Waterbeach New Town SPD

Please refer to uploaded document.

2.3 ACCESS, MOVEMENT AND CONNECTIVITY
Comment: Comprehensive sustainable movement framework and a potential connection to Cycle Route 11 shown in Figure 6 is noted.

2.6 SURROUNDING CONTEXT
Support: Reference to the Wicken Fen Vision.
Objection: Opportunities have been missed to look beyond the immediate site boundaries and to integrate the site
effectively with the surrounding countryside. The site also has a relationship to rural parts of East Cambridgeshire, located to the
north east of the development.

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS
Support: Broadly support the proposed approach to Structuring Elements and Guiding Principles.

4.2.3 PRIMARY MOVEMENT ACCESS
Objection: Primary movement and Access: The proposals for cycling and pedestrian movement omit reference to:
- pedestrian and cycle links the north to the north and east, including the Fen Rivers Way;
- and Lodes Way (National Cycle Route 11).
Support: Inclusion of the 'missing link', which would connect Waterbeach to Wicken. The Trust is supportive of this scheme subject to being satisfied that measures are in place to protect ecologically sensitive parts of the Wicken Fen reserve.

4.2.6 PUBLIC SPACES
Support: Green infrastructure; delivery of high quality multifunctional green spaces and wider connectivity.

4.2.10 EDGE TREATMENTS
Comment: Principle 7 Greenways and Corridors should consider specific enhancement opportunities, and articulate a long term vision for enhancing the Fen Edge and Rail corridor.

5.5 GUIDING PRINCIPLES - 20 Create a multifunctional Green Network
Objection: Commitment needed in SPD to this Guiding Principle otherwise SPD is not fully compliant with Local Plan Policy NH4 in terms of aiding the delivery of the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy.

6.2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
Comment: The SPD should endorse the use of the Natural Cambridgeshire Local Nature Partnership's (LNP) Developing with Nature Toolkit in the design and delivery of multi-functional habitats at Waterbeach.

Please refer to uploaded document.

2.3 ACCESS, MOVEMENT AND CONNECTIVITY
Comment: Comprehensive sustainable movement framework and a potential connection to Cycle Route 11 shown in Figure 6 is noted.

2.6 SURROUNDING CONTEXT
Support: Reference to the Wicken Fen Vision.
Objection: Opportunities have been missed to look beyond the immediate site boundaries and to integrate the site
effectively with the surrounding countryside. The site also has a relationship to rural parts of East Cambridgeshire, located to the
north east of the development.

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS
Support: Broadly support the proposed approach to Structuring Elements and Guiding Principles.

4.2.3 PRIMARY MOVEMENT ACCESS
Objection: Primary movement and Access: The proposals for cycling and pedestrian movement omit reference to:
- pedestrian and cycle links the north to the north and east, including the Fen Rivers Way;
- and Lodes Way (National Cycle Route 11).
Support: Inclusion of the 'missing link', which would connect Waterbeach to Wicken. The Trust is supportive of this scheme subject to being satisfied that measures are in place to protect ecologically sensitive parts of the Wicken Fen reserve.

4.2.6 PUBLIC SPACES
Support: Green infrastructure; delivery of high quality multifunctional green spaces and wider connectivity.

4.2.10 EDGE TREATMENTS
Comment: Principle 7 Greenways and Corridors should consider specific enhancement opportunities, and articulate a long term vision for enhancing the Fen Edge and Rail corridor.

5.5 GUIDING PRINCIPLES - 20 Create a multifunctional Green Network
Objection: Commitment needed in SPD to this Guiding Principle otherwise SPD is not fully compliant with Local Plan Policy NH4 in terms of aiding the delivery of the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy.

6.2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
Comment: The SPD should endorse the use of the Natural Cambridgeshire Local Nature Partnership's (LNP) Developing with Nature Toolkit in the design and delivery of multi-functional habitats at Waterbeach.

Please refer to uploaded document.

2.3 ACCESS, MOVEMENT AND CONNECTIVITY
Comment: Comprehensive sustainable movement framework and a potential connection to Cycle Route 11 shown in Figure 6 is noted.

2.6 SURROUNDING CONTEXT
Support: Reference to the Wicken Fen Vision.
Objection: Opportunities have been missed to look beyond the immediate site boundaries and to integrate the site
effectively with the surrounding countryside. The site also has a relationship to rural parts of East Cambridgeshire, located to the
north east of the development.

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS
Support: Broadly support the proposed approach to Structuring Elements and Guiding Principles.

