Question 37. How should we encourage a shift away from car use and towards more sustainable modes of transport such as public transport, cycling and walking?

New development should ideally be focused around public transport corridors and where development can enhance and benefit from such infrastructure. Development should be designed to maximise the opportunities to use and improve links to public transport and to include walking and cycling routes between housing, jobs, existing centres of attraction and services. Overall, major new developments should look to optimise the level of self-containment on site to reduce unnecessary travel. The College’s “Call for Sites” Duxford submission includes proposals to build on the existing public transport corridor, including links from Whittlesford Parkway, to reduce unnecessary road trips. That said, the College recognises that a substantial number of trips in the short to medium term will still be taken by vehicles using existing highways. The College notes that access studies are underway to assess improvements to congested parts of the road network in the vicinity of its Duxford “Call for Sites” proposal. In this regard, the College will look to play its part, alongside others who are promoting major new developments in and around the area, in facilitating required improvements to highways in relation to its proposal and for the benefits of the wider community.

More buses!

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The promoted site at land off High Street in Balsham is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village. Balsham is also on a bus route, with regular services to Haverhill and Linton and a limited daily service to Cambridge.

It is beyond the scope of a Local Plan, but Greater Cambridge needs a considerably enhanced approach to public transport and a strategic network of pedestrian/cyclist routes linking key settlements with employment locations and Cambridge itself – as being planned at Great Abington.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The promoted sites at land at Two Mill Field and land to the north of Oakington Road in Cottenham would be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village. Cottenham is connected to Cambridge by frequent bus services. There is a shared use path between Cottenham and Histon. Therefore, the promoted sites are sustainable in transport terms, and for this reason they should be allocated in the emerging GCLP.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The sites are accessible to the services and facilities within Great Abington by walking and cycling. The promoted developments would be well-related to the transport infrastructure improvements proposed in the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s Cambridge South East Transport project, which includes cycle routes to Granta Park and Babraham Research Campus, travel hubs, greenways, and the new public transport route into Cambridge. Therefore, the promoted sites are sustainable in transport terms, and for this reason they should be allocated in the emerging GCLP.

New development should be very close to frequent and reliable public transport services. Developers will often argue that a development some 15 or 20 minutes’ walk from a rail station or bus service is sustainable but that distance is sufficient to push most people to drive instead of use public transport. Public transport needs to be significantly improved so that it does not take people much longer than travelling by car.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The promoted development at land at Park Lane in Dry Drayton is accessible to the services and facilities in the village by walking, cycling and public transport, and the site would be well-related to the walking and cycling improvements on Madingley Road proposed by the Greater Cambridge Partnership.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. Histon is defined as a Rural Centre in the settlement hierarchy. Histon contains supermarkets and other small convenience stores and shops, a post office, doctor’s surgery and pharmacy, dentist, library, public houses and restaurants, banks, schools, and village halls. A new primary school is currently being constructed on land to the south east of the promoted site, at Buxhall Farm at the junction of Cottenham Road and Glebe Way. Histon is connected to Cambridge and Ely by a frequent bus service, and it is on a cycle route into Cambridge. The site is accessible to the services and facilities within Histon by walking and cycling. There are existing on and off road cycle routes within Histon and to and from neighbouring areas. The Greater Cambridge Partnership is currently delivering cycle improvements along Histon Road into Cambridge. For all these reasons it is requested that the land rear of 113 Cottenham Road in Histon should be allocated in the emerging GCLP. In addition, it is noted that Paragraph 138 of the NPPF suggests that sites which are accessible by public transport should be one of the preferred locations to be released from the Green Belt, where it is has been assessed that a release is necessary; the promoted development would meet this requirement.

It is possibly beyond the scope of the Local Plan but Greater Cambridge needs a considerably enhanced approach to public transport, including increases in capacity and reductions in fares to encourage use, and a strategic network of public transport, pedestrian and cycle routes linking key settlements with employment locations and Cambridge itself

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The Transport Statement that supported the previous application for the proposed development of Land at Meadow Drift, Elsworth concluded that the location of the site and the local transport services available are such that future residents would have a realistic choice of travel modes. The proposals would therefore contribute towards the aim of the GCLP to encourage a shift away from car use towards more sustainable modes of transport.

