Question 7

Not at all

The open green space is insufficient according to your own standards, let alone what we should be expecting in a modern development. This will result in a densely built-up area, although with a lot of private gardens. It is deeply inadequate to rely on green spaces "adjacent" to the development area - these spaces are providing much needed space for the wider area, and increased density of the area under consultation will increase the overall density of the whole area of NE Cambridge beyond the new development. I am sure that you will argue when it suits you that this consultation covers only the area of the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan, so you cannot be expected to consider the overall density of the whole of NE Cambridge. In which case, I then postulate a counter-argument that if this consultation covers only the area of the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan, then the open spaces requirement *must* be met from within the area of this action plan. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Not at all

Too linear and not enough green space for the population planned. Both Milton Park and the towpath already at capacity. No room for the proposed new large population. Vast estates not good for reducing inequality.

Not at all

The amount of outside space, particularly important in the post-Covid world, is grossly inadequate and in fact falls well below the Council's own modest standards. Narrow strips of space along roads should not be included in the calculation of open space as they are not safe or healthy places for children to play or the elderly to sit. North west Cambridge is poorly served by open public spaces and this development, proposed to house over 18,000, will exacerbate the situation.

Not at all

Not enough 10% a woeful target. Look at Eddington A very good example of good planning

Mostly not

Simply improving access and capacity in Milton Country Park and Chesterton Fen does not absolve you from maintaining your own standards of open spaces provision in housing areas. This will be a densely populated area of the city and our new citizens deserve better from their council planners. 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.'

Not at all

There is insufficient provision of recreational space. Chesterton Fen is just a meadow with no recreational value and Milton Country Park is already at capacity on many weekends. A more ambitious plan like the sports lake and park between Milton and Waterbeach is urgently needed. A few strips of greenery between apartment blocks make for better living conditions but don't address the need for parks and woodlands. They are as important as local schools and GP surgeries and even harder to retrofit! They must be included in the overall concept from the start.

Mostly not

It look like the plan involves mainly using some local green spaces that are overcrowded at times, it doesnt look like there will be new green spaces created. The spaces that are planned to be renovated are quite small.

Mostly not

While the vision sounds good, and it will be important to integrate green spaces throughout the development, there seems to be insufficient large areas of green space.

Mostly not

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 – some of this could include an expansion of Milton Country Park which will benefit from better cycling and walking links.

Not at all

The green and open spaces included are attractive but not sufficient. Larger open areas should be included in the development and areas such as the science park should have improved biodiversity as they currently mostly consist of poorly managed lawn. The increased traffic and access to milton country park means that it could also stand to be made more sizeable.

Mostly yes

Seams fair. Keeping the green space next to the river as Chesterton fen is great.

Mostly not

We believe that there should be more green public open spaces, with the ratio of hecatres to dwellings in line with the Trumpington developments. More sports playing fields should be provided.

Not at all

The public open space is inadequate for the number of people. Existing open space i.e Stourbridge common and Milton COuntry park is already over used. So the current plans are definitely inadequate and unrealistic, and inhuman in terms of people's quality of life. All studies show that in order for people to feel physically and mentally well they need easy access to open space and what is planned is clearly inadequate.

Neutral

No answer given

Mostly not

Small neighbourhood greens are a lovely idea but unless these are maintained they will just become a focus for antisocial behaviour. What are you plans for doing this?

Mostly not

No answer given

Not at all

No answer given

Not at all

More parks and larger area of open space are needed for peoples well being. People will not have gardens and open space is vital for well being. The open space in North Cambridge is already much lower than elsewhere in Cambridge, this many people moving to the area will impact the existing open space. Allotments?

Neutral

You are providing sufficient open space for the development but only if the building density is less than you are proposing and if the sewage works is not relocated. I like the linear feature along the First Public Drain leading into Milton Country Park although its boundary (ies) with the works would have to be secured by fencing hidden by native species of bushes or trees. You give no details of how you intend to increase the capacity of the Park (it is currently at capacity); do you intend to extend it northwards? You should leave Chesterton Fen alone; it is doing OK without your interference. You should be aware that a new pedestrian and cycle bridge over the railway (5 on the relevant plan) would give members of the nearby travelling community easy access to the development.

Mostly not

There needs to be a lot more green space for leisure and ecology

Mostly yes

No answer given

Not at all

The minimal open space that is planned will not compensate for the loss of wide open Green Belt where the WWTP will be sited. It is inexcusable to move the WWTP to Green Belt in order to develop this area. Milto Country Park does not have enough capacity for the rise in use.

Mostly not

I like the green high street, but I think the size of each open space is too small. I would prefer one big open space that people can visit.

Mostly not

I agree with Cambridge Past, Present and Future that there is need for a significant large open space within the development and I support Milton Country Park’s suggestion to expand the amount of green space north of the village with a biodiverse corridor to Waterbeach.

Mostly not

By all means plan squares and green areas, but after work people want to go home to a space with a garden and access to be able to excercise in the precious green belt around NE Cambridge, at Milton, Horningsea, Fen Ditton and Quy. Please do not interfere with the Wicken Fen Vision and the pathways through the Fens.

Neutral

The plan makes good commitment to informal activity, but ignores formal sport, which could be met through off-site provision secured via a financial contribution to enhance existing provision or provide new facilities.

Yes, completely

Green spaces are v important.

Neutral

The mistakes of the developments around the main railway station must not be repeated - too little green space, no amenities for families, poor air quality. There must be adequate green spaces and access to green spaces for all residents.

Neutral

Chesterton Fen is frequently mentioned in the documents but I was not aware that this was public space. There is the path from Fen Road to the river which I assume is the proposed route of the cycle route outlined on the plan. Is it misleading to indicate Chesterton Fen as accessible green space as per Milton Country Park?

Mostly not

I support new green spaces along key walking and cycling routes and plans for a 3.5m landscaped verge (this should be the minimum) between the carriageway and cycleway on primary streets. We also support small neighbourhood greens and playspaces throughout the development so that every resident is able to access a green space area on foot and those without individual gardens have such places nearby to benefit their physical and mental health. Better cycling and walking links to existing green spaces will help residents of all ages and abilities connect with the natural world and boost their wellbeing; however spaces in this area of the city, such as Milton Country Park, are already overstretched. We agree with Cambridge Past, Present and Future that there is need for a significant large open space within the development and support Milton Country Park’s suggestion to expand the amount of green space north of the village with a biodiverse corridor to Waterbeach (including cycleways) which could include a new Sport Lakes facility. We also note that active travel routes along the river are likely to become more crowded; closing the level crossing to the majority of motor traffic (i.e. residents only, with alternative road access for industrial/commercial traffic elsewhere) would open up Fen Road as a pleasant cycle route and free up space for people walking along the towpath.