Waterbeach New Town SPD

Object

Representation ID: 167484

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

2.1 LOCATION AND LAND USE
The SPD is not clear on the different legal identities of the greenfield / brownfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 167485

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Waterbeach and District Bridleways Group

5.4 HEALTH
SPD should include more details on health provision and demand that developers fund this.

Comment

Representation ID: 167486

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

1. INTRODUCTION
Welcome the SPD to support the Local Plan Policy and guide developers.

Welcome the preparation of this document to support policy in the South
Cambridgeshire Local Plan and to provide guidance to developers and help guide the preparation and assessment of future planning applications on the site. The document provides a thorough basis for planning for this large development site.

Comment

Representation ID: 167487

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

1.3 KEY ISSUES
Welcome references to the need for comprehensive development, and the sensitive historical location and proximity of Denny Abbey, but other assets need to be referenced.

1.3 Key Issues - 1 The need for comprehensive development
We welcome reference to the need for comprehensive development of the site. This has been a key concern for Historic England over the years in relation to this site.

1.3 Key Issues - 5 Managing a sensitive historical location
We welcome reference to the sensitive historical location and proximity of Denny Abbey. We would highlight the fact that there are other designated heritage assets in the immediate surroundings. These include Denny Abbey Refectory listed at grade I, barn to the north of Denny Abbey listed at grade II and Waterbeach Conservation Area to the south of the site. These assets need to be specifically referenced in the SPD.

P10, para1 We welcome the reference Denny Abbey and the Major Development Site boundary outside of which built development is not permitted. This boundary was agreed through the EiP.

Comment

Representation ID: 167488

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

2. SITE CONTEXT
Welcome references to historic assets and features, but a factual correction is needed in relation to the ownership of Denny Abbey.

P14 para 3 Strictly speaking, Denny Abbey is in the guardianship of the English Heritage Trust and open to the public via a management agreement with the Farmland Museum Trust.

P18 Section 2.4 para 3 We welcome reference to Car Dyke, the raised causeways and the Soldier's Hill earthworks.

P18 Section 2.4 para 6 We also welcome reference to distant views to Ely Cathedral to the north of the site.

P18 Section 2.4 para 7 We welcome reference to the runways and barracks. Whilst these are not designated heritage assets, they represent an important component of the history of the site.

Comment

Representation ID: 167489

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

2.5 INHERITED ASSETS
Comment that this section should be renamed 'The Historic Environment' as it encompasses all aspects of heritage.

Section 2.5 We suggest that this section is renamed 'The Historic Environment, rather than 'Inherited Assets' The historic environment is considered the most appropriate term to use as a topic heading as it encompasses all aspects of heritage, for example the tangible heritage assets and less tangible cultural heritage. We would again highlight the fact that there are other designated heritage assets in the immediate surroundings. These include Denny Abbey Refectory listed at grade I, barn to the north of Denny Abbey listed at grade II and Waterbeach Conservation Area to the south of the site. These assets need to be specifically referenced in the SPD.

Comment

Representation ID: 167490

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

2.6 SURROUNDING CONTEXT
Welcome references to the various historic assets needing to be preserved but suggest reference is made to drawing on local character and vernacular. Factual corrections proposed.

We welcome reference to the Conservation Area, listed buildings and Scheduled Monument in Waterbeach. Development will need to preserve, and where appropriate enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Clues may be drawn from the Conservation Area to influence the design and layout of the new settlement. The tower of St John's church should be considered as a key view in any future design for the site.

We suggest that reference should be made to the importance of drawing upon local character and the distinctive vernacular and materials palette.

Fig 11 We welcome the inclusion of heritage assets on this diagram. The grade II listed gate piers to Denny Abbey on the A10 would appear to be missing from this figure.

We also suggest the use of the term Scheduled Monument, rather than Scheduled Ancient Monument in the key. Modern convention is to refer to scheduled monuments rather than scheduled ancient monuments, given that a wide range and age of monuments are scheduled. This is in line with the terminology used in the NPPF.

Comment

Representation ID: 167491

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

3. VISION
Welcome the reference to rich local heritage in aspirations for the new town, and reference to valuable historic setting and locally distinctive design.

P29 We welcome the reference to rich local heritage in the aspirations for the new town.

P30 para3 we welcome the reference to the valuable historic setting.

P31para 4 welcome the reference to locally distinctive design which recognises and enhances the character of the area. And existing features such as the causeways, Denny Abbey, Bannold Drove etc.

