Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 3526

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary, there is a grade II listed building, Stacey’s Cottage to the south of the site. The development has the potential to impact the significance of this heritage asset via a change in its setting.

We welcome the preparation of the Heritage Impact Assessment for the site. The assessment recommends a landscaping buffer along the southern boundary of the site to help mitigate any impact on the listed building to the south as well as retention of hedgerow along eastern border, limiting density to retain rural character and open space long eastern boundary to separate development from Wheel of Fortune PH.

Comment

Representation ID: 3527

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

The HIA has identified the need for landscape buffer along the southern boundary of the site as well as retention of hedgerow along eastern border, limiting density to retain rural character and open space long eastern boundary to separate development from Wheel of Fortune PH. These requirements should be included as a criterion in the policy for the site.

Object

Representation ID: 3528

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary, there is a grade II listed building, School Farmhouse, to the south east of the site. The development has the potential to impact the significance of this heritage asset via a change in its setting.

We welcome the preparation of the Heritage Impact Assessment for the site. However, the HIA doesn’t really explore the relationship between the farmhouse and the former farmland.

The HIA says that there will be no harm to the significance of the heritage asset. However, we consider this underplays the relationship between the farmhouse, the barns to the rear and the former agricultural land beyond.

We consider that some open space/landscaping to help protect the setting of the farmhouse would be helpful.

We suggest that the HIA is revisited to address this.

We note that part of the site is to be used as a recreation ground. Careful rearrangement of the layout of land uses could be used to both deliver housing, open space and protection for the setting of the heritage asset.

We look forward to seeing a revised HIA and hope that this will address our concerns.

Comment

Representation ID: 3529

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

The policy wording should include provision of open space/landscaping in the south eastern corner of the site to provide an appropriate setting for the farmhouse and maintain come connection to the former agricultural land. There should also be a requirement for archaeological desk-based assessment to inform any planning application and investigation prior to commencement of development.

Object

Representation ID: 3530

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary, there is a grade II listed building, Sayers Farmhouse, to the south of the site, just across Watton Road. The development has the potential to impact the significance of this heritage asset via a change in its setting.

We welcome the preparation of the Heritage Impact Assessment for the site. However, the HIA identifies a major impact on the significance of the heritage asset.
There would be considerable harm to the significance of the asset through development within its setting. Whilst we note suggested mitigation in the form of planting and open space, this is not sufficient.

Therefore, we would recommend that this site should not be allocated.

Comment

Representation ID: 3531

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

We recommend that the site is not allocated but if the site is allocated, we would expect the policy criterion to include the mitigation measures recommended in the HIA including planting and open space and views to the countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 3532

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site, Home Farm lies to the east of the site. The development has the potential to impact the significance of this heritage asset via a change in its setting.

We welcome the preparation of the Heritage Impact Assessment for the site. We welcome the identification of Grove Farm as a non-designated heritage asset. The HIA also highlights the fact that the whole site is part of a World War II military site recorded on the HER. Further assessment of the archaeological significance is needed now to determine the suitability or otherwise of this site. We would like to see the further assessment before drawing any further conclusions in relation to the suitability of the site.

Comment

Representation ID: 3533

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Depending upon the outcomes of the archaeological assessment, if the site is considered suitable for allocation, the policy criteria should include the recommendations from the HIA including tree planting along the southern boundary, low density developer to retain rural character, area of open space along eastern boundary to maintain separation between development and Grove Farm, retention of sight line from Grove Farm to Norwich Road and archaeological investigation prior to commencement of development.

Object

Representation ID: 3534

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within this site, the site lies immediately to the south of the boundary of the Bawburgh Conservation Area. Any development of this site therefore has the potential to affect the Conservation area and its setting including views into and out of the Conservation area.

We note that the revised allocation boundary has been extended to enable a lower density of development. We broadly welcome this approach.

We reiterate our previous comments in relation to archaeological investigation for this site.

Bullet point 3 states that the HER should be consulted to determine the need for any archaeological surveys prior to development. However, this is different to the recommendation in the HIA which states that ‘Require investigation on the proposed site prior to development commencing to identify and further historic activity’.

In our view, some assessment is needed to inform any planning application.

We therefore advise that bullet point 3 should be amended to read, ‘Planning applications should be supported by archaeological assessment including the results of field evaluation where appropriate.’

Comment

Representation ID: 3535

Received: 31/01/2024

Respondent: Historic England

No comments.