Question 30d
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29686
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Brookgate
Agent: Bidwells
Option D would restrict new student accommodation to specified locations only, resulting in a loss of flexibility for the evolution of the CFNE area. There is no need to impose such a restriction which could have a detrimental impact upon both the provision of student accommodation to meet market demand and upon sites which are safeguarded for student development, when alternative uses may be more appropriate. A new policy as suggested under Option C offers a more flexible approach which will result in student accommodation being developed in suitable locations
Option D would restrict new student accommodation to specified locations only, resulting in a loss of flexibility for the evolution of the CFNE area. There is no need to impose such a restriction which could have a detrimental impact upon both the provision of student accommodation to meet market demand and upon sites which are safeguarded for student development, when alternative uses may be more appropriate. A new policy as suggested under Option C offers a more flexible approach which will result in student accommodation being developed in suitable locations
Comment
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 29914
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Cambridgeshire County Council
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.
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.
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30182
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Grosvenor Developments
Agent: AECOM
No additional comment
No additional comment
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30332
Received: 02/02/2015
Respondent: Coulson Building Group
I support Option A.
I support Option A.
Object
Cambridge Northern Fringe East AAP - Issues and Options
Representation ID: 30600
Received: 19/01/2015
Respondent: Silke Scheler
No.
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.