Question 9

Neutral

Encouraging less car use and more walking and cycling is great, but sufficient car parking space must be provided to ensure that extra cars are not parked in the surrounding roads.

Mostly not

I welcome the stated aims of reducing the need to travel and making active and sustainable modes of transport the norm while ensuring the needs of all members of society are met. The aspiration of no additional car journeys on Milton Road is laudable, but the plans are not robust enough to make this a reality. At a rate of one parking space per two dwellings, this development will add 4000 cars to our already overcrowded local roads. Milton Road already suffers from congestion at almost all times of day, and a slew of developments (Northstowe, Waterbeach, the various Cambridge developments) are set to make this worse. Policy 22 states that “appropriate space for […] car pool hire scheme vehicles” will be incorporated into parking provision. I call for a greater emphasis on such schemes and a more ambitious reduction in private car ownership. The consultation mentions the existing “good public transport links” to North East Cambridge. It will be necessary to continue to invest in services such as the Guided Busway and Cambridge North Station and increase their capacity as needed to keep pace with demand. Requiring additional Park & Ride capacity simply pushes additional car journeys into the surrounding areas. I echo concerns raised by Cambridge Cycling Campaign that trip budgets rely heavily on external schemes such as the Milton Road ‘bus improvements’ and CAM network, neither of which will be completed by the deadlines quoted in the document. If services such as transport links, cycle hire and car clubs are not in place before residents move in, car dependency becomes locked in. Care must also be taken to maintain high-quality walking and cycling access throughout the different periods of construction, including to any ‘meanwhile projects’ on the site or in surrounding communities.

Mostly not

There has been little to no consideration of the increase in traffic through Chesterton. Construction traffic should not be allowed to pass through Chesterton, it is 20 mph residential area with schools and play areas. There should be additional measures put in place through Chesterton to prevent road users using Chesterton as rat-run to avoid Milton Road. It is a genuine problem at the moment and will get worse with the development of North East Cambridge. More work needs to be done here to discourage traffic through Chesterton. How will you prevent car parking in the surrounding area of Chesterton and along Nuffield Road?

Not at all

Not in the right way. Brookgate are carbon copying the plans for Cambridge central station (CB1) despite all the failings. We should have a transport hub around Cambridge north which means that you are able to use this as a major interchange rather than going into Central Cambridge. If I want to travel from Ely to Edington for example this would be great to get off the train and then the guided bus on a segregated system to Edington via Kings Hedges and Darwin Green. Could we not incorporate a ring road for the busway or something similar. Eg from Edington we could continue the busway to Madingly Park and Ride and then Trumpington.

Not at all

This is so unrealistic! Instead of 'safeguarding space...' for a possible future tube system, the whole plan needs to be looked at again. This development is too dense, and the traffic will be only one of the many problems.

Mostly not

Apart from not mentioning the needs of the disabled or elderly. Even with restricted car parking etc this will still bring additional vehicles into the area increasing the difficulties on the city roads

Mostly not

The development plans to 'discourage' car use and non essential vehicle traffic and states that it also is based on not increasing traffic on Milton Road. I find these statements very hard to believe are think they are not attainable. To add 19,000 residents to an area and expect them not to use cars in their daily lives is ridiculous. There will be an impact on local traffic and trips along Milton Road as a result of the development. To simply not provide car parking spaces will only encourage anti social parking in surrounding already congested streets and will not put people off having a car if they need it for family life. . There is just a hopeful expectation that there will be less.

