Question 7

Not at all

It's a shame that there's no provision for anything new other than the token 'linear park' which is minute compared with the population that would be expected to share it. I like the outdoors so I definitely wouldn't want to live there.

Not at all

Absolutely not. The token 'linear park' is minute compared with the population who would be expected to share it. I like the outdoors, so would not like to like there because of this.

Mostly not

It is obvious from the map that the green spaces are small. Calling the 'Cowley Triangle' "extensive" is wishful thinking. Milton Country Park being close by helps, but visiting in during the summer months you can see it is already extremely busy with the current population and will be swamped by the addition of so many nearby new homes.

Mostly not

No answer given

Mostly not

No. The green space surrounding the area is already at capacity and will be unable to cope with an extra 18-19.000 people wanting to walk, run, exercise, take their dog out or have a picnic with their kids. There needs to be new provision for the new residents as relying on the existing provision at Milton Country Park is not feasible and could actually be damaging to the biodiversity and wildlife in the surrounding area. Milton Country Park is already used to capacity as seen in the past months.

Mostly not

no mention of recreation grounds, using off site facilities to mitigate putting them on site. If its right for these residents to use Milton Country Park, Chesterton Rec etc why can other cambridge residents then come and use these. Must ensure ample open spaces Covid as shown that people need open space not postage stamp greens and also defeat the object if you start to have to travel to other open areas. Look at space that was given to Trumpington so why should this be different. Again it goes against our planning policy.

Mostly yes

In general yes, but Cowley Triangle looks modest in the context of the whole site.

Not at all

No. There are far too many homes planned for the site - which would bring the density of habitation way above even London averages. Any new plan in Cambridge should provide twice the typical area of green space per person than residents already have access to, increasing and not decreasing the accessible proportion to existing residents in the locality. This must include a plan to rewild a at least as much land as being built on again and make it accessible to those new residents. Alongside any home building plan, this re-wilding should be by acquisition of industrialised chemically farmed agricultural land - a high proportion of which is used as animal feed for the meat industry - to truly improve the green credentials of the local economy, rather than pretending building projects are green on their own. I am very concerned at the apparent lack of open space in the plans. According to the Cambridge Local Plan (https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/media/6890/local-plan-2018.pdf), the standard for new developments is 2.2 hectares of informal open space per 1000 residents (in addition to other types of open space such as sports facilities). The 18,500 people to be housed in North East Cambridge should therefore have at least 41 hectares of informal open space. However, only 10 hectares of public parks and squares are set out in the plans, which seems at odds with the statement that “our expectation is that all open space requirements will be met on-site”. I note that North East Cambridge will be connected to existing open spaces outside of the development area, notably Milton Country Park and Chesterton Fen, and that access, capacity and biodiversity are to be ‘improved’ at these sites. I question the feasibility of this aim: the plan to improve both biodiversity and access on limited parcels of land seems likely to result in conflict. Milton Country Park in particular is already often at capacity and other developments (particularly Waterbeach New Town) are set to increase visitor pressure. I broadly support Cambridge Sport Lakes’ plans to expand the park to create a strategic green corridor between North Cambridge and Waterbeach (as set out at https://edition.pagesuite.com/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&edid=e1813ee5-0168-4fb0-acb2-6c6b798ffa26).

Not at all

There's just not enough for this number and density of people!

Not at all

This proposed has the least green space for people that anywhere else in Cambridge (fact) and probably in Western Europe. How can a successful community thrive here? I support MRRA and HPERA's responses

Neutral

It is important to maintain natural areas such as Milton Country Park and Chesterton Fen and not make them into an urban facility.

Mostly not

The linear park is a nice idea as is the improved access to Milton Country Park. However, improved access is not enough on its own as Milton Country Park is already very popular and well used and so more investment in the park is also crucial to accommodate an increase in visitors. The development should also provide more area for playing sports, as this is already lacking in north Cambridge. It would be good to include some outdoor gym equipment as well. The amount of green space should reflect the number of homes that are going to be built and the number of people using the site. If building heights are increased this should be accompanied by an increase in green space.

Mostly not

• No. • The green space within the proposed development is minimal, and it is misleading to describe Cowley Triangle as an ‘extensive green space’. This is simply not true. • Other green spaces are minimal linear strips. • To rely on access to the already existing Milton Country Park and Chesterton Fen and somehow include them in this proposed development is disingenuous at best. • There are no private green spaces – gardens – which help people’s sense of care for and ownership of the space.

Neutral

No answer given

Not at all

Green spaces and verges alongside transport routes and small neighbourhood greens and playspaces are welcome to help all residents boost their health and wellbeing. However, these do not displace the need for larger areas of open space both within and outside the development

Not at all

Although there is some open space, these plans are unreasonably tied by the daft boundaries between the City and SCambs. Given the 'Shared' planning and the embryonic joint local plan, there is a blatantly obvious need to create a park along the Cam 'Riverside' on existing flood meadows and a link to an expanded Milton Country Park. Both these need double links. That to an expanded Milton Country Park can be created using an improved link via the Jane Costen bridge over the A14, and a new 'Waterbeach Greenway' link 'pushed beneath the A14 near to the railway. That to the Cam should be via the 'extension' pf Cowley Road over the rail line, and a new 'Green link' adjacent to the A14 that crosses over the rail AND the river Cam with a link to the 'Riverside' and Horningsea Road

Not at all

No comment

Not at all

Clearly shows this is not enough, being too linear with too much reliance on existing. None of the massive issues of the past seen with Orchard Park have been learnt - clearly all driven by greedy Developers looking to make massive monies from very dense building initiatives, leading to major overwhelmed local systems, but long after the Developer’s diggers have upped and left. Car barns have disappeared - to give larger density of housing & even less public open space on the site. Plan includes no new allotments; no new sports pitches; no facilities for the disabled/elderly; independent shops concept has been lost; Green Space by River Cam is very vague; no recognition that Milton Country Park already at capacity etc.

Nothing chosen

Definitely not. Far too little open space with all that concrete and no sunshine much coming into the streets because of heights and no gardens. To suggest Milton Country Park is appalling. It is way over used at weekends now.

Not at all

Only be destroying pre-existing public spaces.

Mostly yes

Again, this is difficult to visualise the people who will be attracted to high rise living overlooking the A14 to the north and Kings Hedges to the south without the provision of car use.

Not at all

No, certainly not. Especially if people are stuck in a flat. It can be shown in the last few months that people need pleasant spaces to walk or cycle . Milton Country Park is in a village. It is not in Cambridge and is packed now at weekends.

Mostly not

Pandemic disruption showing that each dwelling should have some private outdoor space - minimum a balcony.

Not at all

I admire the way you have entitled narrow strips of green as 'linear parks.' If population density reduces there could be more green spaces.

Mostly not

Could use more public open spaces.

Yes, completely

I am concerned about the Chesterton Fen area.

Neutral

No comment.

Mostly not

No comment.

Not at all

No comment

Neutral

No comment.