Question 30d

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29686

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Brookgate

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Option D would restrict new student accommodation to specified locations only, resulting in a loss of flexibility for the evolution of the CFNE area. There is no need to impose such a restriction which could have a detrimental impact upon both the provision of student accommodation to meet market demand and upon sites which are safeguarded for student development, when alternative uses may be more appropriate. A new policy as suggested under Option C offers a more flexible approach which will result in student accommodation being developed in suitable locations

Full text:

Option D would restrict new student accommodation to specified locations only, resulting in a loss of flexibility for the evolution of the CFNE area. There is no need to impose such a restriction which could have a detrimental impact upon both the provision of student accommodation to meet market demand and upon sites which are safeguarded for student development, when alternative uses may be more appropriate. A new policy as suggested under Option C offers a more flexible approach which will result in student accommodation being developed in suitable locations

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29914

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Representation Summary:

If housing (of any type) is to be provided it should be in a location where amenity issues from the Water Recycling Centre, aggregate railheads and existing and planned waste uses will not arise and / or can be satisfactorily mitigated.

Full text:

If housing (of any type) is to be provided it should be in a location where amenity issues from the Water Recycling Centre, aggregate railheads and existing and planned waste uses will not arise and / or can be satisfactorily mitigated.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30182

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Grosvenor Developments Limited

Agent: AECOM

Representation Summary:

No additional comment

Full text:

No additional comment

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30332

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Coulson Building Group

Representation Summary:

I support Option A.

Full text:

I support Option A.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30600

Received: 19/01/2015

Respondent: Silke Scheler

Representation Summary:

No.

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.