Should 70 homes for Histon Road in Cambridge be approved even though plan would breach council policy on green space?

Councillors are to debate plans for 70 new homes in Histon Road, Cambridge, which have prompted 133 objections.

Concerns have been raised about the impact on children’s safety in the Histon Road Recreation Ground.

But planning officers at Cambridge City Council believe the scheme offers “significant benefits” and have recommended approval.

The proposals were put forward by Cambridge Investment Partnership, a development company set up by the city council and Hill Investment Partnerships to build new council homes and private homes across the city.

A former car sales and garage site in Histon Road is earmarked for redevelopment into 45 houses and a block of 25 flats, with 28 of the homes to be made available as affordable housing.

But with more people travelling through the park from the proposed new access point, neighbours have voiced concerns. The developer has already agreed to drop one of the two access points.

The developer said: “In the new layout, the eastern connection has been enhanced.

“This improved eastern access point will create a safe, well-overlooked, and pleasant pedestrian route, enhancing the overall connectivity of Histon Road Recreation Ground.

“The updated landscape design for the eastern access includes a new path segregated from the road by hedging and street trees, leading directly to Histon Road Recreation Ground.”

But one objector said the access would “severely damage the safety and utility of the existing children’s play facilities”.

The objector called for “green space within the actual footprint of the development”, adding:

“Otherwise it just amounts to stealing from the city and local residents for the benefit of the developer, doesn’t it? I mean, why not include neighbouring gardens as well? I can see no justification for appropriating and damaging existing community green space.”

Others complained the plans represent “overdevelopment”.

One said: “There are huge concerns that 70 dwellings on the site, with very small flats, which will hardly encourage people to be settled, and no green space to speak of (plus insufficient cycle parking etc.) it is simply too many.”

Planning officers suggest the development would offer “significant economic, environmental and social public benefits”.

They acknowledged it does not provide the amount of on site public open space required by the council policies but highlighted the link to the recreation ground and the proposed financial contribution of more than £77,000 for improvements to it.

The officer’s report said: “In the assessment of the application it was important for officers to weigh up the option of delivering more open space on site compared to the option of creating a denser form of development, which made a more meaningful contribution to housing delivery (affordable and private) in the city.

“Officers considered the proposed approach to be a more appropriate strategy for the site in question and scale of development proposed.

“Officers considered the delivery of a larger area of open space on a site immediately adjacent to an existing recreation ground, which can be accessed directly from the site, would be classed as making inefficient use of a brownfield site in a sustainable location.

A planning committee will meet today (Wednesday) to discuss the plans.