We are now particularly pleased that the crazy concept of a new bus station alongside Bourges Boulevard has been dropped.

We also criticised the design of the new Westgate Church Square, so we welcome the relocation of the cinema to reduce overshadowing and also that the square will be increased in size. Another major change is the omission of the huge multi-storey car park which would have exited on to the Crescent Bridge roundabout and which would undoubtably have caused severe congestion.

So it would appear that Peterborough is getting closer to a scheme which will enhance and benefit our city. But there are still aspects which have not been addressed. We urge that the city council flexes its muscles to ensure that these are taken into account by the developers.

For instance, the new housing which will be provided along with the other facilities has not been properly integrated. At the moment it is merely tacked on to the north east corner and is outward facing. It ought to be more integral and inward facing (which would ensure that the central areas are always overlooked and more secure).

The connectivity of the railway station and the bus station has been ignored again. The plans will demolish the existing footbridge and all pedestrian traffic will have to cross, at road level, a dangerous Bourges Boulevard (which will be carrying even more traffic!). The original City Centre Masterplan featured an integrated transport interchange together with a "land-bridge", which would have removed this problem. Most major European and Japanese cities have interchanges which provide facilities for trains, buses, taxis, bicycles, pedestrians, retailing and cultural facilities. This is a unique opportunity for Peterborough to include something similar. It should be recognised that such an interchange could form a vital part of a successful local transportation provision which in turn would be the foundation for an attractive and prosperous city.

PFoE questions why so many attractive existing buildings/facilities are being demolished. The developer plans to retain only two buildings on the site. There are a number of buildings which could have been retained and incorporated into the scheme (including the extremely successful Brewery Tap public house/brewery). The Development Corporation achieved precisely this when they built the Queensgate Centre. Peterborough has already lost much of his historical fabric so it ought to be careful to preserve what little remains.

And lastly, the scheme as proposed still does not include a designated cycle route. It must be obvious to most people that there will be safety issues, similar to those in Bridge Street, if this is not included.

It is unfortunately true that many people (and councillors) are unable to interpret architects drawings and assume that if it is new and shiny it must be good. All too often they only perceive the shortcomings after it has been built. We must ensure that the developers address these issues now so that we get the design and the facilities which will truly enhance future Peterborough.

Richard Olive
Peterborough Friends of the Earth,
Beauvale Gardens,
Gunthorpe, Peterborough

Special Report: North Westgate development