Question 42
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29293
Received: 10/12/2014
Respondent: Management Process Systems Limited
It has to be done to protect the future
It has to be done to protect the future
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29477
Received: 20/01/2015
Respondent: Mr Tom McKeown
It would be irresponsible to ignore energy efficiency and generation with new buildings.
It would be irresponsible to ignore energy efficiency and generation with new buildings.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29529
Received: 23/01/2015
Respondent: Mrs Hazel Smith
Some sort of CHP plant may be appropriate.
1.b.Municipal organic waste processing could be a very antisocial neighbour. Milton currently suffers from smells from putrified organic waste in landfill, and we would not wish this area to be a dumping ground for antisocial industrial processes - put these away from residential areas.
Some sort of CHP plant may be appropriate.
1.b.Municipal organic waste processing could be a very antisocial neighbour. Milton currently suffers from smells from putrified organic waste in landfill, and we would not wish this area to be a dumping ground for antisocial industrial processes - put these away from residential areas.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29582
Received: 23/01/2015
Respondent: Mrs Sasha Wilson
This has to be done
This has to be done
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29624
Received: 27/01/2015
Respondent: Cllr Anna Bradnam
I would not support anaerobic digestion facilities (option B) as these can be very smelly.
I would support every building being roofed with having integral solar PV generation tiles, high quality insulation and double glazing.
I would not support anaerobic digestion facilities (option B) as these can be very smelly.
I would support every building being roofed with having integral solar PV generation tiles, high quality insulation and double glazing.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29714
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Brookgate
Agent: Bidwells
Developments should be required to meet the current Building Regulations standards at the point of delivering the development. The removal of the requirement to achieve a 10% reduction due to LZC's/passive solar design is however welcome. It would be useful to clarify what is meant by suitable LZC's for the area. All technologies should be technically and economically viable.
Developments should be required to meet the current Building Regulations standards at the point of delivering the development. The removal of the requirement to achieve a 10% reduction due to LZC's/passive solar design is however welcome. It would be useful to clarify what is meant by suitable LZC's for the area. All technologies should be technically and economically viable.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29947
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council
The requirement for new waste management processing facilities to carry out a feasibility study for the potential for anaerobic digestion is onerous and inappropriate. The waste management uses proposed for this area through the adopted Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan are a Household Recycling Centre (dealing with bulky household waste items) and a permanent inert waste recycling facility; neither of these facilities would be treating organic municipal waste. The only suitable location for anaerobic digestion would appear to be the Water Recycling Centre where sludge treatment works, involving the importation of sludge from elsewhere, is already in place.
The requirement for new waste management processing facilities to carry out a feasibility study for the potential for anaerobic digestion is onerous and inappropriate. The waste management uses proposed for this area through the adopted Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Minerals and Waste Plan are a Household Recycling Centre (dealing with bulky household waste items) and a permanent inert waste recycling facility; neither of these facilities would be treating organic municipal waste. As part of the Waste Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract with AmeyCespa arrangements are already in place for the treatment of municipal organic waste until 2036, which means that this aspiration is unlikely to be deliverable. In order for an anaerobic digestion facility to be viable a significant quantity of organic waste would be required, a municipal waste contract is likely to be needed to give surety of supply before other sources of waste are secured. Such a facility would also give rise to additional HCV movements and potentially amenity issues, depending on access arrangements and the location of the facility. The only suitable location for anaerobic digestion would appear to be the Water Recycling Centre where sludge treatment works, involving the importation of sludge from elsewhere, is already in place.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30086
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Orchard Street Investment Management LLP
Agent: Beacon Planning
Site wide provision of energy generation gives economies of scale, but needs careful consideration re technologies promoted to ensure no adverse impacts. Whilst anaerobic digester suggested for waste industries, such technologies must fit with surrounding uses.
Site wide provision of energy generation gives economies of scale, but needs careful consideration re technologies promoted to ensure no adverse impacts. Whilst anaerobic digester suggested for waste industries, such technologies must fit with surrounding uses.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30208
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Grosvenor Developments
Agent: AECOM
Support approach but object to anaerobic digestion in this location due to potential impacts on quality of new community and amenity.
Support approach but object to anaerobic digestion in this location due to potential impacts on quality of new community and amenity.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30294
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Turnstone Estates Limited
Agent: Carter Jonas
Turnstone considers that the principle of area based approach towards renewables and low carbon energy generation is worthy of further consideration. However, much will depend on the manner in which the CNFE development as a whole is delivered, by whom and over what timescale. There is no reason why the AAP should not reference the potential desirability of such an approach, however, it may be inappropriate to be overly prescriptive on this particular issue.
Turnstone considers that the principle of area based approach towards renewables and low carbon energy generation is worthy of further consideration. However, much will depend on the manner in which the CNFE development as a whole is delivered, by whom and over what timescale. There is no reason why the AAP should not reference the potential desirability of such an approach, however, it may be inappropriate to be overly prescriptive on this particular issue.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30352
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Coulson Building Group
These types of schemes need encouragement.
These types of schemes need encouragement.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30410
Received: 04/02/2015
Respondent: Milton Parish Council
Some sort of CHP plant may be appropriate.
1.b.Municipal organic waste processing could be a very antisocial neighbour. Milton currently suffers from smells from putrefied organic waste in landfill, and we would not wish this area to be a dumping ground for antisocial industrial processes - put these away from residential areas.
See attached document
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30420
Received: 29/01/2015
Respondent: Natural England
We welcome proposals to develop policies for renewable and low carbon energy generation and sustainable design and construction. We advise that these should be worded to ensure benefits for the natural environment are maximised.
See attached document
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30529
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Cambridge City Council
It is agreed that the CNFE may present opportunities for a site wide approach to renewable and low carbon generation. It may be that this is not completely site wide but it should certainly be considered for substantial areas, for example, combined heat and power plants. While phasing may be challenging in terms of capacity in the early stages, consideration to such provision should be made.
With regard to waste processing facilities, further work in this respect would be supported.
See attached document
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30612
Received: 19/01/2015
Respondent: Silke Scheler
Yes.
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.