3.6.5

Showing comments and forms 1 to 6 of 6

Support

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31227

Received: 05/09/2016

Respondent: Naomi Yandell

Representation Summary:

More trees and greenery.
Make more room for bus stops so that pedestrians passing by don't have to step onto the roads to get past.
Make the area more people-friendly and let's have a gateway to central Cambridge which we can be proud of. Cafes/independent shops.

Full text:

To summarise, my comments are as follows:
PLEASE rid the area of the gyratory system which gives cars domination (racetrack mentality), scares cyclists and makes pedestrians feel marginalised.
Make the area more people-friendly and let's have a gateway to central Cambridge which we can be proud of. Cafes/independent shops.
More trees and greenery.
Improve the situation for people cycling and walking.
Ensure that developments are of good quality and use local stone and are
sympathetic to their surroundings.
Make more room for bus stops so that pedestrians passing by don't have to step onto the roads to get past.

Object

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31244

Received: 19/09/2016

Respondent: Dr Roger Sewell

Representation Summary:

I support the ideas of more trees and greenery. However, this is a key location on the inner ring road, and top of the list is adequate traffic flow - and it is far from obvious that this can be achieved at the same time as "more sense of place" and more trees and greenery.

Full text:

I support the ideas of more trees and greenery. However, this is a key location on the inner ring road, and top of the list is adequate traffic flow - and it is far from obvious that this can be achieved at the same time as "more sense of place" and more trees and greenery.

Support

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31284

Received: 21/09/2016

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Simpson

Representation Summary:

This can be achieved once the gyratory system is tamed.

Full text:

This can be achieved once the gyratory system is tamed.

Support

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31316

Received: 04/10/2016

Respondent: Dr Rabia Dada-Oughton

Representation Summary:

More trees, wider footpaths and a generally better aesthetic would be welcome.

Full text:

More trees, wider footpaths and a generally better aesthetic would be welcome.

Support

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31340

Received: 08/10/2016

Respondent: Mr Ben Rowlings

Representation Summary:

Agree with new 'public space' - less traffic, more community, small retail/food businesses, outdoor cafe seating area, market and multi-use event space; raised beds green planting with seating; more cycle use encouraged; better evening lighting.

Full text:

Agree with new 'public space' - less traffic, more community, small retail/food businesses, outdoor cafe seating area, market and multi-use event space; raised beds green planting with seating; more cycle use encouraged; better evening lighting.
Can we encourage a more public/open display (in the location now) of plans, so all the community can view and comment?

Object

Mitcham's Corner Development Framework SPD

Representation ID: 31375

Received: 15/10/2016

Respondent: Dr Robert Izzard

Representation Summary:

"cycle more easily"... this seems unlikely. Unless cyclists are cycling *very* slowly, mixing them with pedestrians who are "spilling out" is likely to cause conflict. Through traffic, including cyclists, will have to slow their journeys (possibly even more than currently) to get through, which will frustrate. I see nothing here which addresses these likely conflicts between users of the same (shared) space. You could learn from the Netherlands where cyclists are not made to share space with pedestrians or cars. I guess if any of the "planning" team were cyclists, this would be immediately obvious to them.

Full text:

"cycle more easily"... this seems unlikely. Unless cyclists are cycling *very* slowly, mixing them with pedestrians who are "spilling out" is likely to cause conflict. Through traffic, including cyclists, will have to slow their journeys (possibly even more than currently) to get through, which will frustrate. I see nothing here which addresses these likely conflicts between users of the same (shared) space. You could learn from the Netherlands where cyclists are not made to share space with pedestrians or cars. I guess if any of the "planning" team were cyclists, this would be immediately obvious to them.