Question 7
but not providing individual space is a mistake- people need their own outdoor space Covid19 has proved this
No uploaded files for public display
Yes open spaces are essential
No uploaded files for public display
Insufficient
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
Yes we think so.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment
No uploaded files for public display
Insufficient for the population you intend to live there - will dramatically impact Milton Country Park.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
In view of the recent pandemic, we need to make as much open space available as possible. I'm concerned about contamination of the land it will stand on.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
The small neighbourhood greens never work in new developments. No-one uses them and they are either left in a state of neglect or they eventually get built upon.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
Yet to be seen. As this is only a draft, developers and Councils often see things differently.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
Keep open spaces and stop building on them!
No uploaded files for public display
Lacking green space.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
No comment.
No uploaded files for public display
Object: We suggest that it might be appropriate to include planting/landscaping along the western edge of Chesterton Fen to soften the edge of the railway and built for of the development in views across the river and from the Fen Ditton Conservation Area, as well as softening the edge of the city and its overall setting. Suggested Change: Include planting along the western edge of Chesterton Fen to soften the edge of the railway and built development.
No uploaded files for public display
There is not enough within the site. They are using land outside the development as 'accessible'. Need different types of open space. Need public open space - not just astroturf on a roof. Need spaces where you can throw a frisbee - not just playing fields. 8,000 homes will create a huge amount of footfall. Needs to be more informal open space, permanently accessible day and evening. We ask that an extension to Milton Country Park is supported, as the park is already suffering from overuse. Could they buy agricultural land (eg the land near Blackwell Traveller Park) as a Country Park to provide additional open space which will be sorely needed?
No uploaded files for public display
Further comments: No comment
No uploaded files for public display
Open spaces are important parts of places. Green spaces that are not open to the general public but provide open space for users (e.g. workers) of a site can also make an important contribution to health and well-being.
No uploaded files for public display
Refer to comments under Policy 8
No uploaded files for public display
• 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. • The plan seems to concentrate on Milton Country Park as the green space, which is already used to capacity. • Compared to other developments in the Cambridge there is very little space per person. In the new development at Trumpington on the other side of Cambridge they have 90 hectares of space for 3,500 homes; here it is to be 10 hectares for 8,000 homes
No uploaded files for public display
Further comments: The area is surrounded by natural landscape with public accesswhy created a contrived open space and build the sewage works on greenbelt!! This is a misuse of public money
No uploaded files for public display
• Is it appropriate to use urban design standards of Cambridge city (2.2 ha per 1,000 pop) rather than South Cambridgeshire (3.2 ha/1,000), given this site borders the Green Belt? • The Cambridge City Local Plan open space standards require 2.2 ha/1,000, or around 40 hectares for NEC. If South Cambridgeshire’s open space standard (3.2 ha/1,000 population) were applied, the requirement would be for 59 hectares. • Neither standard includes allowance for the needs of the working population (e.g. during lunch breaks and for post-work socialising). • The Open Space Topic Paper bases most calculations on a population of 16,236, but, in the same document a population of 17,891 in 8,400 homes is given. It seems therefore that all the open spaces calculations need to be uplifted (see Figure 7). • It appears to be largely undecided how the open space requirements will be satisfied. • The AAP proposes just 9.6 hectares as a linear and triangular park (see Figure 6), which will provide less amenity, e.g. to play informal sports, than recreation grounds elsewhere in Cambridge, e.g. Nun’s Way (4.5ha), Coleridge (5ha), Romsey (2.5ha). • In such a dense development there will be a need for a significant large open space, which will not be served by linear and triangular parks. • The needs of teenagers and young adults in particular appear to be poorly served. • Residents in the south-west quadrant of NEC will have poor access to open space. • Where is the evidence that “enhancing” off-site provision of green space, e.g. at Milton Country Park, will increase their capacity sufficiently to accommodate demand from NEC residents without overburdening the local ecology? • It is wholly unjustifiable to count Milton Country Park (approx. 32ha) towards NEC’s open space requirement as it is already frequently at full capacity during busy periods. • The AAP also acknowledges that MCP and other Milton amenities are too remote for use by child residents of NEC: “North of NEC, Milton Country Park and Milton Village have several existing sport and leisure facilities. Whilst access to these facilities will be improved through a new underpass under the A14, these are not considered sufficiently accessible for children to access from NEC.” • Chesterton Fen is ruled out as potential recreational land: “Due to the potential for flooding, the Chesterton Fen area will not be considered as part of any calculation for formal recreational provision.” However, Logan’s Meadow also floods but provides a valuable space for walking and recreation for local residents. Further consideration should be given to whether Chesterton Fen can provide additional recreation space as well as a wetland nature reserve. • If off-site provision is required then, as well as providing new public open space in the surrounding area, consideration could also be given to drawing some existing visitors away from Milton Country Park to other locations, e.g. new Sports Lake Country Park or adding similar amenities, attractions and activities at other country parks in northern Cambridge, in particular at Darwin Green. That could allow MCP to accommodate more people from NEC. • What actions arise from this statement in Policy 8: “For non-strategic open space
No uploaded files for public display
No answer given
No uploaded files for public display
There should be more public space - I would like to see more open space for growing food, recreation and nature areas. It should be made clear in Policy 14 that the community garden should be for food growing. Good to link to Milton Country Park, but this is already overused at weekends, with overfull car park.
No uploaded files for public display