4.2.3 PRIMARY MOVEMENT ACCESS
Objection: Primary movement and Access: The proposals for cycling and pedestrian movement omit reference to:
- pedestrian and cycle links the north to the north and east, including the Fen Rivers Way;
- and Lodes Way (National Cycle Route 11).
Support: Inclusion of the 'missing link', which would connect Waterbeach to Wicken. The Trust is supportive of this scheme subject to being satisfied that measures are in place to protect ecologically sensitive parts of the Wicken Fen reserve.

4.2.6 PUBLIC SPACES
Support: Green infrastructure; delivery of high quality multifunctional green spaces and wider connectivity.

4.2.10 EDGE TREATMENTS
Comment: Principle 7 Greenways and Corridors should consider specific enhancement opportunities, and articulate a long term vision for enhancing the Fen Edge and Rail corridor.

5.5 GUIDING PRINCIPLES - 20 Create a multifunctional Green Network
Objection: Commitment needed in SPD to this Guiding Principle otherwise SPD is not fully compliant with Local Plan Policy NH4 in terms of aiding the delivery of the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy.

6.2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
Comment: The SPD should endorse the use of the Natural Cambridgeshire Local Nature Partnership's (LNP) Developing with Nature Toolkit in the design and delivery of multi-functional habitats at Waterbeach.

Please refer to uploaded document.

2.3 ACCESS, MOVEMENT AND CONNECTIVITY
Comment: Comprehensive sustainable movement framework and a potential connection to Cycle Route 11 shown in Figure 6 is noted.

2.6 SURROUNDING CONTEXT
Support: Reference to the Wicken Fen Vision.
Objection: Opportunities have been missed to look beyond the immediate site boundaries and to integrate the site
effectively with the surrounding countryside. The site also has a relationship to rural parts of East Cambridgeshire, located to the
north east of the development.

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS
Support: Broadly support the proposed approach to Structuring Elements and Guiding Principles.

4.2.3 PRIMARY MOVEMENT ACCESS
Objection: Primary movement and Access: The proposals for cycling and pedestrian movement omit reference to:
- pedestrian and cycle links the north to the north and east, including the Fen Rivers Way;
- and Lodes Way (National Cycle Route 11).
Support: Inclusion of the 'missing link', which would connect Waterbeach to Wicken. The Trust is supportive of this scheme subject to being satisfied that measures are in place to protect ecologically sensitive parts of the Wicken Fen reserve.

4.2.6 PUBLIC SPACES
Support: Green infrastructure; delivery of high quality multifunctional green spaces and wider connectivity.

4.2.10 EDGE TREATMENTS
Comment: Principle 7 Greenways and Corridors should consider specific enhancement opportunities, and articulate a long term vision for enhancing the Fen Edge and Rail corridor.

5.5 GUIDING PRINCIPLES - 20 Create a multifunctional Green Network
Objection: Commitment needed in SPD to this Guiding Principle otherwise SPD is not fully compliant with Local Plan Policy NH4 in terms of aiding the delivery of the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy.

6.2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
Comment: The SPD should endorse the use of the Natural Cambridgeshire Local Nature Partnership's (LNP) Developing with Nature Toolkit in the design and delivery of multi-functional habitats at Waterbeach.

The access and transport needs to be addressed - particularly A10 upgrade and effect on existing village.
Layout and relationship to Waterbeach village needs further consideration, either its separate or its not the developers can not have the best of both worlds.

I feel that 11,000 homes for this site is too much, the density and height of the proposed building is more suited to an urban site rather than the rural setting that Waterbeach currently is. I agree that the current disused barracks should be developed but not the green fields surrounding it, the impact to the surrounding fenland environment has not been taken into account. Although the new town is said to be completely separate to Waterbeach village there is not enough distinction between the two and why keep reference it as Waterbeach new town? The relocation of the train station is only being done to serve the new town and consideration and integration to the existing community has not been properly thought through. No new development should take place until the A10 has been upgraded and there should be a ban on all construction traffic using the existing village.

1.dwellings must be limited to 9,000 or less

2. Market town approach 4 story dwellings max

3. CLT promotion a full section not a maybe paragraph

4. The negative impact Amey is causing to air quality, continuous EA breaches, resolve

5. Crime prevention section within health

6. Park and Ride service must service the village

7. Process to be put in place to make the developers work together. Currently behaving like a divorced pair

8. Remove EFW references

9. Water treatment to be 1,000 meters away from the river Camb to protect recreational use

The Waterbeach SPD does not cover the basics :-

1. The number of dwellings should be restricted to 8,000 to 9,000 as per the inspectors report. The developers want more and the SPD seems to be developer led. The key element of the SPD must be explicit that the development will be 9,000 dwellings or less. Reference to 10,000 to 11,000 should be removed.

