Is SNTC selling land to upgrade a play area?

One reason behind the proposal to take away urban open space (Shady Walk) to extend the car park is the state of the Town Council play area. As the reports put it, part of the gain at losing urban open space to car parking is an improved open space.

But I have to question. Is the Town Council is actually going to "improve" the open space? This is because of the 2006/07 Best Value report. The report looked into the Town Council owned play areas. It acknowledges the Town Council play areas as poor. ("the perception of the public who were consulted is that the play areas are inadequately maintained, poorly equipped and out of date," Best Value Report 2006/07)  For Shady Walk the whole basis of Town Council policy is based on what two adults said an interviewer. What they said was: “Area best sold and money used to provide better facilities elsewhere in St Neots. Children for whom the play area was originally provided have grown up and left the area.”

So NO leafleting of the area. NO talking to local residents about the play area. Two adults, who aren't even identified as living in the area, have basically decided Town Council policy. The policy is to get rid of the play area.

With the development plan now talking about an "improved open space", what does this mean? SNTC had a policy of play area renewal until cut by Giles and Thorpe.

If Shady Lane is an indication of our play areas then investment must flow again into keeping these play areas up to scratch. This can be achieved by cutting costs or by increasing taxation. Selling urban open space to achieve these needs is the wrong way. 

Whole development land plan link.