Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

The ability to park a cycle in a safe, secure, and convenient location is a key aspect of encouraging and supporting travel by bike. The County Council considers that cycle parking provision at least in line with standards will be required. However, further more detailed analysis will be needed on cycle mode share and targets to determine an appropriate level that seeks to maximise cycle access to the area. This is likely to confirm a level of provision in excess of standards given the high levels of non-car mode split likely to be required but as noted this will require further, more detailed, analysis.

The ability to park a cycle in a safe, secure, and convenient location is a key aspect of encouraging and supporting travel by bike. The County Council considers that cycle parking provision at least in line with standards will be required. However, further more detailed analysis will be needed on cycle mode share and targets to determine an appropriate level that seeks to maximise cycle access to the area. This is likely to confirm a level of provision in excess of standards given the high levels of non-car mode split likely to be required but as noted this will require further, more detailed, analysis.

Increased cycle parking is in line with increasing modal share to walking and Cycling, and Active Transport is a key wider determinant of health.

The ability to park a cycle in a safe, secure, and convenient location is a key aspect of encouraging and supporting travel by bike. The County Council considers that cycle parking provision at least in line with standards will be required. However, further more detailed analysis will be needed on cycle mode share and targets to determine an appropriate level that seeks to maximise cycle access to the area. This is likely to confirm a level of provision in excess of standards given the high levels of non-car mode split likely to be required but as noted this will require further, more detailed, analysis.

The ability to park a cycle in a safe, secure, and convenient location is a key aspect of encouraging and supporting travel by bike. The County Council considers that cycle parking provision at least in line with standards will be required. However, further more detailed analysis will be needed on cycle mode share and targets to determine an appropriate level that seeks to maximise cycle access to the area. This is likely to confirm a level of provision in excess of standards given the high levels of non-car mode split likely to be required but as noted this will require further, more detailed, analysis.

Any considerations for further provision of cycle and pedestrian access in CNFE should take account of both the existing and planned mineral and waste activities in the area and the importance of separation between HCVs and other users.

We would be content to rely on Local Plan policies related to climate change and sustainable design and construction.

At present the proposal to develop a bespoke sustainable design and construction policy for CNFE through Option B seeks a minimum BREEAM standard of 'excellent' for all 'new non-residential development' under point (a). As 'new non-residential development' would include future mineral and waste applications, where operations can be designed without the need for a building, we would question whether a minimum standard of BREEAM excellent is relevant in these circumstances? As such we would recommend that point (a) is reworded to make reference to non-residential built development in the form of offices and industrial units etc. which excludes mineral and waste uses. In the case of mineral and waste applications it would be better to seek a high environmental application which will deliver the standards required without using BREEAM which is not considered appropriate. This is already sought through adopted policy in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Core Strategy (particularly Policies CS22 Climate Change and CS24 Design of Sustainable Minerals and Waste Management Facilities) and the two adopted Waste Management Design Guides (The Location and Design of Waste Management Facilities 2011, and the RECAP Waste Management Design Guide 2012).

No comment

The requirement for new waste management processing facilities to carry out a feasibility study for the potential for anaerobic digestion is onerous and inappropriate. The waste management uses proposed for this area through the adopted Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan are a Household Recycling Centre (dealing with bulky household waste items) and a permanent inert waste recycling facility; neither of these facilities would be treating organic municipal waste. As part of the Waste Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract with AmeyCespa arrangements are already in place for the treatment of municipal organic waste until 2036, which means that this aspiration is unlikely to be deliverable. In order for an anaerobic digestion facility to be viable a significant quantity of organic waste would be required, a municipal waste contract is likely to be needed to give surety of supply before other sources of waste are secured. Such a facility would also give rise to additional HCV movements and potentially amenity issues, depending on access arrangements and the location of the facility. The only suitable location for anaerobic digestion would appear to be the Water Recycling Centre where sludge treatment works, involving the importation of sludge from elsewhere, is already in place.

This approach is supported for residential and office / industrial built development; However, it would be prudent to require a Full Health Impact Assessment for all residential development given the mixed use of the area, especially if residential development is located in proximity to the Water Recycling Centre and / or aggregates railheads and other uses which have the potential to give rise to amenity issues.

In the case of future minerals and waste development on CNFE, where activities may largely be conducted outside of a building and are considered compatible with the existing surrounding minerals and waste uses, this should be acknowledged within the proposed approach. It is therefore recommended that the proposed approach is strengthened in relation to residential development and remains as identified for office type built development, with an acknowledgement that minerals and waste uses are excluded from this requirement.

The requirement of requiring a health impact assessment is supported. The concept of requiring a Health Impact Assessment accords with the South Cambridgeshire local plan (current and proposed) and with the Cambridgeshire Health and Wellbeing Strategy with requires: "Ensure that housing, land use planning and development strategies for new and existing communities consider the health and wellbeing impacts for residents in the short and long term."