Trumpington Residents’ Association – Statement

Western Orbital LLF, 30.10.17

The Association opposes the resolution proposed by Hauxton and Harston Parish Councils for the reasons given below.

With regard to the proposal for a new Park & Ride to the west of the M11 at Junction 11, our position was made clear in “Park & Ride – The TRA’s Position” dated 27 June 2017, from which the following extract is taken:

“In our view the current proposal to establish a second P&R on the Hauxton side of the M11 at Junction 11 is a sound approach … We appreciate that this is of concern to Hauxton and Harston residents but the suggestion that a P&R at Foxton is an alternative to the Hauxton P&R is not sustainable as it would not meet the need.

It is essential that the new P&R is able to intercept traffic coming into Trumpington not only from the A10 but also, and equally important, from the M11 travelling north and exiting at Junction 11. Astra Zeneca, for example, has told us that a lot of their staff travel north on the M11. Their number will increase significantly with the location of Astra Zeneca’snew R&D Centre and corporate headquarters on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus next year - many of the staff being relocated currently travel to work by car. Unless a significant proportion of this demand is intercepted close to Junction 11 and a strong public transport alternative provided, the already substantial congestion at Junction 11 and on the Hauxton Road / Addenbrooke’s Road will increase. This is a major advantage of this option as against others given the large and imminent increase in jobs (including but not only Astra Zeneca) and in patient services (the new Papworth Hospital) on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. Foxton is not a feasible location for this nor would it provide the access to the guided bus network that is also essential to achievement of the mode shift necessary to reduce congestion on the Trumpington road network.

The TRA supports the idea of a wider range of smaller P&Rides/Cycles beyond Cambridge’s necklace of villages including a transport hub at Foxton. But this will not meet the large and pressing needs of Trumpington which at present groans under the weight of growing traffic congestion at the ever extending peak times throughout the week.

The TRA’s support for the proposed P&R at Junction 11 west of the M11 is not unconditional. First, given its location in the Green Belt which separates Cambridge from its necklace of villages, it is vital that the site is suitably and sustainably designed to fit in with its surroundings including the River Cam and the Country Park. Ecological protection, control of light pollution and careful design of junctions are also essential. Second, it is imperative that adequate access to and from the site and between it and the existing Trumpington P&R, is provided. We believe that there is a strong case for a new bus bridge across the M11 linking the new and existing P&Rs, allowing buses, including guided buses, to transit quickly between them. And third, it is essential that ready access to and from the M11 is afforded without reliance on the already heavily congested Junction 11 roundabout. Our strong preference is for this to be via a dedicated bus route using the safeguarded strip alongside the Hauxton Road and linked with the new bus bridge across the M11. We are strongly opposed to any suggestion that access from the M11 should be across the Green Belt from the M11 and through the middle of the houses currently being constructed in completion of the approved Trumpington Meadows development. This would be unacceptable.”

[Extract from pages 1 &2]

We remain of this view.

With regard to the request to the Executive Board proposed by Hauxton and Harston, the Association rejects completely the suggestion that “extension of the current site into the area where the Sporting Village application was recently withdrawn” be explored. This is for the reasons given in the Association’s detailed objection to that planning application dated 16 September 2016 (S/1925/16/OL; 16/1376/OUT). In particular, development of a P&R in this location would damage the “high quality, clean edge to the City and approach to Cambridge which will be achieved by the consented development when fully built”; and would cause irreparable damage to the Green Belt by “In practice … tak(ing) the developed edge of the City out to the M11… the need to retain the site … as part of the Green Belt is imperative … when seen in the context of the significant areas of land already released from the Belt for the housing and other developments being built in the Southern Fringe.” (Pages 1 & 2).

Additional reasons for the Association’s rejection of this aspect of Hauxton & Harston’s proposed request are:

  1. It is the wrong location for the necessary extra P&R capacity which must intercept traffic before it gets into Trumpington’s crowded road network; and
  1. It is important to note that one third of the additional demand for P&R spaces comes from vehicles from the south of Cambridge traveling on the M11 northbound. [Presentation to the Western orbital LLF, 20 June 2017] If extra P&R capacity were to be provided in the location proposed by Hauxton & Harston, Junction 11, which is already heavily overloaded at peak times, would become even more overloaded; as would the A1309, Hauxton Road and its junctions with both the access to the new P&R and with the Addenbrooke’s Road, thus further impeding access not only to the existing P & R but also to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.
  1. In practice, it is not clear where access to a site in this location could reasonably be provided from the Hauxton Road given the relatively short distance between J11 and the new city edge at the Trumpington Meadows estate when fully built. Nor is it apparent how access could reasonably be provided for traffic exiting a new P&R on this site and turning right on to the Hauxton Road in direct conflict with the large volumes of traffic.
  1. Extension of the “current site”, i.e. Trumpington P&R, to this site as proposed in the resolution cannot be achieved as the Trumpington Meadows estate when fully built will be physicallyin between the current site and this site.
  1. Acquisition of the site at considerable cost would be required and no means of financing this is identified; whereas the County Council already has an option on the site to the west of the M11. We are aware of Smarter Cambridge Transport’s proposal that the existing and new sites be swapped so that all of the necessary spaces, including those currently provided at Trumpington P&R, could be provided on this site with the existing site being released for housing. Having looked at it carefully, with the help of information from Smarter Cambridge Transport, our informed conclusion is that this is not practical because -
  • It is not likely to be capable of providing all of the spaces required under scenario 3 – and would require extensive underground provision at great cost to get anywhere near that total.
  • It is not practically deliverable within the timescale required under scenario 3, whereas provision west of the M11 is.
  • It assumes willingness on the part of the present landowner to sell, which cannot be safely assumed.

With regard to that part of the proposed request to the Executive Board concerning expansion of the existing Park & Ride at Trumpington, the Association’s reasons for completely rejecting further expansion are stated in our response to the CPPF’s comments, and apply here also.

David Plank

For Trumpington Residents’ Association

30 October 2017

Page 1 of 1

DP/ 30.10.17 v1