Question 47b

Showing comments and forms 1 to 11 of 11

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29299

Received: 10/12/2014

Respondent: Management Process Systems Limited

Representation Summary:

An integrated approach with all upfront design and finance agreed.

Full text:

An integrated approach with all upfront design and finance agreed.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29586

Received: 23/01/2015

Respondent: Mrs Sasha Wilson

Representation Summary:

Good design and clear financial report necessary

Full text:

Good design and clear financial report necessary

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29720

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Brookgate

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Requiring the first phase of development to provide a masterplan for the whole AAP area is overly onerous, hindering phase 1 deliverability and reducing flexibility. Phase 1 should demonstrate that it can integrate with future phases of development and policy should be flexible enough to facilitate this. The development framework should be provided within the AAP, with apportionment of infrastructure requirements identified.

Full text:

Requiring the first phase of development to provide a masterplan for the whole AAP area is overly onerous, hindering phase 1 deliverability and reducing flexibility. Phase 1 should demonstrate that it can integrate with future phases of development and policy should be flexible enough to facilitate this. The development framework should be provided within the AAP, with apportionment of infrastructure requirements identified.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29748

Received: 30/01/2015

Respondent: The Master Fellows and Scholars of the College of Saint John the Evangelist in the University of Cambridge

Agent: Savills

Representation Summary:

We object to Option B since it suggests that there is a phasing plan in place and where the developer undertaking any development will have to provide a masterplan for the whole of the Plan area. This is unacceptable, in our view the AAP should provide the detailed development framework against which planning applications will be considered.

Full text:

Savills Planning Team in Cambridge are instructed on behalf of St John's College, Cambridge to submit responses to the Issues and Options Report on the CNFE having regard to the College's landholdings and land interests at St John's Innovation Park west of Cowley Road and east of Milton Road.

Option B on phasing and delivery approach as set out within the Issues and Options Report seems to suggest that a requirement of a planning application for the first phase of development will need to provide a masterplan for the whole of the AAP area. Firstly it is unclear as to where the first phase of development will take place and we have seen nothing in the plan as published for consultation that suggests there is a phased approach to the development. Certainly the redevelopment options are not phasing plans and therefore it is difficult to understand the logic whereby a developer of any area of land within the Plan area is charged for providing a masterplan for the whole of the area. In our view the AAP as drafted and as expressed within Option A on page 68 of the report, should provide the principles for a development framework against which individual phases of redevelopment should come forward alongside their own detailed planning application. The onus placed on the first developer to set out a Masterplan for the whole of the CNFE is entirely unreasonable and should be resisted.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29804

Received: 30/01/2015

Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Representation Summary:

The first planning application should not be overburdened with having to provide an entire masterplan. The Council need to ensure that all of landowners have been fairly and comprehensively consulted.

Full text:

The first planning application should not be overburdened with having to provide an entire masterplan. The Council need to ensure that all of landowners have been fairly and comprehensively consulted.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29890

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: St John's Innovation Centre

Representation Summary:

47.1 Option B on phasing and delivery approach set out in the Issues and Options Report implies that any planning application for the first phase of development will need to provide a Masterplan for the whole of the AAP area. It is unclear where the first phase of development will take place and we have seen nothing in the plan as published for consultation that suggests a phased approach to the development. The redevelopment options are not phasing plans and therefore it is difficult to
understand why a developer of any area of land within the Plan should be made responsible for providing a Masterplan for the whole of the area. The AAP as drafted and set out in Option A on page 68 of the report should provide the principles for a development framework against which a specific phase of redevelopment can come forward as part of its own individual, detailed planning application. We object to the onus placed on the first developer to set out a Masterplan for the whole of the CNFE as it is entirely unreasonable.

Full text:

47.1 Option B on phasing and delivery approach set out in the Issues and Options Report implies that any planning application for the first phase of development will need to provide a Masterplan for the whole of the AAP area. It is unclear where the first phase of development will take place and we have seen nothing in the plan as published for consultation that suggests a phased approach to the development. The redevelopment options are not phasing plans and therefore it is difficult to
understand why a developer of any area of land within the Plan should be made responsible for providing a Masterplan for the whole of the area. The AAP as drafted and set out in Option A on page 68 of the report should provide the principles for a development framework against which a specific phase of redevelopment can come forward as part of its own individual, detailed planning application. We object to the onus placed on the first developer to set out a Masterplan for the whole of the CNFE as it is entirely unreasonable.

Comment

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 29953

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council

Representation Summary:

Option B may be difficult to deliver given that a developer of the early phases may not be aware of issues and constraints in areas they do not propose to develop, and therefore it may not be appropriate to propose detailed master planning proposals for other areas of the CNFE. In particular the reduction in size and enclosure of the Water Recycling Centre in Option 3 could take different forms and be located in different ways on the site depending on the constraints placed on the redevelopment by the inlet works and other technical aspects of the development.

Full text:

Option B may be difficult to deliver given that a developer of the early phases may not be aware of issues and constraints in areas they do not propose to develop, and therefore it may not be appropriate to propose detailed master planning proposals for other areas of the CNFE. In particular the reduction in size and enclosure of the Water Recycling Centre in Option 3 could take different forms and be located in different ways on the site depending on the constraints placed on the redevelopment by the inlet works and other technical aspects of the development.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30095

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Orchard Street Investment Management LLP

Agent: Beacon Planning

Representation Summary:

More drawn out process - abrogates framework to potential private developer, may result in amendments to AAP.

Full text:

More drawn out process - abrogates framework to potential private developer, may result in amendments to AAP.

Object

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30213

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Grosvenor Developments Limited

Agent: AECOM

Representation Summary:

Could severely impact on delivery of vision and objectives for the CNFE.

Full text:

Could severely impact on delivery of vision and objectives for the CNFE.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30354

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Coulson Building Group

Representation Summary:

The scheme is more likely to happen if this approach is taken.

Full text:

The scheme is more likely to happen if this approach is taken.

Support

Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options

Representation ID: 30374

Received: 02/02/2015

Respondent: Cambridge Past, Present and Future

Representation Summary:

Strongly supported by CambridgePPF. Good master planning will ensure that a high quality new quarter for the city is established, regenerating sub-sites and avoiding many mistakes at a later date. Best urban design practice is crucial to create a vibrant city and the value of 'participatory master planning' for larger development sites is well known.

Full text:

Strongly supported by CambridgePPF. Good master planning will ensure that a high quality new quarter for the city is established, regenerating sub-sites and avoiding many mistakes at a later date. Best urban design practice is crucial to create a vibrant city and the value of 'participatory master planning' for larger development sites is well known.