Greater Cambridge Local Plan Preferred Options

Very concerned to see the north area of St Matthew's Piece and the allotments on New Street are identified as 'opportunity areas'.

As protected open spaces there should be no question of any 'opportunity' to build on these valuable green spaces.

For the avoidance of doubt these areas need to be removed from the classification of an 'opportunity area' and re-classified as untouchable protected open space for the health and well-being of the local community.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.

I have looked at your short tick-box ‘survey’ and your ‘detailed response’ mechanisms and find both wholly unsatisfactory. The former leads me by the nose without permitting any opportunity to express my views; the latter is too cumbersome. Options to use phones, apps etc. are of zero benefit to me; I do not own a smart phone. Per the Gunning Principles emphasised in your department’s Webinar on 4 November 2021, please confirm that the content of my following brief comments will be:
• noted;
• recorded;
• counted; and
• conscientiously taken into account with other public feedback.

On water issues, I fully endorse the Consultation Response of the Friends of the Cam on the Draft Local Plan (see https://www.friendsofthecam.org/sites/default/files/ObjectiontoNext%20LocalPlan_0.pdf)
On trees, I draw to your attention the very recent report by the Forestry Commission (see https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/valuing-the-mental-health-benefits-of-woodlands/) regarding the vital importance of improving, enhancing, protecting and preserving tree cover. This must be delivered everywhere in and around Cambridge, but especially where tree canopy cover falls below the already meagre average for our area – in order to reduce entrenched disadvantage (per the well established principles of ‘Doughnut economics’; see https://doughnuteconomics.org/principles-of-practice).

Focussing on my immediate area, north Petersfield in Cambridge, as an active supporter of the Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, I stress the need to both retain and strengthen the provisions of the existing 2018 Local Plan Policies 23 and 60 (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60). Petersfield is the most densely populated ward in Cambridge, and the ward with both the poorest tree canopy cover and worst open-space provision (see https://tiny.cc/FoSMPtrees4 & https://tiny.cc/FoSMPappsIV-V).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece therefore seek for the provisions of existing Policy 23 in the New Local Plan to explicitly protect and preserve the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and its invaluable trees. Although partly ‘Protected Open Space’, and not designated as a potential development site under the 2018 Local Plan, this area still lies within the boundary of the ‘Eastern Gate Opportunity Area’. Any possible ambiguity must be explicitly removed for both for the northern half of St Matthew’s Piece and also Abbey Ward's New Street Allotments (there are no allotments at all within Petersfield).

The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece also seek for the provisions of existing Policy 60 (on tall buildings) in the New Local Plan to be fully retained and also strengthened so that the wording of the Policy can be fully enforced by Planning Officers, as explained very briefly here: https://tiny.cc/FoSMP23and60.

Many local residents hold strong views on the First Proposal's inclusion of a possible development site on St Matthew’s Street – for 12 houses to be constructed in place of the existing garages. I wish here to stress the fundamental needs to both:
• protect and fully preserve the magnificent mature tree at the eastern edge of the site; and
• take full account of any increased stress to water and drainage/sewerage systems in evaluating any future proposals.