Comment

Representation ID: 167492

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
Welcome guidance in relation to sports facilities, flood lighting, buildings, green infrastructure, aspirations for an expansive parkland, reference to former military uses and proposed enhancement of historical features. Additional detailed comments for clarification.

Broadly welcome section on setting of Denny Abbey and proposals to respond sensitively to setting and explore opportunities to enhance. Delete 'visual' in first bullet point as setting relates to more than just visual.

Welcome guidance on location of sports facilities and restrictions on floodlighting and changing facilities and other buildings. Parking would be unacceptable beyond northern boundary - suggest mentioned in SPD.

Welcome reference to maintenance of views of key landmarks, and aspirations for an expansive parkland with views to fenland landscape and Ely Cathedral with pockets of planting.

Welcome reference to former military uses and reflection of former runway in layout of Park.

Welcome locating green infrastructure along former historic routes such as causeways and droves, including proposals for A Causeway Link, between lake and Abbey.

Welcome proposed retention and enhancement of number of other historical features and reference to many of other heritage assets in and around site.

Include reference to Waterbeach Conservation Area and listed buildings, in particular church tower. Welcome the reference to Car Dyke.

Concerned at proposed heights in open flat landscape. May be inappropriate height and density for small fen-edge town. Suggest more appropriate to keep to 4-5 storeys as at Northstowe with tall punctuating buildings being limited to 6 storeys.

Points of clarification / corrections:
* Figure 21 - causeway link annotation is confusing and does not match key on either p50 or 70.
* Concerns about yellow annotation of setting of Denny Abbey - could imply setting is limited to this area, when it is much wider. Figures 22 and 27 introduce different interpretations of setting.
* P53 para 1 'listed building' should be plural

Comment

Representation ID: 167493

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
SPATIAL FRAMEWORK DIAGRAM
Comment that the park and ride needs careful consideration to ensure the setting of Denny Abbey

P70 Spatial Framework Diagram We note the location of the Park and Ride site at the north west of the site. We can see the logic of this close to the employment site and also at the other side of the development to the park and ride site at the station. However, careful consideration will need to be given to the design of this proposal to ensure that the setting of Denny Abbey is appropriately protected and enhanced. Lighting for example will need to be carefully designed to minimise harm to setting.

Comment

Representation ID: 167494

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
Welcome references to various heritage assets, but suggest some wording changes to provide greater clarity.

Table 8 Issue 5 - We welcome reference to the setting of Denny Abbey at Issue 5. However, the wording for the mechanism is not clear. Reference to 'Development proposals' for the SLA could be misinterpreted as meaning built development. From section 5 we appreciate that this is not the case but can we suggest hat this is reworded to more closely reflect the design aspirations for this area.

Table 8, Issue 7 We welcome reference to Bannold Drove and Car Dyke as well as Denny Causeway

Table 8 Issue 8 We welcome reference to heritage assets and landscape. We
welcome the requirement for archaeology strategies.

Table 8, Issue 10 - See comments above in relation to the edge treatments for the Strategic Landscape Area. Regarding Car Dyke, a green buffer will be requirement to protect the route of Car Dyke.

Comment

Representation ID: 167495

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

5. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Comment that no reference to historic environment in this chapter (covered in Chapter 4), but welcome references to enhancing the local landscape context and protecting the most sensitive heritage environments.

Note that no reference is made to historic environment in this section. We assume this is because most of the historic environment issues are covered in Chapter 4.

Welcome reference to the retention of Military Heritage Museum.

Welcome requirement for development to respond to and enhance local landscape context. In particular, welcome references to planting to filter views, as well as protection of key views to church steeples (perhaps this should also say and towers?), Denny Abbey and Ely Cathedral.

Whilst welcome opportunities for allotments and community orchards, if any of these land uses are to be located to north of agreed limit of development, then built development e.g. toilet facilities etc. would be considered inappropriate.

Welcome reference to need locate land uses which generate most noise and light away from most sensitive heritage environments. One of our key concerns in relation to proposals for a park and ride site at northern edge.

Comment

Representation ID: 167496

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

6. DELIVERING THE PLACE
Comment that insufficient information is given to other measures for the area around Denny Abbey, or in relation to phasing and delivery of heritage aspects.

Welcome requirement for military heritage museum and landscaping measures contributing to setting of Denny Abbey.

