Draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan

Neither agree nor disagree

We believe in the vision and principles which focus on a place for everyone with everything nearby. The focus on getting more people walking and cycling is particularly welcome to ensure a healthy, safe, and vibrant community that will lead to a zero-carbon future. However, the details given in the longer Area Action Plan and supporting documents do not give confidence that this vision will be implemented successfully. The number of houses and people seem unrealistic. Transport plans rely heavily on the delivery of schemes by other authorities (such as CAM metro) which may not be delivered in time, and the aim of creating a mixed-use site across the whole area has been lost due to the balance of power lying with landowners over the local community. We would strongly prefer, as local neighbors, to establish a locally-controlled Development Corporation to ensure that the vision for the area can be properly realized. We do not think this is possible if left to developers.

Mostly yes

18,000 residents is a lot with many cycling into the city centre on a regular basis for work and leisure. Additionally, many residents across Cambridge will be cycling to the 20,000 new jobs proposed in the plan. The plan is for 75% of the additional journeys to be by foot, cycle or public transport. The only sensible cycle route is along the river: in fact a pedestrian & cycle bridge is proposed to connect the new development to the Haling Way towpath to facilitate that. That means thousands of extra daily cycle journeys can be expected a) on the Haling Way towpath, b) along Fen Road and c) over the new bridge to the path along Stourbridge Common. Routes a) and b) converge at Water Street. None of these routes is wide enough to accommodate this number of extra cyclists, nor is there any spare space to widen their pinch points. The new influx of cyclists using Water Street will be travelling either on the pavement shared with pedestrians, where space to pass is already tight, or on the road shared with fast-moving traffic. The only way to safely accommodate the extra cycle journeys along this conduit into the city centre is to remove some of the motor traffic by closing the level-crossing and connecting Chesterton Fen to Milton Road with a new road bridge across the railway line alongside the proposed pedestrian & cycle bridge. The movement of large vehicles (e.g. skips, equipment carrier ect) is not safe for cyclists particularly with these vehicles swerving around parked cars and speed bumps.

Neutral

We support the new centres being located at the junctions of strategic cycling and walking routes which will help the district’s residents access facilities safely and easily. We also support the main district centre being located on a key route from Milton to East Chesterton and close to the Busway cycleway. This will mean that the library, health centre and arts hub are easily accessible and therefore of great benefit to surrounding communities. We support the recommendation that no single proposal for retail or services should be permitted if it is large enough to generate need for a car park, but generous amounts of secure cycle parking should be provided at centres along with shuttle bus stops and space for disabled car parking. There is a lack of sports and leisure facilities such as a swimming pool – an ideal place for these would be close to the station and bus terminus to allow easy car-free access for people travelling from outside the new district. We also support Cambridge Past, Present and Future’s recommendation to relocate industrial units and the aggregates railhead to the north-east corner of the site with a separate industrial access road added alongside the A14, which would remove large amounts of heavy traffic from the main route through the district.

Mostly not

There seem to be too many jobs in comparison to homes which will increase the number of people travelling into the area from outside and therefore unable to walk or cycle to work, creating more traffic around the whole of North Cambridge and the A14. It seems useful to have a variety of jobs so that many people can live close to their employment, but a better balance of homes and jobs is needed. Construction should be phased so that this balance remains stable at every stage of development.

Mostly not

A secondary school is very likely to be needed, along with more leisure and sports facilities as these are lacking in this part of the city. We support schools and leisure facilities being located on key walking and cycling routes so that children can travel safely and independently to their destinations from a young age. We have particular concern as we have a blind travel who has the ability to travel independently, but currently it is not safe enough to do this! Schools, health facilities and other community buildings should be in place as residents move into the first homes to promote low levels of car use and ownership. It will be important to also have cycle hire and car clubs already available so that residents do not get locked into car ownership.

Neutral

The approach to building heights and density should be determined by aspects such as liveability rather than external factors which could lead to overdevelopment. The framework for the area should begin with walking and cycle routes and generous amounts of green space. Given these types of buildings, it is hard to understand whether any family space will be created or whether everyone will be crammed together in apartment blocks. Let's hope there is not another lock-down where access to a garden is required!

Neutral

It seems that there are lots of play areas for residents, but there is no large open space. It also seems that active travel routes along the river are likely to become more crowded; closing the level crossing to motor traffic (with alternative road access elsewhere) would open up Fen Road as a pleasant cycle route and free up space for people walking along the towpath.

Mostly yes

We value existing havens for biodiversity in the area (such as those alongside the guided busway and Cowley Road cycle and walking routes) are safeguarded as well as additional measures undertaken to increase biodiversity across the site.

Mostly not

We are really pleased to see the ambition to make North East Cambridge a place where 75% of trips are made by walking, cycling or public transport and the street hierarchy and designs seem to support this goal. It is important that high-quality routes continue to the edge of the area (including junctions) and connect up with external cycle routes for onward journeys to maximise the number of longer trips made by cycle. We do have concerns about the ability of the planning service to ensure consistent quality of routes and facilities across a site which encompasses several different landowners and developers. The addition of qualifiers gives tempting get-out clauses for things which must be in place to prioritise active travel (for example, ‘Where possible [cycle parking should provide] sufficient space within which to easily manoeuvre cycles of all types’ on p198 of the Draft Area Action Plan or ‘Where possible, the priority hierarchy on streets and roads within the study area should place active travel modes first…’ in the Transport Evidence Base). Cycling must be safe, convenient and attractive to enable people to switch from driving. It seems impractical for a net-zero site to assume such high private car ownership. Realistic restrictions on car parking based on goals that encourage the use of car clubs and pools, along with walking, cycling and public transport are needed. For example, spaces in the car barns (proposed to be leased) should be set at cost levels which are a disincentive to owning over sharing or hiring. Car clubs, active travel infrastructure, secure public and residential cycle parking and good public transport links should be in place as the first residents move in, in addition to a consolidation hub within the development for business and home deliveries. It is really important that there are spaces / vehicle bays for deliveries, removals and private un/loading to avoid obstructive parking in the carriageway, or on pavements or cycleways. This causes great difficulty for those with disabilities to safely navigate.

Neutral

The transport sector is the largest contributor to carbon emissions in the UK and it will be a challenge to achieve a modal shift in north Cambridge from a situation where 71% of trips are made by car to one where 75% of trips are made by walking, cycling or public transport. Public transport itself is unlikely to be zero-carbon for some time. Therefore, it’s important that other aspects of the development create as few emissions as possible: for example, buildings should be designed to be carbon-negative. The area’s vision should not be for a ‘low-carbon’ district which is too vague for developer commitments: specific targets in terms of carbon emissions should be set for each aspect of the site. Most of the climate targets for the development are not sufficiently ambitious and contributing to local zero carbon goals in terms of transport will be particularly challenging. Trip budgets for motor traffic should be calculated based on the carbon budget rather than current highway capacity. Cycle infrastructure should be designed in a way that is adaptive to climate change: for example, cycle routes should remain clear in the event of a 100-year rain event.