Comment

Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Representation ID: 58004

Received: 12/12/2021

Respondent: Cambridge Doughnut Economics Action Group

Representation Summary:

Standards for community facilities like this should not be based simply in proportion to the number of residents: there should be lower limits so that smaller developments also meet the limit allocations. This will prevent deliberate piecemeal developments that escape or make a mockery of open space requirements by reducing them to an infeasible size.
Developers should not be permitted to double-count open spaces that are intended to meet two functional and incompatible criteria. Eg. the play area at Nine Wells, Cambridge, is co-located in a rainwater catchment area, the play area is submerged for large portions of the year.

Full text:

Standards for community facilities like this should not be based simply in proportion to the number of residents: there should be lower limits so that smaller developments also meet the limit allocations. This will prevent deliberate piecemeal developments that escape or make a mockery of open space requirements by reducing them to an infeasible size.
Developers should not be permitted to double-count open spaces that are intended to meet two functional and incompatible criteria. Eg. the play area at Nine Wells, Cambridge, is co-located in a rainwater catchment area, the play area is submerged for large portions of the year.