Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Search representations
Results for CODE Development Planners Ltd search
New searchObject
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 21
Representation ID: 29770
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Shared social spaces contribute to open innovation. It is highly questionable if an atmosphere of social interaction and open innovation could be fostered at a site which is heavily constrained through noise, odour, insects, vibration and HGV traffic.
Open Innovation has become the 'best practice' approach to product and service development for R&D intensive businesses over the last ten years.
Not the only but the most recent and perhaps most notable example of the approach as it applies to Cambridge has emerged since the Draft Local Plans' evidence base was prepared.
Shared social spaces contribute to open innovation. It is highly questionable if an atmosphere of social interaction and open innovation could be fostered at a site which is heavily constrained through noise, odour, insects, vibration and HGV traffic.
Open Innovation has become the 'best practice' approach to product and service development for R&D intensive businesses over the last ten years and Cambridge has become a global magnet for this activity, because of the opportunity to work alongside such outstanding research and R&D activity.
Not the only but the most recent and perhaps most notable example of the approach as it applies to Cambridge has emerged since the Draft Local Plans' evidence base was prepared. Astra Zeneca's announcement of a relocation of its HQ (2,000 employees) to the Cambridge Bio-medical Campus reinforces the substantial impact the 'open innovation' approach is having on Cambridge's R&D sector. The immediate further interest and commitment from other companies and organisations preparing to develop new operations on the immediately adjacent land at CBC and the allocated CBC Phase 2 is testament to the impact of the approach.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 22a
Representation ID: 29771
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
No Comment.
No Comment.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 22b
Representation ID: 29772
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
No comment.
No comment.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 22c
Representation ID: 29773
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
No.
No.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 23a
Representation ID: 29774
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Cambridge Science Park does not require to be included in the AAP; it has adequate policy direction and protection through the Draft Local Plans.
To include the Cambridge Science Park within the boundary of the AAP risks that the AAP area will be seen as a success delivering increased employment floorspace by virtue of the science park's altering state; development which would happen regardless of the AAP being in place or not.
Cambridge Science Park does not require to be included in the AAP; it has adequate policy direction and protection through the Draft Local Plans. Any further material planning considerations which may be associated with this document may lead to delays in decision making as it is unclear how long it will take for this plan to be adopted. These potential delays and proliferation of planning guidance is in direct contrast to Central Government initiatives to reduce planning bureaucracy and the presumption that policy compliant development should be approved without delay, as directed by the NPPF.
To include the Cambridge Science Park within the boundary of the AAP risks that the AAP area will be seen as a success delivering increased employment floorspace by virtue of the science park's altering state; development which would happen regardless of the AAP being in place or not. The success of the AAP site will have a direct bearing on the ability of Cambridge to attract global R&D investment, if it is not delivering employment floorspace and affordable dwellings quickly this needs to be identifiable quickly and resolved through a review. To include the Cambridge Science Park in the boundary risks masking this important monitoring factor.
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 23b
Representation ID: 29775
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
The intensification/densification of sites within the Cambridge Science Park should be judged against existing and emerging Local Plan policies and other material such as NPPF. The intensification of uses within the science park is a current and ongoing dynamic and the need to provide guidance is now. To delay providing guidance by placing it within this AAP would be too late. The Council should seek to address these issues through the Draft Local Plan which could be complemented by Supplementary Planning Guidance which could be relatively quick to produce, if it is considered necessary at all.
The intensification/densification of sites within the Cambridge Science Park should be judged against existing and emerging Local Plan policies and other material such as NPPF. The intensification of uses within the science park is a current and ongoing dynamic and the need to provide guidance is now. To delay providing guidance by placing it within this AAP would be too late. The Council should seek to address these issues through the Draft Local Plan which could be complemented by Supplementary Planning Guidance which could be relatively quick to produce, if it is considered necessary at all.
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 23c
Representation ID: 29776
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
No.
No.
Support
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 24a
Representation ID: 29777
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved
Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 24b
Representation ID: 29778
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Object for reasons stated in 24a.
Response to Question 24a: Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved.
Object for reasons stated in 24a.
Response to Question 24a: Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved.
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Question 24c
Representation ID: 29779
Received: 30/01/2015
Respondent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Object for reasons stated in 24a.
Response to Question 24a: Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved.
Object for reasons stated in 24a.
Response to Question 24a: Option A would result in no change to the current land use provisions. This is supported on the basis that the industrial land uses are important to the City functionality and that there are no clear agreements to demonstrate that their relocation to within a short distance can be achieved.