Note suggestion for allotments/community orchards to north east of main site. Need to avoid built development in this zone. Sheds etc. may also be inappropriate.

Insufficient information is given to other measures for area around Denny Abbey. Discussions involved passing over land within immediate setting of Denny Abbey and construction of a new access road to allow site car park to be removed. Vision of linking settlement to Denny Abbey and measures and resources to ensure that development would sustain and enhance site depend on suitable planning obligation - incorporate into SPD.

Suggest additional bullet point under Progress and Delivery Group 'g) to ensure the heritage strategy for the site is implemented'.

Add reference to phasing of delivery of enhancements for Denny Abbey and heritage asset.

Add requirement for a Heritage Statement / Heritage Impact Assessment to accompany any planning application.

Primary objectives of Progress and Delivery Group should also include: to ensure the delivery of the heritage strategy for site.

Could refer to need for high quality design and good practice in relation to public realm. Refer to our regionally specific advice in 'Streets for All East of England'. More information and advice can be found on our website.

Comment

Representation ID: 167497

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Historic England

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF ACRONYMS
Comment that it should refer to Scheduled Monument rather than Scheduled Ancient Monument.

List of Acronyms - We suggest the use of the term Scheduled Monument rather than Scheduled Ancient Monument. Modern convention is to refer to scheduled monuments rather than scheduled ancient monuments, given that a wide range and age of monuments are scheduled. This is in line with the terminology used in the NPPF.

Object

Representation ID: 167499

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: The Farmland Museum and Denny Abbey

Agent: Dr Jane Williamson

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
DENNY ABBEY SETTING

The Farmland Museum and Denny Abbey has important role to play in the New Town but will need investment in order to develop its full potential. This is not fully reflected in the SPD


There is no recognition of the role that the Farmland Museum, in partnership with English Heritage, can play in providing a unique asset for the new town by telling them the story of the place where they live and enhancing wellbeing through providing opportunities for community engagement, volunteering. It is a unique and serene place . However investment will be needed.

Opening of the Causeway route is very much welcomed, enabling many more people to visit without needing to use a car. However, the easier access to the site means that security of the scheduled monument especially the Abbey buildings and Farmland Museum will need considerable improvement.

.The Farmland Museum and Denny Abbey will need investment in order to develop its full potential but has an immensely important role to play in the New Town. Its potential as a unique community asset is not fully reflected in Chapter 4.2 section 5 or anywhere else in the SPD.

Little mention has been made of the small well with 'Spring up O well' inscribed on the stone surround towards the north of the site. It should be retained as a lasting reminder that the land's agricultural history is much longer than the 70 or so years of military use.

Comment

Representation ID: 167500

Received: 25/10/2018

Respondent: Mr Michael Dean

5.2 MOVEMENT AND PLACE
Comment that construction traffic should avoid Denny End Road which is not designed for heavy vehicles and residential properties are at risk of damage from vibrations.

Denny End Road has suffered a vast increase in heavy lorries over the past few years, in addition to constant use by heavy farm traffic. Over the past few months, this has been aggravated by construction traffic for the Bannold Road development. The infrastructure was not designed for such heavy vehicles, and properties in the road are subject to violent shocks on the occasions that vehicles hit one of the many dips and hollows in the surface. Frequent water mains leaks in the road indicate this. I would strongly object if it is planned that construction traffic for the new Waterbeach Airfield development would access the site via the residential part of Denny End Road. There is an access gate to the airfield at the A10 end of Denny End Road, and I would suggest that all construction traffic enter the site by this entrance.

Object

Representation ID: 167501

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

1. INTRODUCTION
Waterbeach New Town is a great opportunity to realise a world-class development with sustainable transport integrated from the beginning. SPD has drawn a street network that encourages people to drive, even for short trips, by making it direct to drive and easy to park cars. This will result in much more congestion, pollution and road injury.

We support the sustainable transport vision put forward by the Waterbeach Cycling Campaign. See their SPD response and their website.

Object

Representation ID: 167502

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
PRIMARY MOVEMENT ACCESS
Street network provides direct routes for car travel, which means that cars will become the preferred mode of transport within the development. Instead of allowing car through-traffic inside the site, ensure that car trips must go out and around the edge of the development. Walking and cycling routes for local trips should always be shorter and more convenient than the equivalent journey by car.

Chapter 3 'Primary movement and access' must first describe how active travel and public transport will be designed and given priority before describing private car access to the site.

