We agree that creating Great Places intersects with other themes. This must also include:
A great place is somewhere which sits well within its landscape (as covered by policy GP/LC).

The Great Places paper refers to Heritage Assets, but does not adequately recognise that the city of Cambridge is a heritage asset of worldwide significance which meets UNESCO’s Outstanding Universal Value criteria for World Heritage status. This significance derives from the combination of its built and natural heritage. We would like the draft Plan to recognise the vital role which this special character plays in making Cambridge a great place to live in, work, study, and visit.

The structuring of the consultation creates a separation between Landscape and Townscape (Objective 6) and Historic Environment (Objective 7), which for Cambridge creates a risk that there is not adequate consideration and valuation of the historic city in its historic landscape setting, with historic landscape and open spaces considered as green infrastructure but not as historic environment.

Cambridge’s special character (which is what makes it a great place) will be put under significant pressure by the scale of growth proposed (73,000 extra residents). Cambridge Past, Present & Future is very concerned about the “limits to growth” capacity in trying to accommodate the 21st century demands this will create within the built fabric and spaces of a medieval market town. The fundamental conflicts between growth on the one hand and environmental capacity and special character on the other must be recognised as a key challenge for the draft Local Plan. We are concerned that the evidence base does not include an assessment of the cumulative impacts on the historic centre and what the likely impacts of this might be – without this it is impossible to reach a judgement. Para 3.2.4 of the Strategic Heritage Impact Assessment: baseline includes the statement that “3.2.4 Future growth in Cambridge has the potential to strengthen and reinforce these characteristics, enabling the City to meet contemporary environmental, economic and social drivers without undermining its economic identity" but we could not find any evidence to support this statement.