Draft North East Cambridge Area Action Plan

Object

Representation ID: 55617

Received: 29/09/2020

Respondent: Historic England

Flood Risk and Sustainable Drainage
Whilst we broadly welcome the inclusion of a policy in relation to sustainable drainage reference should be made to the need to consider archaeology in the design and layout of sustainable drainage systems.
Archaeology is an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to its significance. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. Reference could be made to this in sections 4.1 and 5 and Appendix A.
Buried waterlogged archaeology may be at particular risk from changes in the water environment. Consideration should be given to the most appropriate course of action to protect buried waterlogged archaeology though the design of Sustainable Drainage Systems. Waterlogged deposits, such as peat have the potential to preserve organic remains that are relatively rare in the archaeological record. They are of great importance for the information they provide about everyday objects such as drinking and eating vessels (wooden bowls, leather bottles, horn cups), clothing (fabric, shoes), modes of transport (boats, trackways) and equipment of subsistence (fishtraps). To maintain the preservation of organic materials, it is essential that the conditions which contributed to their survival (waterlogged; anoxic) remain the same. While saturated with water, oxygen is excluded which limits the presence/action of most soil fauna (insects, moulds, and micro-organisms) and fungi which feed on organic matter. The lowering of the water-table in an area could result in the remains becoming exposed to oxygen, which can enhance the degradation and loss of any remains that are present. We suggest that the SPD should discuss how these sorts of sites will be managed, which makes reference to the Historic England ‘Preserving Archaeological Remains’ guidance (2016): https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/preserving-archaeological-remains/
Reference should be made to the Ciria SuDS Manual which offers more guidance.
See our comments on historic environment policy framework in respect of archaeology.
Suggested Change:
Include reference to buried archaeology in relation to SuDs.

Object

Representation ID: 55618

Received: 29/09/2020

Respondent: Historic England

Distinctive design for North East Cambridge
We welcome the reference in the first paragraph to Cambridge’s heritage ad townscape qualities and the unique characteristics of Cambridge and Cambridgeshire. Criterion e could be elaborated to include reference to local building materials and vernacular. For example, Cambridge brick is an obvious response to the historic building materials in the area and can be used to enable new development to both respond to, and be better absorbed into, the local environment.
Suggested Change:
Elaborate criterion e to include reference to local building materials and vernacular

Object

Representation ID: 55620

Received: 29/09/2020

Respondent: Historic England

Legibility is important in any new community. The use of existing landmarks and key views into an out of the development can be an important aspect of this design process. A criterion should be added to specifically highlight the opportunities for key views to be used to enhance legibility within the development e.g. to church spires and other landmark buildings that may be seen from within the site.
Trees and landscaping play an important role in helping to protect and enhance the setting of the City. Reference should be made to this in the policy.
Suggested Change:
Add criterion to protect key views or landmark buildings e.g. churches to increase legibility
Add criterion in relation to role of trees, landscaping and green infrastructure in protecting and enhancing the setting of the wider City and historic environment.

Object

Representation ID: 55621

Received: 29/09/2020

Respondent: Historic England

Density, heights, scale and massing
We continue to express our significant concerns regarding the current proposed heights and densities for North East Cambridge. We reiterate the importance of thoroughly testing this approach with respect to impact on heritage assets, the historic environment and the wider setting of the city.
We understand that you are commissioning some further work to explore this aspect in more detail which we very much welcome. However, it will be important that this work truly shapes your proposals and that you respond to that, rather than merely justifying a particular approach. It is important that you explore other ways to increase densities rather than simply through height.
The comparative height examples are really helpful in illustrating what might be proposed (as indeed the comparison green space figures were also very useful). Of course, it is not just height, but also massing, that will be critical.
We welcome the requirement in the policy for proposals to include appropriate landscape and visual assessment as well as heritage impact assessment and massing studies, together with the wider skyline and heritage assets. We welcome the specific reference in the policy to Fen Ditton Conservation Area and other heritage assets.
Suggested Change:
We look forward to continuing to work with you regarding densities, heights, scale and massing on this site. We look forward to seeing the report that you are commissioning in this regard.

Comment

Representation ID: 55624

Received: 29/09/2020

Respondent: Historic England

Use Classes
Amend references to use classes in line with new use classes.
Suggested Change:
Amend references to Use Classes