Question 38b
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29290
Received: 10/12/2014
Respondent: Management Process Systems Limited
Let's look to a future where cars are not the primary mode of transport.
Let's look to a future where cars are not the primary mode of transport.
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29338
Received: 16/12/2014
Respondent: Dr Roger Sewell
Even tighter restriction for residential accommodation would be ridiculous (see answer to 38a).
However, there is a need to ensure that parking intended for residents and their visitors isn't usurped by station and business users. Therefore such parking should not be "on-street" but within the confines of each property, in order to avoid having to pay for a "residents' parking scheme".
Even tighter restriction for residential accommodation would be ridiculous (see answer to 38a).
However, there is a need to ensure that parking intended for residents and their visitors isn't usurped by station and business users. Therefore such parking should not be "on-street" but within the confines of each property, in order to avoid having to pay for a "residents' parking scheme".
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29703
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Brookgate
Agent: Bidwells
Brookgate support the use of more restrictive car parking standards across the whole area to reflect the highly sustainable location. Transport modelling work will assist in determining the appropriate levels of car parking taking into account the site accessibility and proposed land-uses. It should be recognised that car parking levels particularly for commercial development should not be set too low as it may make development unattractive to potential tenants, particularly given the high car parking levels consented on adjacent establish commercial development sites. The under-provision of car parking could also lead to off-site overspill parking.
Brookgate support the use of more restrictive car parking standards across the whole area to reflect the highly sustainable location. Transport modelling work will assist in determining the appropriate levels of car parking taking into account the site accessibility and proposed land-uses. It should be recognised that car parking levels particularly for commercial development should not be set too low as it may make development unattractive to potential tenants, particularly given the high car parking levels consented on adjacent establish commercial development sites. The under-provision of car parking could also lead to off-site overspill parking.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29936
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council
Car parking has a strong relationship to traffic generation and consideration will need to be given to balancing operational needs of the site, with encouraging high levels of access by non-car means and supporting sustainable transport access to the site, and thus ensuring that any residual impacts on the highway network are not severe. More detailed consideration of parking numbers, and the approach to parking provision, will be required including detailed assessment of non-car trip patterns, mode split targets, relationship to standards, potential for shared use of parking across different land uses, and impacts of vehicular traffic on networks
As noted above, car parking provision has a strong relationship to traffic generation and careful consideration will need to be given to balancing operational needs of the site, with encouraging high levels of access by non-car means and supporting sustainable transport access to the site, and thus ensuring that any residual impacts on the highway network are not severe. The County Council therefore considers that more detailed consideration of parking numbers, and the approach to parking provision, will be required including inter-alia detailed assessment of non-car trip patterns, mode split targets, the relationship to standards, the potential for shared use of parking across different land uses, and impacts of vehicular traffic on the highway networks
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30056
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Orchard Street Investment Management LLP
Agent: Beacon Planning
Encourages on-street parking, competition for spaces and does not reduce car usage, just displaces it.
Encourages on-street parking, competition for spaces and does not reduce car usage, just displaces it.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30201
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Grosvenor Developments
Agent: AECOM
consideration to be given to this to reflect sustainability of location
consideration to be given to this to reflect sustainability of location
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30347
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Coulson Building Group
This is the worst Option.
This is the worst Option.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30427
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Tom McKeown
The Campaign is in full support of Option B: restrictive car parking standards across the whole area to reflect the highly sustainable location. Placing restrictions on private motor use must be part of achieving this mode shift.
I am in full support of restrictive standards across the whole area to reflect the highly sustainable location. Enabling active and public transport must be the focus for this development. Restrictions on private motor use is part of achieving this mode shift.
See attached document
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30525
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Cambridge City Council
Option B. This seems to be a sensible approach if to maximise more sustainable forms of transport as well as encouraging employers to support more sustainable forms of transport for travel to work.
See attached document
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30608
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.