Question 7

Mostly not

There needs to be more green space. The idea of a linear park is interesting but needs to be well lit at night.

Mostly not

The provision is 10 hectares of open space for 18000 homes. Trumpington Meadows has 90 hectares for 3500 houses. You are assuming that residents of the new development can use existing green spaces but Milton Country Park has stated that they cannot accommodate more visitors Stourbridge Common and the towpath are already very busy. The common is also used for grazing cattle. Jesus Green is full of people throughout the summer who generate large quantities of litter. The existing green spaces of Cambridge are already heavily used so some realistic green space is needed to address the recreational needs of the development.

Mostly not

There needs to be more green space. The idea of a linear park is interesting but needs to be well lit at night.

Not at all

Further to points made before, it is striking how the development compares say with the new development at Trumpington Meadows has 3,500 homes and 90 hectares of public space. The plan assumes that as an alternative to space on the site, people will be able to use neighbouring open spaces such as the Stourbridge Common, the towpath, and Milton Country Park. All of these spaces are already well used, and the representative from MCP who sat on the Community Forum reported that MCP is already at capacity and cannot accommodate more visitors

Mostly not

There is still far too much separation of any green space from living/work spaces, and still far too little green space for this whole part of Cambridge. The very young and very old are not able to access these spaces easily, when such access should be an essential part of any urban design.

Not at all

The amount of green space you are considering in your plans is laughable. There will be no wild areas, everything will be mown and trimmed. Residents will be expected to use Milton Country Park which is already at capacity. The green space allocated does not meet the Cambridge Local Plan requirements. Other developments have a far higher percentage of green space per resident than these proposals. Not enough green space is being kept in the area so all residents will have to travel out of the development to be able to find any.

Not at all

No answer given

Not at all

(comment 2 of 2) Green Party policy encourages community involvement in food growing, for example allotments and community orchards. The plans for North East Cambridge do not appear to provide much opportunity for residents to grow food. If food growing would be unsafe because of the site’s history as a sewage treatment works, this should be made clear.

Mostly not

Science Park is a private space. Will the linear park be a similarly private space, with management controlled by the developers? There will be much more usage of Milton Country Park and Ditton Meadows by NEC residents - ideally Milton Country Park should be extended north, perhaps reviving the rowing lake plans.

Not at all

Again, definitely not! The plan makes provision for just 10 hectares of public space (around the same size as Jesus Green). This is certainly not enough for 18,000 people to share - it equates to 5.5m2 per person. • The new development at Trumpington Meadows has 3,500 homes and 90 hectares of public space - much more reasonable. 10 hectares is appallingly little. • The Mayor of London’s ambition is for developments to ensure at least 10m2 of ‘playable space’ per child. • The plan assumes that as an alternative to space on the site, people will be able to use neighbouring open spaces such as the Stourbridge Common, the towpath, and Milton Country Park. All of these spaces are already well used, and the representative from MCP who sat on the Community Forum reported that MCP is already at capacity and cannot accommodate more visitors.

Mostly not

No, there is too much reliance on existing parks such as Milton Country Park which is already very heavily used. North Cambridge has the lowest amount of green space in Cambridge and this is not going to improve this situation.

Not at all

That area of Cambridge has almost no large open spaces at present. The development of that site provides an opportunity to improve that situation but the plans are limited in this respect.

Mostly not

Comparing with other spaces where the density is not so high and people do not lack gardens. This long thin strip is not suitable for the numbers of people who will need to get out of those high rise buildings. You are not creating a healthy safe environment You are just trying to make money

Not at all

There should be a large exciting playground for older children

Mostly not

Green spaces and verges alongside transport routes and small neighbourhood greens and play-spaces are welcome to help all residents boost their health and wellbeing. However, these do not displace the need for larger areas of open space and the possibility of residents having access to allotments or community gardens to 'grow their own'. The proposals rely on space outside the site for recreation purposes. The Milton Country Park is already at capacity - it is not large enough to be able to cope with the needs of 18,000 new residents. Is there really funding and land available to increase the capacity of the park in parallel with the housing development?

Mostly not

not enough green space within the development. Landscaped pavements alongside shops is not a green space to relax and paly in. A small green surrounded by mountains of glass and brick sounds horrendous. We need green corridors leading from one wide space to another to allow people to get out and about in their neighbourhood. In a traditional housing estate there are front and back gardens giving a sense of embeddedness within a green place. With no gardens attached to all the flats being built there will be alot less green space than in a traditional housing estate -Therefore yuo need to put in as much green space as possible.