Mostly not

I'm all for reduced car use but also recognise that not everyone can use other means of transport, so some car parking facility will be needed. The science park has plenty of car parking and just recently a new multi storey car park! So these can be used if necessary. I support MRRA and HPERA's responses

Not at all

• Without an incentive, or a stringent deterrent, the aim to minimise car usage is unrealistic. For all the usual reasons – work, holidays, health appointments, pursuing leisure interests, visiting friends and relatives, etc – people will still want to get to other parts of the city and, of course, to other parts of the country. • There would need to be ample, safe, secure and covered bike-parking space. And there would need to be an incentive, such as subsidised fares, and frequency of service between, say, 7am to midnight, to use public transport: this particular need is not in the planners’ gift. • By assuming that 0.5 parking spaces per new home will be sufficient is totally unrealistic. The knock-on effect – of travel-through and the need for parking – to adjacent areas such as East Chesterton, West Chesterton, Kings Hedges and Arbury will cause much anxiety and hostility, and it will add to pollution levels where air quality is already questionable.

Not at all

Please re think your obsession with banning cars as it is ridiculous. Pollution and the Cimate Change are major problems but electric cars will solve this problem in the near future. The council should concentrate on making electric cars more popular, insist on charging points in all new developments and plan how ordinary hosueholds can charge their electric cars. The freedom made available my modern perosnal trasnport is not going to be let go and the council needs to change it's approach and allow electric or hydrogen powered vehicles solve the pollution climate change problem

Not at all

The street layout and design of the site includes many aspects which will help discourage car use including no through-routes and car parking which is not outside people’s homes.

Mostly not

Only by restricting the car space within the whole area can these objectives be achieved. This creates a win win loop. It makes it pleasent and safe to walk and cycle meaning a far wider range of people (age, class , income) will walk or cycle.

Not at all

People will NEVER ditch their cars and to assume they will is naive & stupidly shortsighted. It will create untold levels of NEW traffic which will be highly undesirable.

Not at all

Also see Qu2 response above. Any public transport offering is more of the same (history shows that it all fails) - not any proposed transformal step change to learn from the lessons of the past. Any cycling provision is mostly squeezing more into existing ‘network’. People don’t use methods of walk/cycle/unreliable public transport especially in bad weather - all history tells you that. Massive effects of extra traffic in all local roads, & car parking madness on the site. All ‘planning words’ on ‘discouraging car usage’: always turn out to be unenforceable as well as inappropriate to modern ways of day-to-day living: school run, shift working by both parents etc. Where do you plan to put roads for everyone’s (high density housing) home delivery van access?? They can’t come on a bike/walking.

Nothing chosen

If all the inhabitants and workers Living and using this area cannot walk or cycle.they will be dependent on cars. Trains only go from A to B, the Guided bus and buses are not owned by the councils and therefore do not run for the customer but for the shareholder so fares are expensive if they run the routeS at all.

Not at all

No - all the homes will have cars. There will also be a huge increase in industrial traffic associated with the sewage works that will create huge disruption for school children and harm the environment.

Mostly not

Only time will tell. If you look at the number of cars in Kings Hedges per household and compare the plans for this development, it looks like wishful thinking.

Mostly yes

You are, only providing half a car space but it may not work. On some families with grown up children they may have four cars to park. It may not work because human nature as it is, cars often get parked right outside their doors.

Mostly not

Abject failure to address existing car congestion in the city. Smart, eco friendly and low cost (free?) public transport should be the starting point. Accessibility too.

Mostly not

Concerned what will happen when vehicles come off the motorway and want to travel into Cambridge. Why will they, if the residents of NEC decide not to use Milton Road - there's no other access.

Mostly yes

No comment.

Yes, completely

No comments.

Mostly yes

No comment.

Nothing chosen

No comment

Not at all

New houses and business = more traffic. You cannot force people not to drive.

Not at all

0.5 cars is still 4,000 new cars. Again it should be more ambitious target. There are excellent bus/train links. Could you have parking away from homes to discourage?

Mostly not

Doing too much to discourage car travel - not everyone can walk far or cycle. Vehicular access is necessary for medical services, plumbing problems, deliveries etc. Inadequate parking is bad for climate change.

Not at all

Shouldn't have cars here or parking.

Nothing chosen

Too much. Cars essential - public transport useless. Car requires to visit villages /doctor/hospital/work and relatives. Parking spaces essential.

Not at all

We do not think so