Page 46 under 'Strategic walking and cycling connections 'text should say that the developers will deliver each one of the listed points as a Fix, plus additional point sregarding design.

Page 46 statement should be modified to add 'direct, safe, continuous, attractive and ith elements that design-out crime, enhance personal security such as strong natural surveillance, nearby active uses and buildings that face the route.'

Should explicitly specify that developments must follow the guidance specified in the Cambridge Cycle Parking Guide for New Residential Developments or any document that supersedes the current Cycle Parking Guide. SPD should also consider other guidance (sources suggested in representation)

Page 40 / 41 - car parks proposed induce traffic, do not build these car parks with access from the village of Waterbeach. Instead, focus on creating highly attractive sustainable travel option.

Page 45 must be modified to say 'cycle routes will have segregated cycleways with separate footways, with ample verges on either side to support tree planting and visibility splays in an environment that feels safe'

Object

Representation ID: 167503

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
EDUCATION
Instead of being near roads, primary schools should be near safe, off-road walking and cycling routes and provided with a large amount of cycle parking, and only blue badge car parking.

Object

Representation ID: 167504

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

5.2 MOVEMENT AND PLACE
On page 88 it says that 'In order to mitigate the impact upon the A10, the development must achieve a significant modal shift towards public transport and active travel.' The section then includes two car-capacity measures do not belong in a section about promoting public transport and active travel because increasing capacity for cars will increase the usage of cars

Table 9 proposes several good principles that we support such as 'A user hierarchy that
prioritises sustainable modes of travel', 'Create walkable neighbourhoods', 'Create an environment for cycling', and 'Provide access to high quality public transport facilities'. These should be Fixes.

Object

Representation ID: 167505

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

6.2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
Page 118, the improved new foot/cycleway fromWaterbeach to Cambridge has a vague trigger, and furthermore, it is not clear from the SPD when the strategic walking and cycling network for the development will be built. Should be completed and ready for use prior to occupation of any dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 167506

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
AMOUNT DENSITY AND HEIGHTS
Table 7 Land Use Budget must include entries for foot paths and cycle routes that are separate from the streets, using ample and flexible widths for rights-of-way that include sufficient space for good verges, proper landscaping, and important safety measures such as visibility splays on either side of cycle routes.

Object

Representation ID: 167507

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Cambridge Cycling Campaign

6.5 MONITORING, REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION
It is reasonable for the development to seek to achieve for short-to-medium distance trips at least 50% mode share for active travel modes, and in the longer run strive to achieve 70% active travel mode share for short-to-medium distance trips.

Object

Representation ID: 167508

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

1. INTRODUCTION
Public consultation has been very rushed, and should have been after local plan adoption. Further time should be allowed for more detailed review by residents who have a number of concerns.

Object

Representation ID: 167509

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
Policy related to Waterbeach New Town in the Local Plan does not envisage any infrastructure necessary for the settlement being outside the SS6 area, yet developers are now apparently allowed to locate many facilities off site.

Object

Representation ID: 167510

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
It does not seem that this SPD has accurately considered the impact of the development on residents of Waterbeach and Chittering.

The intersection with existing Waterbeach is attaching a very urban development to a rural village with almost no transition zone. Height and density of buildings especially near the existing village and the interface with the village, indeed the spatial arrangement of the masterplan and the relationship to Waterbeach village does not meet the needs of current Waterbeach residents.

Object

Representation ID: 167511

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

5.5 OPEN SPACE, PLAY AND SPORT
Sporting facilities are at a great distance from current village residents. Trigger points for providing new facilities do not seem to take account of the need for the existing village facilities to cope with greater demand in initial stages.

Object

Representation ID: 167512

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

5.2 MOVEMENT AND PLACE
The basic road structure including 2 access point from the A10 should be built before any houses are occupied before any significant development is undertaken. The 3 village junctions with the A10 (Chittering, Denny End and Car Dyke) should all be upgraded before other A10 work is done under S108 provisions

Object

Representation ID: 167513

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

4.2 KEY STRUCTURING ELEMENTS (FIXES)
The desire for active transport does not seem to consider adequately the needs of all the population, especially the disabled and elderly. Dangers of ditches next to routes must be considers. Inadequate provision for equestrian users.

Object

Representation ID: 167514

Received: 26/10/2018

Respondent: Dr C Grant

5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Inadequate consideration of impacts on existing village.