2. The inspector states the delivery should be in keeping with a Market Town. The SPD should be explicit and limit the number of stories to 4 maximum. The majority should be 2 story developments in keeping with a market town. Further the boundaries between Denny Abbey and Waterbeach Village should be limited to 2 stories in terms of development.

3. The SPD should promote the local CLT. The Waterbeach CLT should be a section within the document. The CLT is a key organisation in delivering affordable housing to local people. The key workers section should be removed as all workers are key.

4. Air Quality- Amey Cespa East continues to breach EA permits the SPD should reference within the Air Quality requirements that the council will work with the EA in ensuring Amey comply with permits. Amey is the major local pollution source in terms of Air Quality after the A10. It is unfair that 30,000 people may be subject to poor Air Quality and smells generated illegally by Amey. The SPD must address this issue.

5. Health and Mental Health, one of the main elements to healthy living is a low crime environment. The SPD does not address crime prevention and the role of the police. 9,000 houses on top of the existing village should warrant a police station. The council needs to learn from the Orchard Park errors which has led to Orchard Parks high crime issues.Orchard Park is now a leading UK crime hotspot we don't want the same mistakes made at Waterbeach

6. The Park and Ride service must come to the existing village. This will give the current village good access to key resources 7 days a week, eg train station, supermarkets. We must not allow U&C to remove Waterbeach village from the P&R services

7. The developers are not working together eg U&C feel RLW have been premature with the train station application (based on village drop in sessions). RLW need a road from the A10 but that land is in control of U&C. Some systems need to be put into place to ensure the developers work together and disputes can be resolved by arbitration. We must not get creep from 8,000 to 9,000 houses.

8. Reference to EFW should be removed from the document as planning approval has been rejected. Further the comment about electricity generation is irrelevant as the electricity cable was going to Kings Hedges not the new town.

9. Water treatment plants, Waterbeach Village has a great resource used by many people for recreational use, the River Camb. Any new plants should be based at least 1,000 meters away from the River Camb. Sewage plants don't go hand in hand with recreational areas, smells, vista etc etc . The SPD should state the sewage works (water treatment) must not be within 1,000 meters of recreational areas.

1.dwellings must be limited to 9,000 or less

2. Market town approach 4 story dwellings max

3. CLT promotion a full section not a maybe paragraph

4. The negative impact Amey is causing to air quality, continuous EA breaches, resolve

5. Crime prevention section within health

6. Park and Ride service must service the village

7. Process to be put in place to make the developers work together. Currently behaving like a divorced pair

8. Remove EFW references

9. Water treatment to be 1,000 meters away from the river Camb to protect recreational use

The Waterbeach SPD does not cover the basics :-

1. The number of dwellings should be restricted to 8,000 to 9,000 as per the inspectors report. The developers want more and the SPD seems to be developer led. The key element of the SPD must be explicit that the development will be 9,000 dwellings or less. Reference to 10,000 to 11,000 should be removed.

2. The inspector states the delivery should be in keeping with a Market Town. The SPD should be explicit and limit the number of stories to 4 maximum. The majority should be 2 story developments in keeping with a market town. Further the boundaries between Denny Abbey and Waterbeach Village should be limited to 2 stories in terms of development.

3. The SPD should promote the local CLT. The Waterbeach CLT should be a section within the document. The CLT is a key organisation in delivering affordable housing to local people. The key workers section should be removed as all workers are key.

4. Air Quality- Amey Cespa East continues to breach EA permits the SPD should reference within the Air Quality requirements that the council will work with the EA in ensuring Amey comply with permits. Amey is the major local pollution source in terms of Air Quality after the A10. It is unfair that 30,000 people may be subject to poor Air Quality and smells generated illegally by Amey. The SPD must address this issue.

5. Health and Mental Health, one of the main elements to healthy living is a low crime environment. The SPD does not address crime prevention and the role of the police. 9,000 houses on top of the existing village should warrant a police station. The council needs to learn from the Orchard Park errors which has led to Orchard Parks high crime issues.Orchard Park is now a leading UK crime hotspot we don't want the same mistakes made at Waterbeach

6. The Park and Ride service must come to the existing village. This will give the current village good access to key resources 7 days a week, eg train station, supermarkets. We must not allow U&C to remove Waterbeach village from the P&R services

7. The developers are not working together eg U&C feel RLW have been premature with the train station application (based on village drop in sessions). RLW need a road from the A10 but that land is in control of U&C. Some systems need to be put into place to ensure the developers work together and disputes can be resolved by arbitration. We must not get creep from 8,000 to 9,000 houses.