It is possibly beyond the scope of the Local Plan but Greater Cambridge needs a considerably enhanced approach to public transport, including increases in capacity and reductions in fares to encourage use, and a strategic network of public transport, pedestrian and cycle routes linking key settlements with employment locations and Cambridge itself.

Reallocate road space from motor traffic to cyclists and pedestrians. Charge motorists for entering zones within Cambridge city. Stop giving planning permission to developments which provide parking in the city. Rollout more residents parking schemes on the streets of Cambridge. Free parking encourages private motor use.

I have answered this MANY times. Pot holes - get rid of. Continuous segregated cycle lanes for LOCAL inside-Cambridge cycling - make them. Cars/lorries etc etc - reduce/constrain. Prioritise pedestrians and cyclists at EVERY junction. To which I could add: make bus route maps visible at every bus stop. Make them clear and intelligible - the stagecoach website is awful. Have more, smaller, electric busses, more much often going on many more routes. Don’t require people to take a bus into the centre to change busses to another radial route to get all the way back out again to where they actually want to go. I have lived in Cambridge for decades and have taken fewer than 5 busses in total. Too difficult to access info, and the info is always depressingly useless.

7.1 The NPPF states that “Significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes. This can help to reduce congestion and emissions and improve air quality and public health.” 7.2 The NPPF also advocates the advantages of planning new settlements by: “Considering opportunities provided by existing or planned transport improvements (such as public transport stops) when determining where future development should take place”, “Assessing how potential development sites could provide new opportunities for transport infrastructure improvements” and “By locating new homes and jobs which have easy access to reliable sustainable transport modes.” 7.3 The Local Plan needs to ensure developments create an environment where accessibility to day to day services and other facilities is easy and a choice of transport modes is available. This will enable the local community to choose the more socially inclusive and sustainable methods of travel. New developments need to be designed so that this can happen from first occupation when habits start to form.

• 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. • Cycle routes must be given priority both in planning terms and on the ground where they cross roads. • 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. • 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. • 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.

The plan should oppose all building of new roads, and encourage public transport, including cycle and walking links at any new stations. All new facilities such as schools should be safely accessible by foot and bicycle.

Greater Cambridge needs an enhanced approach to public transport and a strategic network of pedestrian/cycle routes linking key settlements with employment locations and Cambridge itself. This should be delivered in conjunction with a Local Plan which promotes residential development in close proximity to employment allocations and settlements, particularly Cambridge, thereby reducing the need to travel by car. We note that the first two “greenways” which will provide off-road routes to connect villages and the city have been given final approval. The Greater Cambridge Partnership committed £14 million on 01 February 2020 for greenways to Waterbeach and Fulbourn. Construction is planned to commence October 2023, with completion expected by September 2024. The Waterbeach Greenway will link the village with Cambridge railway station and will provide off-road connections for walkers, cyclists and horse riders. The projected route runs through land promoted by the Quy Estate and in close proximity to the site promoted for residential development at Albert Road, Stow-cum-Quy. This would promote non-car modes of transport to/from Cambridge and would mean that employment opportunities could easily be reached from residential development by sustainable non-car modes of transport.

Pigeon support the aspiration to secure a shift away from car use towards more sustainable transport. We consider that the Councils have set out all the relevant issues in the consultation document. It will be important that the Local Plan is coordinated in process and substance with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Transport Plan to ensure that development is accessible by public transport, walking and cycling. To the extent that development locations cause residents to have to travel, the first option should be rapid, sustainable modes suited to the length of the journey – walking/cycling/bus/metro/railway. The Councils are already adopting this approach so far as the Cambourne to Cambridge corridor is concerned, making our proposed site at St Neots Road, Hardwick highly sustainable. Further expansion of villages within transport corridors should be seen as an opportunity to sustain and attract new services and reduce the need for residents to travel to facilities farther afield.

