South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Object

Representation ID: 3165

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Although there are no designated heritage assets on site, the site lies to the south east of the grade II listed Brooke Lodge, dating from c1835 and to the north of the Brooke Conservation Area. Any development of the site has the potential to impact on the significance of these designated heritage assets.
We welcome the preparation of an HIA for the site. However, the HIA only covers the eastern portion of the site and does not consider the land to the west of the road, the development of which is likely to have a greater impact on the setting of Brooke Lodge. We recommend that the HIA is updated to reflect this. The recommendations from the revised HIA should be used to inform the policy wording.
That said, the extensive landscaping between the proposed site and the listed Lodge would limit the impact of development on the historic environment.
Bullet point 9 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 9 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Support

Representation ID: 3166

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

There are no designated heritage assets on site. Green Farmhouse listed at grade II, lies to the east of the site. However, given the distance we consider that the development of the proposed allocation would have limited impact of the setting of the heritage asset.

Object

Representation ID: 3167

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary. However, Lilac Farmhouse (grade II listed) lies opposite the site, and Bunwell Manor Hotel and The Cottage, also grade II listed, lie to the north of the site. Any development of the site has the potential to impact on the significance of these designated heritage assets.
We welcome the preparation of an HIA for the site. The HIA makes a number of helpful recommendations for the site. Some of these have been included in the policy (bullet points 1 and 2) but not all.
In bullet point 1 it would be helpful to make clear that the views should link Lilac Farmhouse (grade II) to the open countryside.
The HIA also advises development should be set back from the road frontage to retain an open setting. Add criterion to state this.
Bullet point 2 would be reworded to also reference Bunwell Manor Hotel.

Object

Representation ID: 3168

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary there are two grade II listed buildings (Flaxlands Farmhouse and The Plough Inn) on the opposite side of the road. Any development of the site has the potential to impact on the significance of these designated heritage assets.
We appreciate that this site was allocated in the previous local plan and indeed has an existing planning permission.
We welcome the reference in the policy criteria to Flaxlands Farmhouse, but the policy should also mention the Plough Inn (also grade II listed).

Object

Representation ID: 3169

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are no designated heritage assets on site. The Close, listed at grade II, lies to the south of the site. The grade I listed All Saints Church lies to the north of the site. However, given the distance we consider that the development of the proposed allocation would have limited impact of the setting of the heritage assets.
We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The HIA makes a number of helpful recommendations in relation to site density and views of the church.
We broadly welcome bullet points 1,2 and 4 of the policy but consider that bullet point 1 could be more specific in relation to density on the eastern part of the site and views of the church.
Bullet point 4 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 4 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Object

Representation ID: 3170

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are no designated heritage assets on site. However, the site is adjacent to the Gedleston Conservation Area. There is also a pair of grade II listed cottages to the west of the site at West End. Any development of the site has the potential to impact on the significance of these designated heritage assets.
We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The HIA recommends that development needs to respect the form and layout of the Kells Estate. This is reflected in criterion 2.
Bullet point 4 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 4 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Object

Representation ID: 3171

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets on the site, the former Hales Hospital (grade II listed) lies to the east of the site. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the setting (and significance) of this heritage asset.
We welcome the preparation of the HIA and revised HIA for the enlarged site.
We have some concerns for the north eastern portion of the site. We welcome the reference in paragraph 17.16 of the supporting text to views and heights and layout. However, this should be incorporated into the policy itself.
The policy should be amended to include a new criterion to read,
Protect views of the grade II listed Hales Hospital from Briar Lane, careful layout, design and landscaping, including 1 and 1.5 storey dwellings in the north east of the site to protect and enhance the listed building as recommended in the HIA.
Bullet point 5 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 5 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Object

Representation ID: 3172

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets on the site, the former Hales Hospital (grade II listed) lies to the east of the site. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the setting (and significance) of this heritage asset.
We welcome the preparation of the HIA and revised HIA for the enlarged site.
We appreciate that this site was allocated in the previous local plan and also has the benefit of planning permission and that development has commenced.
Reference should be made to the nearby listed Hales Hospital with the addition of a criterion to read:
‘Protect and enhance the grade II listed Hales Hospital through careful layout, design and landscaping’.
Bullet point 4 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 4 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Object

Representation ID: 3173

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets on the site, the disused windmill (grade II listed) lies to the east of the site. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the setting (and significance) of this heritage asset.
We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The HIA makes a number of helpful recommendations. We welcome the references to the HIA and recommendations in paragraph 18.15 and also in bullet points 1 and 2 of the policy.
However, not all of the recommendations are reflected in the policy. Therefore, we suggest the addition of a bullet point to read:
‘Careful layout and design to keep views open, retain visual prominence of windmill and incorporate views of windmill from public spaces’.
Bullet point 6 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.
We therefore advise that bullet point 6 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Support

Representation ID: 3174

Received: 01/03/2023

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome the references to the Conservation Area and Church in bullet point 3.