Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 57002

Received: 09/12/2021

Respondent: Trumpington Residents Association

Representation Summary:

The Trumpington Residents' Association argues that there should be a priority on supporting a network of recharging points. We are concerned about the vagueness concerning the number of parking spaces. For example, there is no mention of parking for visitors/deliveries, yet these become even more crucial as the number of parking spaces for residents decreases. If you do not have a car, you could be even more reliant on having your groceries delivered. Where is the insistence that developers properly manage this demand?

Full text:

The Trumpington Residents' Association argues that there should be a priority on supporting a network of recharging points, as the number of EVs increases.

There is a reference to the provision of '1 charge point per dwelling' but how will this work when not all parking spaces are immediately adjacent to the property to which they relate (page 307)?

We are concerned about the vagueness concerning the number of parking spaces. For example, there is the statement "We are therefore proposing that we move to a more design-led approach, supported by indicative standards tailored to reflect different circumstances" (page 309) but no mention of parking for visitors/deliveries, yet these become even more crucial as the number of parking spaces for residents decreases. If you do not have a car, you could be even more reliant on having your groceries delivered. Where is the insistence that developers properly manage this demand?