Policy 24a: Land Assembly

Object

Representation ID: 54451

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Orchard Street Investment Management

Agent: Turley

While it is understood that any acquisition of property or land would be subject to a payment at market value, the lack of alternative industrial and other business premises within the City could result in the closure of and loss of employment for local residents. It is critical that in bringing sites forward, due regard is had to the provisions of criterion (c), and that this should be the starting point before any consideration of Compulsory Purchase Powers takes place.

It is vital that discussions are undertaken with all landowners in the first instance to try and agree/negotiate a combined approach. The site as a whole has a number of land owners and the Area Action Plan makes no reference to a ‘joined up’ approach. Early engagement with all land owners going forward is crucial and this does not seem to have been resolved yet.

Support

Representation ID: 55698

Received: 02/10/2020

Respondent: St John's College

Agent: Savills

Positive intervention, in the form of land assembly and the relocation of existing floorspace and uses (and thereby existing businesses), is to be welcomed.

Policy 24a simply reiterates the steps and tests required in order to use compulsory purchase.

Comment

Representation ID: 55851

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Veolia and Turnstone Estates

Agent: Carter Jonas

It is proposed in Policy 26 that the existing waste recycling transfer facility off Cowley Road would
be relocated off site, but at this stage no suitable and viable alternative relocation site is
identified. Veolia would be affected by the redevelopment of its existing site, and would welcome
discussions with the Council to find a suitable alternative viable site from which it can operate a
waste recycling transfer facility and release of value from their existing site to facilitate any move.
It would not be necessary or appropriate for compulsory purchase to be used because the Veolia
site could be redeveloped in conjunction with Cambridge City Council for the proposed business
and housing uses, and designed to meet the policy requirements specified in the AAP.

Comment

Representation ID: 55934

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Ridgeons Timber & Builders Merchants and Turnstone Estates

Agent: Carter Jonas

It is proposed at this stage that the existing Ridgeons operation will remain on-site, however it
is allocated for residential led redevelopment in the draft AAP. If Ridgeons are to relocate from
the site, then a suitable alternative site should be identified within the AAP area to enable the
relocation of its existing operations. It is important to reiterate that Ridgeons would be
affected by the redevelopment of its existing site, and would welcome discussions with the Council
to find a suitable alternative viable site from which it can operate a building merchants and
release of value from their existing site to facilitate any move. It is disappointing that they
have not been included within the wider Masterplanning sessions for the AAP area which have taken
place to date.

It would not be necessary or appropriate for compulsory purchase to be used because the Ridgeons
site could be redeveloped in conjunction with Cambridge City Council for the proposed housing uses,
and designed to meet the policy requirements specified in the AAP and the existing builders
merchant could be relocated to Cowley Road Industrial Estate or elsewhere if the appropriate
support is given by the Councils to such relocation. As set out above, the design and layout of the
proposed residential uses at Nuffield Road Industrial Estate, and the design of the strategic
walking and cycling routes on Nuffield Road, should be integrated and compatible with the existing
builders merchant operations at the Ridgeons site. If that is not possible, then an alternative
site should be identified for the relocation of the Ridgeons operation, which is in close
proximity to Cambridge and existing customers.

Support

Representation ID: 55983

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Hawkswren Ltd

Agent: Carter Jonas

As set out in the Introduction, A De Simone Investments Ltd has an option on the Bart Tech site,
and intends to deliver development that is consistent with the mix of uses and policy
requirements specified for this development parcel, subject to requested amendments on building
heights and flexibility to include short term serviced accommodation.

Object

Representation ID: 56004

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Turnstone Estates Limited

Agent: Carter Jonas

It is anticipated in the North East Cambridge AAP that the existing Tarmac operations off Cowley
Road would be relocated and the site redeveloped for business and housing uses – see Figure
11. It should not be necessary for compulsory purchase to be used because the Tarmac site
could be redeveloped in conjunction with Cambridge City Council for the proposed business and
housing uses, and designed to meet the policy requirements specified in the AAP.

Comment

Representation ID: 56158

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: U+I PLC.

Agent: We are Town

Support the use of CPO to prevent piecemeal or inappropriate development coming forward. Although it can’t neatly be
encapsulated in policy wording, the ‘threat value’ of CPO should not be underestimated and the process as a result
truncated where possible.