Mostly not

You offer just 10 hectares of public space for 18,000 people to share. Trumpington Meadows has over 3000 dwellings and about 90 hectares of public space. You plan (or hope) that residents will use Milton Country Park often - especially during holidays - full to bursting, or else Stourbridge Common and the towpaths. The attraction of such amenities is that they presently can cope with numbers, and are therefore visited. Added numbers will spoil the attraction, even destroy the greenery. In tandem, cost for upkeep will increase. There must be more greenery in the NE development itself. So, yes, that means build less housing.

Not at all

There is no decent communal green space that is flexible for informal football, rounders, park runs, picnics fairs etc. The few mean green corridors proposed are not wide enough for this purpose and provide no heart to the design. It is unacceptable to expect Milton Country Park to meet this need when it is already over used.

Mostly not

10 hectares of public space for 18,000 people does not seem a lot. Especially when other developments have more, like Trumpington Meadows where 3,500 homes have 90 hectares. Neighbouring public open space is already well-used too.

Mostly not

No answer given

Mostly not

10 hectares of public space for 18,000 people does not seem a lot. Especially when other developments have more, like Trumpington Meadows where 3,500 homes have 90 hectares. Neighbouring public open space is already well-used too.

Mostly not

10 hectares of public space for 18,000 people does not seem a lot. Especially when other developments have more, like Trumpington Meadows where 3,500 homes have 90 hectares. Neighbouring public open space is already well-used too.

Not at all

I agree with CPPF’s view that the South Cambridge open space provision metrics should have been adopted given the site’s location, rather than the City’s provisions. It is also concerning that there does not appear to be any provision for workers, particularly given the proposed dramatic increase in jobs. In relation to other points: - It is inadequate that there is no large scale provision of open space on site, particularly as this will be a high density development with restricted large private open space, increasing the demand. This is a real failing of the development as planned. The lack of informal recreational facilities will result in commuting to amenity facilities elsewhere and risks creating a soulless development. • 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. - It is unclear why Chesterton Fen, and expansion of the public open space area is not counted as part of the potential open space, even if off site. 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. As a general point, the application lacks detail on how the public open spaces will be designed and how they will relate to different categories of resident. There is no clear provision for teenagers and young people, the suggestion of children accessing Milton Country Park is acknowledged as impractical and there are no food growing facilities such as community orchards and allotments which would accessible for all age groups.

Not at all

The provision of green spaces within the plan appear ornamental and not feasible for the amount of outdoor activity and development of this size requires. The nearby sites of Stourbridge Common, Milton County Park and the towpath along the river are crowded on nice days already. There needs to be a plan to attract people to open spaces within their living environment.

Mostly not

Could some sport facilities (football ground, tennis courts, etc.) be considered, considering the amount of future dwellers in the area? Could some community gardens/allotments be added to the area so that the area feels not simply urban but also offers some nature escape? The Cowley Triangle seems to be the only place where people would be able to exercise and it looks rather close to the main roads (e.g. Milton, Cowley roads) which is not ideal for safety and well-being reasons (e.g. noise, pollution)

Not at all

The plan makes provision for just 10 hectares of public green space (around the same size as Jesus Green). This equates to 5.5m2 per person - a wholly inadequate amount. For comparison, the new development at Trumpington Meadows has 3,500 homes and 90 hectares of public space. People need access to green space, particularly if they don't have their own private gardens - the current crisis has reinforced that. Public space is necessary for mental health. The Mayor of London’s ambition is for developments to ensure at least 10m2 of ‘playable space’ per child, precisely because children need space they can play in and that gives them the opportunity to be close to nature. The plan assumes that as an alternative to space on the site, people will be able to use neighbouring open spaces such as the Stourbridge Common, the towpath, and Milton Country Park. All of these spaces are already well used, and the representative from MCP who sat on the Community Forum reported that MCP is already at capacity and cannot accommodate more visitors.

Mostly not

Whilst the mix may be in the right direction, the amount of new open space is hopelessly inadequate for the proposed population.

Not at all

According to the Cambridge Local Plan, 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.

Not at all

The amount of public space is incredibly small given the number of new residents you're aiming for. The Cambridge local plan (https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/media/6890/local-plan-2018.pdf) outlines 2.2 hectares of open space per 1,000 people. The 2 substantial parks, Cowley Triangle and the linear par, only add up to 9.6ha, (the open space in the science park looks small, and I can't find the area of this). 9.6ha is only0.5 hectares per 1,000 people, well below Cambridge's own standard. This is too low. The new development will be near to Milton Country Park, which is good, but that area shouldn't be included in the totals for this development as the park is already frequently at capacity. The plan seems a bit greedy - packing in lots of high rise tower blocks at the expense of outside communal space, against Cambridge's own targets.

Yes, completely

Communal allotments Involve local people in designing green areas Improve tow path as this will get very busy