Comments on: Redevelopment of the Cambridge Station Area http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html Cambridge, United Kingdom. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:54:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Richard http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3342 Richard Sat, 11 Oct 2008 15:19:58 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3342 The ~65% increase in car traffic predicted by Ashwells comes from table 7.6 in <a href="http://www.cb1forcambridge.co.uk/pdfs/planning_documents/Traffic%20Assessment%20&%20Technical%20Appendices/Appendix%20E.pdf" rel="nofollow">their travel plan</a>. From a base of 2211 car trips per day they predict 3739 following the CB1 development. This is a 69% increase. The ~65% increase in car traffic predicted by Ashwells comes from table 7.6 in their travel plan.

From a base of 2211 car trips per day they predict 3739 following the CB1 development. This is a 69% increase.

]]> By: Richard http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3340 Richard Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:39:52 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3340 Andrew, "Low Increase" sounds very similar to "No Increase"; When Huw Nicholas responded to you I think he had heard "No Increase" and started his response by saying that this was not what he was predicting. Andrew, “Low Increase” sounds very similar to “No Increase”; When Huw Nicholas responded to you I think he had heard “No Increase” and started his response by saying that this was not what he was predicting.

]]> By: Andrew Bower http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3339 Andrew Bower Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:22:12 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3339 Hi Richard, Alan Baker was indeed present on Tuesday but I'm not sure for how long. Thanks for your detailed record of the meeting. I'm not sure whether I was misheard or fluffed the question but my first point was actually meant to be querying how sure they can be that the demand (or need) for cars would be held low [not to no increase - I knew that wasn't the claim] simply by pretending the problem doesn't exist and refusing to create parking spaces for the new dwellings. I've submitted an FOI request to find out how the assessment process was influenced by collaborating with the applicant: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/communications_with_station_area Andrew Cambridge Hi Richard,

Alan Baker was indeed present on Tuesday but I’m not sure for how long.

Thanks for your detailed record of the meeting.

I’m not sure whether I was misheard or fluffed the question but my first point was actually meant to be querying how sure they can be that the demand (or need) for cars would be held low [not to no increase - I knew that wasn't the claim] simply by pretending the problem doesn’t exist and refusing to create parking spaces for the new dwellings.

I’ve submitted an FOI request to find out how the assessment process was influenced by collaborating with the applicant:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/communications_with_station_area

Andrew
Cambridge

]]> By: Chris Howell http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3313 Chris Howell Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:31:21 +0000 http://www.rtaylor.co.uk/redevelopment-of-the-cambridge-station-area.html#comment-3313 Hi Richard, I think Alan Baker, Chair of the planning committee was also in the audience. I think Huw misunderstood my question about independence - I am not so concerned about the relationship between the County Council and Atkins, their consultants which is fair enough, it was more the relationship between the applicants Ashwells and the County Council as the highway's authority. At times Huw sounded like he was speaking on behalf of the applicant, when I think the County's role should be to provide an independent i.e. objective assessment of the transport implications (positive and negative) of Ashwell's application and conclude on its overall acceptability in transport terms. There seems to have been an overriding assumption by the officers for some time that this application is acceptable, and the County has worked with the applicants to 'make the transport case work', which is a bit of a problem if like me you disagree with this position. Hi Richard,
I think Alan Baker, Chair of the planning committee was also in the audience.
I think Huw misunderstood my question about independence - I am not so concerned about the relationship between the County Council and Atkins, their consultants which is fair enough, it was more the relationship between the applicants Ashwells and the County Council as the highway’s authority. At times Huw sounded like he was speaking on behalf of the applicant, when I think the County’s role should be to provide an independent i.e. objective assessment of the transport implications (positive and negative) of Ashwell’s application and conclude on its overall acceptability in transport terms. There seems to have been an overriding assumption by the officers for some time that this application is acceptable, and the County has worked with the applicants to ‘make the transport case work’, which is a bit of a problem if like me you disagree with this position.

]]>