Greater Cambridge Local Plan Issues & Options 2020

Nothing chosen

As with development on the edge of villages, development within village boundaries should give consideration to settlement character and identity. Development of jobs and homes should seek to conserve and enhance the historic environment through appropriate development that minimises harm to the historic environment through careful siting and appropriate design. There may be some villages that are more or less suited to absorbing additional growth, in part dependent upon their historic character and settlement morphology. Consideration will need to be given to the capacity of individual villages and their sensitivity to change

Densification can be useful in accommodating the required growth. That said, many of the sites identified in the Urban Capacity Study of Cambridge 2002 have since been developed and there are limited options for further densification within the City boundary. However, where there are opportunities for densification, this must be managed carefully in a way that seeks to conserve and enhance the historic environment. We refer you to our publication, ‘Increasing residential density in historic environments’ which can be found here. This study explores the factors that can contribute to successfully delivering developments which increase residential density in historic environments. It uses a combination of literature review and case studies to provide a series of recommendations to support decision making. We also refer you to our earlier comments in relation to tall buildings where we advise on the need to refine the existing tall buildings policy to identify areas where taller buildings might be acceptable and those areas where they would not, through an evidence based approach to policy making. Whilst taller buildings may be appropriate in some areas, there is an on-going question of scale. It is important that densification, including tall buildings, respects and does not harm the historic environment. Finally, densification is particularly appropriate in the context of brownfield development. Whilst densification of some areas may be appropriate, it is important to protect and enhance open spaces within urban areas and villages as these open spaces can constitute an important aspect of the character of a place, may help protect the setting of heritage assets or even be a heritage asset in their own right. Open spaces can provide important green lungs and help in tackling climate change. And they may also serve as important recreation and leisure areas.

We assume this refers to land previously released from the Green Belt such as the land at Cambridge Airport. Given that this land has previously been identified for development then it would seem that development of these areas would be appropriate subject to suitable relocation of the airport to enable this land to be released for development. Again however, careful consideration will need to be given to the historic environment including the nearby conservation area at Teversham.

The NPPF (paragraph 72) states that the supply of large numbers of new home often can be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns. Criterion 3 of the paragraph states that they should ‘set clear expectations for the quality of the development and how this can be maintained (such as by following Garden City Principles). The Greater Cambridge area has had a history of accommodating development within new settlements. Such developments can offer a sustainable form of development and, if of sufficient scale, can offer opportunities to provide the appropriate level of supporting strategic infrastructure and employment. Whilst Historic England broadly welcomes the idea of new setttlements, it is important that these are carefully located and planned with respect to all three strands of sustainable development. One of the strands of sustainable development includes the protecting and enhancing the historic environment. Landscape and heritage assets should be considered from the outset when determining the location of a new settlement in order to ensure that development can be delivered whilst having regard to the these assets. It is expected that strategic new settlement policies makes reference to the historic environment and the need for its conservation or enhancement. In considering potential locations for new settlements, it is important to consider the potential impact of new development on character and vitality of existing historic places. Consideration should also be given to the landscape character/context and how any new development would relate to it. Any new place has a past. Attention should be given as to how heritage can shape our future places and how new development might respond to our heritage to enhance the place and those assets. Whilst we recognise that it is hard to avoid all heritage assets for new settlement proposals given the scale of the proposed development, never-the-less sites where should be chosen where there are likely to be fewer heritage assets and where harm to heritage can be avoided or at least minimised. The key to the development of large strategic sites, be they new settlements or urban extensions, is early Heritage Impact Assessment prior to allocation and before the site is included in a Local Plan, to determine suitability of site per se and, if so, which parts of site developable and to recommend appropriate mitigation. We would also emphasise the importance of clear policy wording and ideally a concept diagram to show key principles for the new settlement including heritage mitigation. Many Local Plans state that new settlements should come forward as a new ‘Garden Village’ based on the Town and Country Planning Association’s principles for Garden Cities. It is important at this stage to highlight that whilst these principles are useful and do embody a number of modern town planning concepts, they do not address the historic environment. It is therefore unclear how the TCPA principles can be reconciled with the NPPF’s definition of sustainable development in terms of its environmental strand which requires the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. Whilst the TCPA Garden Cities Principles are silent on the historic environment, their 2017 publication “The Art of Building a Garden City” does provide a further level of detail, particularly with regards to the siting of new settlements. This publication states that, “locations for new garden cities should not only avoid damaging areas that are protected for their ecological, landscape, historic or climate-resilience value but should actively be located in areas where there can be a positive impact on these assets. Underpinning the consideration of sites for new garden cities or towns should be the extent to which each one … will allow for positive impacts on assets of historic value”. (Emphasis added, pg 100) In drafting any principles for the development of new garden communities, we would suggest that you ensure that reference is made to the need to conserve and enhance the historic environment.

Any proposed growth of villages should give consideration to settlement character and identity. Development of jobs and homes should seek to conserve and enhance the historic environment through appropriate development that minimises harm to the historic environment through careful siting and appropriate design. There may be some villages that are more or less suited to absorbing additional growth, in part dependent upon their historic character and settlement morphology. Consideration will need to be given to the capacity of individual villages and their sensitivity to change.

There would be benefits to siting development along public transport corridors, both existing and proposed. However, as ever, consideration will also need to be given to any impact on the historic environment.

See comments above in relation to historic environment policies and tall buildings policies.

The Plan should include a glossary. This should include appropriate Historic Environment terminology including Historic Environment, Heritage Assets, Listed building, Conservation Area, Scheduled Monument, Registered Park and Garden, Designated Heritage Assets, Non- designated Heritage Assets, Local List, Heritage at Risk etc. The Plan should include appropriate monitoring indicators.

Conclusion In preparation of the forthcoming Local Plan we encourage you to draw on the knowledge of local conservation officers, the county archaeologist and local heritage groups. Please note that absence of a comment on a question or document in this letter does not mean that Historic England is content that the proposal or document forms part of a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment or is devoid of historic environment issues. Finally, we should like to stress that this opinion is based on the information provided by the Council in its consultation. To avoid any doubt, this does not affect our obligation to provide further advice and, potentially, object to specific proposals, which may subsequently arise where we consider that these would have an adverse effect upon the historic environment. We hope that the above comments of assistance.

No uploaded files for public display