Things tagged 'planning'

limited to the area of Cambridge Cycling Campaign:

866 issues found for 'planning':

  • Glebe Farm development

    Created by cobweb // 0 threads

    Permission given for 286 homes. Concern was raised in 2010 about the positioning of the 715 cycle parking spaces.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • Bell School development

    Created by cobweb // 3 threads

    Outline planning permission was given in 2008 for this development of up to 347 houses. In 2011 a reserved matter relating to the design on the junction was refused by the Joint Development Control forum. This is still a subject of debate. Another concern is the path adjacent to Babraham Road which is much used by staff at Addenbrooke's either on foot on by bike.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • NIAB development

    Created by cobweb // 7 threads

    A development of 1,780 houses, including community facilities, roads, footpaths and cycleways. Frontage land has already been built on (this is the land facing Huntingdon Road) and outline planning permission given.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • 11/1501/FUL from pub to Sikh Temple/ meeting place, Arbury Road

    Created by Rohan Wilson // 0 threads

    The Grove Pub. Transport Statement recognises that 19 cy spaces should be provided (1 per 15sqm public space), states they are in "garage" but details not given, just assumed space available. Needs closer look. TRICS database for a Leeds Sikh Temple shows no cycling, 16.4% walking, 3.6% public tpt.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • 12/0300/FUL infill house rear 27 Histon Road

    Created by Rohan Wilson // 0 threads

    The adjacent, approved plot, 11/05530/FUL designed by the same architectural practice, places the cycle cupboard next to the front door and closer to it than is the car.

    THIS proposal, however, offers the standard back-of-garden shed for bins and bikes, with the bikes beyond the bins, while the car driver door is adjacent to the house front door...

    Note Manual for Streets 8.2.1, quoted in a prominent panel on p5 of the Cambridge Cycle Parking Guide:
    "In residential developments, designers should aim to make access to cycle storage at least as convenient as access to car parking."

    Please sign in to vote.

  • Change of use, office to study rooms: 89 Regent Street

    Created by Rohan Wilson // 1 thread

    This comment is on behalf of Sustrans, the charity that’s enabling people to travel by foot, bike or public transport for more of the journeys we make every day.

    The site is proposed as study rooms for students aiming to enter university. Thus they would be old enough to cycle independently within Cambridge, for example between their places of residence and the various study buildings.

    Remarkably, it is suggested (Planning Statement) that the students might park their bikes on Station Road where cycle parking is available, and might be augmented, and walk to the proposed site. This is a distance of 700m, taking 10 minutes at a normal walking pace plus any waiting time to cross the East Road/ Regent Street junction. Any student with a cycle at Station Road would be likely to wish to use it to continue to the proposed site, if parking arrangements provided there were reasonably convenient and secure.

    We are told that the Regent Street site is closer to the student residences than Free School Lane, but no more definite information is given as to how far the residences are from the proposed site or from Station Road.

    The city's cycle parking standards are presumably set to reflect normal levels of demand from staff and students, and no explanation is given as to why "very few students have bicycles".

    The access to the suggested cycle parking in a narrow yard at the rear of the building is presumably the gated passageway to its north. This is not made clear, nor is it clear whether there are steps to be negotiated. It seems impossible that more than perhaps a dozen bicycles could be parked in the yard most of whose width appears to be less than a bike's length, leaving no room for daily or emergency access with the parking arrangement indicated.

    The transport aspects of this proposal have not been examined in sufficient detail for their impact to be properly assessed, but it is certain that there is insufficient space for the level of cycle parking required. There appears to be no disabled access. We therefore object.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • Use change to Children's Gym: 34 Clifton Road

    Created by Rohan Wilson // 1 thread

    12/0342/FUL 12 cycle spaces indicated but space looks inadequate (no dimensions or layout shown)

    This comment is on behalf of Sustrans, the charity that’s enabling people to travel by foot, bike or public transport for more of the journeys we make every day.

    The site is on a local cycle link and thus it is reasonable, in the context of Cambridge, to anticipate a high proportion of parents and children arriving by bicycle. Indeed, bearing in mind the limited car parking available we would recommend that a travel plan strongly promoting cycle access for staff and users be required.

    We object because we do not believe that the cycle parking space(s) allocated are consistent with the stated aim and the need to achieve high cycling levels. In particular, tagalongs, trailers and large carrier-bikes are likely to form a high proportion of customer cycles. The dimensions of the small, unsheltered enclosure (designed as a bin store in the current use of the site?) and a proposed layout are not given but look insufficient, and include a narrow entrance.

    If cycles for say 30% of 18 customers, their children and 8 staff were to arrive by bike (say 3 staff, 6 adult customers and 8 children during a single class) then allowing a 50% margin for changeover between classes, space would be needed for a variety of types of bike and trailer to accommodate some 3 staff, 9 adult and 12 children customers.

    This sort of calculation and the detail of the use of the cycle parking spaces do not seem to have been presented by the applicant, and should be required and assessed before the application is determined. We suggest that at least one car space would have to be used to accommodate sufficient cycles on this site.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • Planning application at Addenbrooke's for major trauma unit

    Created by Heather Coleman // 1 thread

    The planning application has the promise of new, extra cycle parking, which should be good news. However, details are scant to say the least and as new jobs will presumably be created, I fear it will do nothing to alleviate the chronic shortage of cycle parking on site, especially at this location at the rear of the Concourse, and a place of choice to park if you have cycled from Trumpington.

    Please sign in to vote.

  • Orchard Park Sites A & B Planning Application

    Created by Richard Moss // 3 threads

    Planning application submitted for housing near the primary school and a mixed use housing plus retail development at Unwin Square, east of the Permier Inn. Concerns about provision for cycle parking contained in the plans submitted.

    Please sign in to vote.

173 threads found for 'planning':

No planning applications found for 'planning'.

Back to top