher proportions of trips made by Milton Keynes (70%) and Zeist residents (46%) are by car than for the city of Houten (34%). A further study found that 42% of trips shorter than 7.5 kilometers in Houten are made by bike, and around 21% by foot.” (Foletta, 2014) “Street layout and design standards should focus on 20mph maximum speeds, ‘home zone’ street design and a network of safe, convenient and attractive routes for cycling and pedestrians.” (Campaign for Better Transport, 2019) “Turning streets from vehicle dominant to pedestrian and cycle friendly spaces involves slowing vehicle speeds (through design), designing parking to avoid conflicts, introducing cycle infrastructure and high quality pavements, and providing attractive street spaces with sufficient street furniture for rest and relaxation.” (Carmona, 2020) Evidence for our response to Question 37. • Parkin, John (2018). Designing for Cycle Traffic. Institute of Civil Engineers Publishing. • Dales, John and Jones, Phil (2014). International Cycling Infrastructure: Best Practice Study. Report for Transport for London. • CROW (1996–2017). The Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic. CROW-Fietsberaad. Ede, Nederland. • Wheels for Wellbeing (2019). A Guide to Inclusive Cycling. 3rd Edition. • Taylor, Ian and Sloman, Lynn (2011). Thriving cities: integrated land use and transport planning. • Cambridge City Council (2009). Review of the Orchard Park Development and Lessons to be Learnt for Future Major Developments. • Aldred, Rachel et al (2019). Impacts of an active travel intervention with a cycling focus in a suburban context. Transportation Research Part A 123. • Foletta, Nicole (2014). Case Study: Houten. ITDP Europe.