8. Reference to EFW should be removed from the document as planning approval has been rejected. Further the comment about electricity generation is irrelevant as the electricity cable was going to Kings Hedges not the new town.

9. Water treatment plants, Waterbeach Village has a great resource used by many people for recreational use, the River Camb. Any new plants should be based at least 1,000 meters away from the River Camb. Sewage plants don't go hand in hand with recreational areas, smells, vista etc etc . The SPD should state the sewage works (water treatment) must not be within 1,000 meters of recreational areas.

1.dwellings must be limited to 9,000 or less

2. Market town approach 4 story dwellings max

3. CLT promotion a full section not a maybe paragraph

4. The negative impact Amey is causing to air quality, continuous EA breaches, resolve

5. Crime prevention section within health

6. Park and Ride service must service the village

7. Process to be put in place to make the developers work together. Currently behaving like a divorced pair

8. Remove EFW references

9. Water treatment to be 1,000 meters away from the river Camb to protect recreational use

The Waterbeach SPD does not cover the basics :-

1. The number of dwellings should be restricted to 8,000 to 9,000 as per the inspectors report. The developers want more and the SPD seems to be developer led. The key element of the SPD must be explicit that the development will be 9,000 dwellings or less. Reference to 10,000 to 11,000 should be removed.

2. The inspector states the delivery should be in keeping with a Market Town. The SPD should be explicit and limit the number of stories to 4 maximum. The majority should be 2 story developments in keeping with a market town. Further the boundaries between Denny Abbey and Waterbeach Village should be limited to 2 stories in terms of development.

3. The SPD should promote the local CLT. The Waterbeach CLT should be a section within the document. The CLT is a key organisation in delivering affordable housing to local people. The key workers section should be removed as all workers are key.

4. Air Quality- Amey Cespa East continues to breach EA permits the SPD should reference within the Air Quality requirements that the council will work with the EA in ensuring Amey comply with permits. Amey is the major local pollution source in terms of Air Quality after the A10. It is unfair that 30,000 people may be subject to poor Air Quality and smells generated illegally by Amey. The SPD must address this issue.

5. Health and Mental Health, one of the main elements to healthy living is a low crime environment. The SPD does not address crime prevention and the role of the police. 9,000 houses on top of the existing village should warrant a police station. The council needs to learn from the Orchard Park errors which has led to Orchard Parks high crime issues.Orchard Park is now a leading UK crime hotspot we don't want the same mistakes made at Waterbeach

6. The Park and Ride service must come to the existing village. This will give the current village good access to key resources 7 days a week, eg train station, supermarkets. We must not allow U&C to remove Waterbeach village from the P&R services

7. The developers are not working together eg U&C feel RLW have been premature with the train station application (based on village drop in sessions). RLW need a road from the A10 but that land is in control of U&C. Some systems need to be put into place to ensure the developers work together and disputes can be resolved by arbitration. We must not get creep from 8,000 to 9,000 houses.

8. Reference to EFW should be removed from the document as planning approval has been rejected. Further the comment about electricity generation is irrelevant as the electricity cable was going to Kings Hedges not the new town.

9. Water treatment plants, Waterbeach Village has a great resource used by many people for recreational use, the River Camb. Any new plants should be based at least 1,000 meters away from the River Camb. Sewage plants don't go hand in hand with recreational areas, smells, vista etc etc . The SPD should state the sewage works (water treatment) must not be within 1,000 meters of recreational areas.

1.dwellings must be limited to 9,000 or less

2. Market town approach 4 story dwellings max

3. CLT promotion a full section not a maybe paragraph

4. The negative impact Amey is causing to air quality, continuous EA breaches, resolve

5. Crime prevention section within health

6. Park and Ride service must service the village

7. Process to be put in place to make the developers work together. Currently behaving like a divorced pair

8. Remove EFW references

9. Water treatment to be 1,000 meters away from the river Camb to protect recreational use

The Waterbeach SPD does not cover the basics :-

1. The number of dwellings should be restricted to 8,000 to 9,000 as per the inspectors report. The developers want more and the SPD seems to be developer led. The key element of the SPD must be explicit that the development will be 9,000 dwellings or less. Reference to 10,000 to 11,000 should be removed.

2. The inspector states the delivery should be in keeping with a Market Town. The SPD should be explicit and limit the number of stories to 4 maximum. The majority should be 2 story developments in keeping with a market town. Further the boundaries between Denny Abbey and Waterbeach Village should be limited to 2 stories in terms of development.

3. The SPD should promote the local CLT. The Waterbeach CLT should be a section within the document. The CLT is a key organisation in delivering affordable housing to local people. The key workers section should be removed as all workers are key.