Greater Cambridge needs an enhanced approach to public transport and a strategic network of pedestrian/cycle routes linking key settlements with employment locations and Cambridge itself. This should be delivered in conjunction with a Local Plan which promotes residential development in close proximity to employment allocations and settlements, particularly Cambridge, thereby reducing the need to travel by car. We note that the first two “greenways” which will provide off-road routes to connect villages and the city have been given final approval. The Greater Cambridge Partnership committed £14 million on 01 February 2020 for greenways to Waterbeach and Fulbourn. Construction is planned to commence October 2023, with completion expected by September 2024. The Waterbeach Greenway will link the village with Cambridge railway station and will provide off-road connections for walkers, cyclists and horse riders. The projected route runs through land promoted by the Quy Estate and in close proximity to the site promoted through the Call for Sites process at Fen Ditton. Any development at this site could link into the route which would promote sustainable means of transport. This would mean that employment opportunities could easily be reached from residential development by sustainable non-car modes of transport.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The promoted site at land south of Old House Road in Balsham is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village. Balsham is also on a bus route, with regular services to Haverhill and Linton and a daily service to Cambridge. Additional growth also has the potential to increase demand for public transport and therefore increase the level and quality of services provided.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The promoted site at land South of St Neots Road Eltisely is accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the services and facilities within the village and to nearby employment and local facilities at Cambourne. In light of the recent announcement concerning East-West Rail, and the planned new bus routes along the A428 corridor, and perhaps CAM, accessibility to public transport is also to be significantly enhanced during this Plan period. It is for these reasons that this site should be allocated in the emerging GCLP for a modest scale of development as is proposed here. A balanced housing strategy is needed which includes growth a Group Villages such as Eltisely to ensure the full needs of the housing area are met. Locating growth in villages where real transport choice will exist represent a sustainable and justified strategy for growth.

• 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.

• 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. • Cycle routes must be ubiquitous, continuous, high-quality, safe, convenient, legible and fully accessible to people of all abilities. • 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. • 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. • 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.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. The developments promoted by Endurance Estates in Bassingbourn are all accessible by walking, cycling and public transport to the good range of services and facilities within the village, including the secondary school (Bassingbourn Village College). The promoted development at land off Poplar Farm Close would include the widening of the footway on the northern side of Brook Road adjacent to the site, providing safer pedestrian access to the primary school, village college and sports centre. Bassingbourn is on bus routes, with regular services to Royston and a limited service to Cambridge. There is a railway station at Royston.

• 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.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that development is located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Therefore, the site selection process for potential allocations in emerging CGLP will be an important part of increasing travel by sustainable modes of transport. It is considered that the site promoted by North BRLOG at South West Cambridge is well related to the sustainable transport projects to the west of Cambridge i.e. Cambourne to Cambridge Public Transport Corridor, the potential future Cambridge Autonomous Metro, Comberton Greenway and Barton Greenway. An urban extension at South West Cambridge would support the delivery of these transport infrastructure projects and increase access by walking, cycling and public transport. It is partly for these reasons that land at South West Cambridge should be allocated in the emerging GCLP. In addition, it is noted that Paragraph 138 of the NPPF suggests that sites which are accessible by public transport should be one of the preferred locations to be released from the Green Belt, where it is has been assessed that a release is necessary; the promoted development at South West Cambridge would meet this requirement.

A congestion charge for driving cars into the centre of Cambridge. Increased amounts of segregated bus and bike lanes. Reduced cost of the buses would also help. Not continuing road expansion programmes which will only serve to encourage further car use.

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. 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.

I think a major flaw in our public transport system is that all buses go to the City Centre. So few people actually work in the City Centre. You usually have to catch multiple buses to get to where you go making it quicker to drive. In reality, huge numbers work on the Addenbrookes site and the Cambridge Science Park - the major towns in the County should all have buses going direct to these workplaces.