Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda item
Minutes:
The Committee
received a report to note concerning the County Council Transport Team’s
intended approach to the assessment and consideration of traffic and transport
impacts associated with proposed development within the North East Cambridge
(NEC) Area Action Plan (AAP).
A report was
presented by Cambridgeshire County Council’s Transport Assessment Team Manager
and Principal Transport Officer, Transport Assessment
Team.
In response to
Member’s questions on trip budget enforcement the Transport Assessment Manager
and Principal Transport Officer said the following:
i.
Acknowledged
the need for significantly improved transport facilities for the NEC area prior
to the completion of the development set out in the NEC AAP.
ii.
Developments
would need to demonstrate how they could meet the objectives set out in the
County’s Transport Position Statement.
iii.
Long
term, further transport infrastructure would be required to realise the sustainability
of the area. Developments would be broken down and a monitor and manage
approach taken.
iv.
The trip
budget would be in place and monitoring would begin at the start of a
development.
v.
If it
were noted that trips had started to increase, this would be brought to the
attention of the developer and they would be advised that the trend needed to
reduce. Additional measures could be introduced, and the travel plan
intensified to reverse a possible breach.
vi.
If the
trip budget was irreversibly breached, then subsequent phases may be held back.
vii.
Large master plan areas would be broken down
into smaller parcels. If a developer were failing to perform against the trip
budget, they would not be allowed to continue beyond the parcel being
developed.
viii.
Monitoring
information such as the ability to track vehicles through automatic number
plate recognition and the location of cameras on the entry and exit points of
the development would be possible.
ix.
The
Alconbury Weald development was an example of the monitor and manage approach
which is a development of 5,000 dwellings broken down into smaller phases.
Phase 1 comprising approximately 800 houses. As the subsequent phase(s) of the
development were looked at the data would be based on the travel habits
established on site so there was a much more educated and refined view towards
Phase 2.
x.
There
had been instances at Alconbury Weald where a specific junction would be
monitored in future. If development trips had gone over a trigger point
pre-agreed mitigation would be required and had been delivered.
xi.
Lessons
had been learnt on the monitor and manage approach from developments such as
Alconbury Weald. The monitoring technology had improved which allowed a greater
understanding of when and why the trip patterns were emerging. This has led to
a more effective response from officers.
xii.
The
developers in the area were working to produce a shared transport strategy for
the area, with support from the local authority officers. Advised any
recommendation provided by the Highways Authority to the planning authority
would have considered the merits of the application about the Transport
Position Statement.
The Assistant
Director (Delivery) said the following:
i.
A large
amount of evidence-based work had been undertaken which supported the NEC AAP
transport work that had been progressed to date. The Position Statement
produced by the County Council reflected this evidence base.
ii.
The
negotiation with developers and their transport assessment would need to take
into the account this evidence base and the Council’s Position Statement.
iii.
The
Position Statement could be considered a material consideration when
applications came to the Committee for deliberation.
The Joint Director
for Planning and Economic Development responded:
i.
The
document outlined how the County Council’s (as Highways Authority) methodology
would be applied to these sites. Understanding that shift approach was an
important part of considering the Highway Authority’s responses to each
application.
ii.
When
considering applications, the Committee should give weight to the consultation
response.
In response to
Member’s questions on how the trip budget could be facilitated the Transport
Assessment Manager and Principal Officer said the following:
i.
Agreed
that Park and Ride had an opportunity to take trips off the network and that
Park and Ride-based solutions would be explored.
ii.
The
Combined Authority as the local Transport Authority were tasked with transport
strategy for the area and strategic interventions. The County Council, as the
Highway Authority, were responsible with the day to day operation of the
network. They were the consultee in the planning process, providing a technical
view of a developer submission and would seek the opinion of the Combined
Authority.
iii.
When
talking about sustainability this was in the context of both the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) definition and everyday sustainability.
iv.
Would
encourage developers to create an area that optimises a level of development
that achieved a sustainable and logical way with a balance of employment and
residential development.
v.
When
looking at control measures, in the first instance, the technical information
provided by a developer would be scrutinised to determine whether the phase in
question would be sustainable.
vi.
If there
were congestion this would not be identified at a point where it had become
unmanageable but earlier as the development would be monitored from the start.
vii.
In worse
case scenarios concerning control measures, the developer would have to pay a
penalty and would not be able to continue to build further phases, reducing any
further damage.
viii.
Agreed
there was potential to restrict car parking and the use of cars in the area.
However, did not want to eliminate the use of a car as an option but create a
scenario where the car was not the obvious choice due to a range of options
available.
ix.
Would
recommend that the developer contributed to the package of local, internal and
strategic transport infrastructure for the NEC area.
x.
The
Greater Cambridge Partnership were currently working on the Cambridge to
Waterbeach corridor and were engaged on the Cambridge Eastern Access study
focusing on sustainability to the east.
xi.
Recognised
the need to improve the connection to Cambridge North Railway Station.
xii.
The trip
budget had included several committed developments including the Cambridge
North railway station.
xiii.
The
development in this area would be dependent on external agencies and would be
looked at on a ‘parcel on parcel basis’.
xiv.
Part of
the transport assessment plan would be to look at the areas at risk of
displacement parking, looking at the number of spaces already on site, the
issues that may already be occurring, the proposals in question and identifying
where displacement parking might take place.
xv.
Agreed
that there could be a change of developers, but the conditions would not
change.
xvi.
Acknowledged
people’s habits needed to be changed and use alternative transport, it was not
as simple to reduce the number of carparking spaces but there needed to be a
multifaceted approach.
The Joint Director
for Planning and Economic Development said the following:
i.
As part
of the new Joint Local Plan parking on new developments was being looked at,
for example discreet parking on the parameters of the site and the reduction of
road space for parking. Residents would have to walk to their car as they would
to the nearest to the bus stop. This would help to create a modal change as the
car would not be parked outside the property and there would be a walk to
access the vehicle.
ii.
The
Environmental Health Teams would be consulted on the matter of air quality.
There were potential air quality issues along the transport corridors A14 and Milton
Road. The environmental assessments would model and asses these areas when
considering applications.
iii.
The
Environmental and Planning Team were currently working on a wider air quality
management.
The Committee noted the approach that the County Transport Team (as the Highways Authority) intended to take to the assessment and mitigation of transport effects from development proposals within the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan area until advised otherwise
Supporting documents: