Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29848

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: St John's Innovation Centre

Representation Summary:

This option relates to the lower level of development whereby Anglian Water remains in situ. Its presence in has a major bearing on potential adjacent land uses.

We have two main concerns.

First, St John's Innovation Park does not benefit from the proposal for plot densification applicable to the Cambridge Business Park. Current density at the St John's Innovation Park is lower than that of the Business Park. The key and the plan need amending to ensure that plot densification also applies to the St John's Innovation Park. This will be consistent with the Councils' own consultants, SQW, who in their supporting documentation at paragraphs 1.229 and 1.34 confirm that the potential exists to introduce more employment floorspace on the area within the Innovation Park.

Secondly, the "Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility" refered to in Option 1 requires a definition in Appendix 3 (Glossary of Terms).

We are concerned to see Option 1 include such a facility close to offices at the St John's Innovation Park, alternative locations exist which would be more appropriate for siting such a facility. A recycling centre is inappropriate in close proximity to high technology offices and buildings.

Full text:

See attached [below]

10.1 This option relates to the lower level of development whereby Anglian Water remains in situ. Its presence in the central and northern part of the site has a major bearing on potential adjacent land uses, having regard to the character of the infrastructure and the consequent cordon sanitaire in place within the minerals and Waste LDF plan, which provides for a safeguarding area around the edge of the site.

10.2 We have two main concerns. First, as stated in separate responses to other questions, we note that the St John's Innovation Park does not benefit from the proposal for plot densification applicable to the Cambridge Business Park. We cannot see why any differentiation is made when comparing the two areas and the opportunities afforded by increasing floorspace in both those areas are consistent with Objective 3 of the Plan. Furthermore, current density at the St John's Innovation Park is lower than that of the Business Park. The key and the plan need amending to ensure that plot densification also applies to the St John's Innovation Park. This will be consistent with the Councils' own consultants, SQW, who in their supporting documentation at paragraphs 1.229 and 1.34 confirm that the potential exists to introduce more employment floorspace on the area within the Innovation Park.

10.3 Secondly, Option 1 shows a new "Household Waste Recycling Centre and inert recycling facility" to be located to the north of the Anglian Water site. We are surprised that no definition of this facility appears in Appendix 3 (Glossary of Terms) and we consider that it requires specific reference. We are concerned to see Option 1 include such a facility close to offices at the St John's Innovation Park. Where alternative locations exist - either within the new or existing areas to the south of the Anglian Water landholding - they would be more appropriate for siting such a facility. A recycling centre - with its attendant characteristics of noise, dust and traffic - is inappropriate in close proximity to high technology offices and buildings. It degrades the standing of the St John's Innovation Park and consequently we cannot support Option 1.