Question 30b

A limit should not be set on the amount of student accommodation that would be allowed in the CNFE area. This would result in an inflexible approach which could fail to meet market demand and unnecessarily restrict appropriate development/re-development in the CNFE area, potentially jeopardising both the supply of student accommodation within Cambridge and the successful creation of a mixed and balanced community at CNFE.

The setting of a limit on the provision of student accommodation appears to be sensible development control action. However, it will be complex to justify a limit and to enforce it

If housing (of any type) is to be provided it should be in a location where amenity issues from the Water Recycling Centre, aggregate railheads and existing and planned waste uses will not arise and / or can be satisfactorily mitigated.

No additional comment

I support Option A.

See attached document

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.

I would support Option A or B (up to 20% student housing but no more.)