Question 7

Not at all

These are all man made spaces at the expense of the real thing as you land grab our Green Belt to make this development possible. To put extra pressure on Milton Country Park which is already too busy is unacceptable. Nothing can compare to open, unspoilt countryside and the relocation of the sewage works completely threatens our opportunity to relax, exercise and engage with nature something which is becoming ever more crucial for our mental well-being. Even Mayor James Palmer was quoted on Radio 4's Rethinking: Cities saying that because of Covid "people want to spend their living time in areas where there's plenty of open space and fresh air". These public open spaces are a poor and insufficient antidote to our busy stressful lives.

Mostly not

I like the linear park, but all the others are too small. It isn't clear if there is any playground equipment (one is in the visual but no detail) or any sport facilities like skate park or outdoor basketball court. All these are needed.

Not at all

10 Ha of POS in a 185 Ha site for thousands of residents sounds very low and cramped. Noted that there will be access to other areas but some of these, eg MCP are already very busy. There's not a lot of green space for people nearby. This proportion is too low.

Mostly yes

Please call the linear park "First Public Drain Park".

Mostly yes

that needs of disabled people are included

Mostly not

Open space provision is inadequate.

Neutral

It would be really good if the countryside can be brought further into cambridge. The linear parts especially should be wild corridors, so wildlife and wild plants can extend their range and connect with other parts of the city, The Cambridge Canopy project, to plant 2000 trees by 2050, could be extended in ambition by ensuring substantial linear woodlands (with public walking access) in this new development, providing the wildlife access and a much richer connection to nature for people living in apartments. Keep the boring grass parks to a minimum, perhaps confined to the squarer areas like the Cowley Triangle.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Not at all

With the High density of residential properties without private gardens, it is essential the residents, particularly children, youths and the elderly, have open spaces for recreation and exercise.

Neutral

The ratio of green space in such dense building is still very small.

Mostly yes

will there be green space adequate for children and adults to do sports etc? The links to Chesterton Fen and Milton Country Park are a good idea. At the moment much of the area around cambridge North feels unsafe to cycle through so if the new design and green space feels safe and improves the feel of the area this will be great.

Mostly yes

The woodland around Cambridge North station is currently very attractive, and this part will lose all greenery. Some thought about making a better green space would be a strong addition.

Not at all

The proposed open spaces are no compensation for relocating the Waste water Treatment Works on truly open spaces in the Green Belt.

Mostly not

The provision is below the required local plan standard, Milton Country park and the fen should not be included here as they are existing.

Mostly not

The provision is below the required local plan standard, Milton Country park and the fen should not be included here as they are existing.

Mostly not

You have no regards to open spaces and the environment this is just sales talk. To build this you building a sewage plant on green belt land.

Not at all

No, Bigger open spaces would be better and not to move the sewage works to Green Belt land to facilitate housing that might not be needed is just stupid and wasting money.

Not at all

Whatever open spaces are being planned, they do not compensate for the loss of green belt land, on any of the proposed sites for the CWWTP relocation. Milton Country Park is already over crowded & highly utilised by current residents. Also in your plans, some of the green open space is supposed to be unusable because it covers gas mains?

Mostly yes

A good initial plan, but it needs to be much more than this. Places to grow things should be an essential right for all people. It is healing as well as good for our planetary vision. See my comments above re community gardens, allotments etc.

Yes, completely

I fully agree

Mostly not

Not enough detail on how Milton Country Park access and capacity can be increased. Size is finite and insufficient for this increased number of residents. Same applies to Chesterton Fen. Cowley Triangle – green space cannot compensate for private space loss in high density blocks. Green space cannot compensate for loss of greenbelt caused by relocation of WWTP.

Neutral

Milton Country Park is a great resource but it is already full and needs to be expanded. If there is to be an increase of so many houses on its doorstep it needs a big increase in capacity. The new open spaces seem quite small, nothing along the sizes of a leisure centre or facilities for kids. I feel this could be more ambitious in its provision for activities such as biking, rowing, running etc than just a little bit of green space and small play spaces.

Neutral

Difficult to judge.

Not at all

No, the area should remain industrial.

Yes, completely

No answer given

Mostly not

Whatever open spaces are integrated into the development they cannot compensate for the loss of Green Belt where the new WWTP is proposed to be sited. Milton Country Park is already used to and beyond its capacity. The few other green spaces in the area are already heavily used or under threat from the WWTP proposal. This community will struggle to access truly green spaces, other than the token ones created on the development. Again, overly dense housing exacerbates this problem.

Mostly not

Not enough open spaces. Need to be provided by developers and not rely on existing spaces eg Parkers Piece, Lammas Land etc.

Not at all

Quite simply - No, absolutely not. The plans fall completely short of the council's own policy for the amount of green space, and in a world with a growing population, where more people are living in urban centres like Cambridge and housing density is growing - all while we should be combating climate change, I find this very disappointing, especially given the development's commitment to the environment. Green spaces are a valued part of communities - especially when people don't have gardens of their own, and they are important to help combat climate change. If the development is to meet people's expectations, green space must be a top priority, rather than an almost completely ignored after-thought like it is here.

Mostly yes

The amount of open spaces marked out in the framework falls significantly short of the council’s own policy requirement for a development of this size. Generous public open space at the heart of a densely populated residential site like this is vital to create a healthy new community, especially considering the notable shortage in the surrounding urban area of North Cambridge and the large number of new business developments on the north side of the city. In addition, I would like to point out that my current residence, 98 Nuns Way, as well as the surrounding area, limited access to green spaces and a lot of residential traffic given the large number of residential properties in a relatively small area.

Mostly not

Give the density of residential and business property planned for this area, there is insufficient public space. In addition, the amount of open spaces marked out in the framework falls significantly short of the council’s own policy requirement for a development of this size.