Question 32

Showing comments and forms 1 to 15 of 15

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29284

Received: 10/12/2014

Respondent: Management Process Systems Limited

Representation Summary:

Sensible, but lets not forget SMEs.

Full text:

Sensible, but lets not forget SMEs.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29521

Received: 23/01/2015

Respondent: Cllr Hazel Smith

Representation Summary:

Residential flats will ensure the area is not dead in the evenings.

Full text:

Residential flats will ensure the area is not dead in the evenings.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29573

Received: 23/01/2015

Respondent: Mrs Sasha Wilson

Representation Summary:

Provided it is tastefully done

Full text:

Provided it is tastefully done

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29616

Received: 27/01/2015

Respondent: Cllr Anna Bradnam

Representation Summary:

Where there is residential development there must also be local shops and community facilities, including a doctor's surgery

Full text:

Where there is residential development there must also be local shops and community facilities, including a doctor's surgery

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29689

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Brookgate

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Brookgate agree that a new local centre is essential to the creation of a vibrant, mixed use neighbourhood as set out in the proposed CNFE vision. It will act as both a focal point and a social hub for the CNFE area. There should be flexibility regarding its location along the Boulevard, positioning it around the station would ensure a highly accessible and sustainable location. It should include new retail provision to meet local needs and complement nearby centres as set out in objective 4 of the proposed development objectives. Employment and residential uses could be provided on upper floors.

Full text:

Brookgate agree that a new local centre is essential to the creation of a vibrant, mixed use neighbourhood as set out in the proposed CNFE vision. It will act as both a focal point and a social hub for the CNFE area. There should be flexibility regarding its location along the Boulevard, positioning it around the station would ensure a highly accessible and sustainable location. It should include new retail provision to meet local needs and complement nearby centres as set out in objective 4 of the proposed development objectives. Employment and residential uses could be provided on upper floors.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29791

Received: 30/01/2015

Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Representation Summary:

In principle it is correct that a new local centre should be created to support the needs of a local community, however, it is not possible to make any informed decision on quantum, uses or location until the deliverability of the AAP area is further advanced.

Full text:

In principle it is correct that a new local centre should be created to support the needs of a local community, however, it is not possible to make any informed decision on quantum, uses or location until the deliverability of the AAP area is further advanced.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29918

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Representation Summary:

Proposed new local centre in Options 2-4 is supported in principle. It is noted that it is proposed that this includes a residential element and other elements which will be used by people, and in Option 2 the local centre appears to lie partially within the odour zone which is not suitable for such a use. The location of the local centre must have regard to development existing or proposed in the locality, so that potential amenity issues arising from proximity to the Water Recycling Centre, waste management uses, and railheads are avoided and / or can be satisfactorily mitigated.

Full text:

The proposed new local centre in Options 2-4 is supported in principle. However, it is noted that it is proposed that this include a residential element and other elements which will be used by people, and in Option 2 the local centre appears to lie partially within the odour zone which is not suitable for such a use. The location of the local centre must have regard to other development existing or proposed in the locality, so that potential amenity issues arising for example from proximity to the Water Recycling Centre, waste management uses, and the railheads are avoided and / or can be satisfactorily mitigated.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30033

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Orchard Street Investment Management LLP

Agent: Beacon Planning

Representation Summary:

Providing sufficient services for immediate needs of community near station most suitable location to ensure maximum use.

Full text:

Providing sufficient services for immediate needs of community near station most suitable location to ensure maximum use.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30188

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Grosvenor Developments Limited

Agent: AECOM

Representation Summary:

At this stage the approach is too rigid and could need adaptation if more residential is included. Thus location and form needs to be less specific.

Full text:

At this stage the approach is too rigid and could need adaptation if more residential is included. Thus location and form needs to be less specific.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30285

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Turnstone Estates Limited

Agent: Carter Jonas

Representation Summary:

Turnstone consider that any uses proposed on the CNFE site should be totally complementary to employment uses. Retail facilities of an appropriate scale would be an acceptable use, subject to commercial viability.

Full text:

Turnstone consider that any uses proposed on the CNFE site should be totally complementary to employment uses. Retail facilities of an appropriate scale would be an acceptable use, subject to commercial viability.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30334

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Coulson Building Group

Representation Summary:

No comment.

Full text:

No comment.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30402

Received: 04/02/2015

Respondent: Milton Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Residential flats will ensure the area is not dead in the evenings.

Full text:

See attached document

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30481

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Indigo Planning Ltd

Representation Summary:

TCE support the approach set out for the new local centre and welcome the proposals to include retail and other uses within this location. These new uses should be located in one area (as part of the local centre) so as not to dilute the existing office and employment functions of the CNFE area.

Full text:

See attached document

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30519

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Cambridge City Council

Representation Summary:

Support. The provision of such facilities together is likely to be more sustainable and viable.

Full text:

See attached document

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30603

Received: 19/01/2015

Respondent: Silke Scheler

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

I find all proposed options to be too restricted with the use of space. A mix of residential use, offices and industry would be preferable to give it a more natural feel. For example, leave the Nuffield Road industrial area and more residential use development further north. Also consider a more modular approach that allows to develop toward a future goal, but doesn't depend on things (like moving the water recycling centre) from the get go.

*******************


9) Objective 3 shouldn't get highest priority.
14) 11-13 are too divided in to use of space, a more natural mix of residential, offices and industrial would be better. Also, re-use as much of what is already there as possible.
15, 16, 17) No clear explanations, which means meaning will be defined later.
18b) Would destroy the feeling of that part of the city.
23c) Science Park should be independent.
24d) This should only be considered if there are no other options. Moving the businesses will be expesive, so leave them there and build the residential area somewhere else.
30e) Student accomodation should be integrated so they won't all be in the same area.
36) Whatever makes best sense for transport at the current stage of the project.