4. Air Quality- Amey Cespa East continues to breach EA permits the SPD should reference within the Air Quality requirements that the council will work with the EA in ensuring Amey comply with permits. Amey is the major local pollution source in terms of Air Quality after the A10. It is unfair that 30,000 people may be subject to poor Air Quality and smells generated illegally by Amey. The SPD must address this issue.

5. Health and Mental Health, one of the main elements to healthy living is a low crime environment. The SPD does not address crime prevention and the role of the police. 9,000 houses on top of the existing village should warrant a police station. The council needs to learn from the Orchard Park errors which has led to Orchard Parks high crime issues.Orchard Park is now a leading UK crime hotspot we don't want the same mistakes made at Waterbeach

6. The Park and Ride service must come to the existing village. This will give the current village good access to key resources 7 days a week, eg train station, supermarkets. We must not allow U&C to remove Waterbeach village from the P&R services

7. The developers are not working together eg U&C feel RLW have been premature with the train station application (based on village drop in sessions). RLW need a road from the A10 but that land is in control of U&C. Some systems need to be put into place to ensure the developers work together and disputes can be resolved by arbitration. We must not get creep from 8,000 to 9,000 houses.

8. Reference to EFW should be removed from the document as planning approval has been rejected. Further the comment about electricity generation is irrelevant as the electricity cable was going to Kings Hedges not the new town.

9. Water treatment plants, Waterbeach Village has a great resource used by many people for recreational use, the River Camb. Any new plants should be based at least 1,000 meters away from the River Camb. Sewage plants don't go hand in hand with recreational areas, smells, vista etc etc . The SPD should state the sewage works (water treatment) must not be within 1,000 meters of recreational areas.

1.dwellings must be limited to 9,000 or less

2. Market town approach 4 story dwellings max

3. CLT promotion a full section not a maybe paragraph

4. The negative impact Amey is causing to air quality, continuous EA breaches, resolve

5. Crime prevention section within health

6. Park and Ride service must service the village

7. Process to be put in place to make the developers work together. Currently behaving like a divorced pair

8. Remove EFW references

9. Water treatment to be 1,000 meters away from the river Camb to protect recreational use

The Waterbeach SPD does not cover the basics :-

1. The number of dwellings should be restricted to 8,000 to 9,000 as per the inspectors report. The developers want more and the SPD seems to be developer led. The key element of the SPD must be explicit that the development will be 9,000 dwellings or less. Reference to 10,000 to 11,000 should be removed.

2. The inspector states the delivery should be in keeping with a Market Town. The SPD should be explicit and limit the number of stories to 4 maximum. The majority should be 2 story developments in keeping with a market town. Further the boundaries between Denny Abbey and Waterbeach Village should be limited to 2 stories in terms of development.

3. The SPD should promote the local CLT. The Waterbeach CLT should be a section within the document. The CLT is a key organisation in delivering affordable housing to local people. The key workers section should be removed as all workers are key.

4. Air Quality- Amey Cespa East continues to breach EA permits the SPD should reference within the Air Quality requirements that the council will work with the EA in ensuring Amey comply with permits. Amey is the major local pollution source in terms of Air Quality after the A10. It is unfair that 30,000 people may be subject to poor Air Quality and smells generated illegally by Amey. The SPD must address this issue.

5. Health and Mental Health, one of the main elements to healthy living is a low crime environment. The SPD does not address crime prevention and the role of the police. 9,000 houses on top of the existing village should warrant a police station. The council needs to learn from the Orchard Park errors which has led to Orchard Parks high crime issues.Orchard Park is now a leading UK crime hotspot we don't want the same mistakes made at Waterbeach

6. The Park and Ride service must come to the existing village. This will give the current village good access to key resources 7 days a week, eg train station, supermarkets. We must not allow U&C to remove Waterbeach village from the P&R services

7. The developers are not working together eg U&C feel RLW have been premature with the train station application (based on village drop in sessions). RLW need a road from the A10 but that land is in control of U&C. Some systems need to be put into place to ensure the developers work together and disputes can be resolved by arbitration. We must not get creep from 8,000 to 9,000 houses.

8. Reference to EFW should be removed from the document as planning approval has been rejected. Further the comment about electricity generation is irrelevant as the electricity cable was going to Kings Hedges not the new town.

9. Water treatment plants, Waterbeach Village has a great resource used by many people for recreational use, the River Camb. Any new plants should be based at least 1,000 meters away from the River Camb. Sewage plants don't go hand in hand with recreational areas, smells, vista etc etc . The SPD should state the sewage works (water treatment) must not be within 1,000 meters of recreational areas.