Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Reg. 19 Pre-submission Addendum

Object

Representation ID: 3986

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

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 revised Heritage Impact Assessment for the site. In particular we note that built development will now be limited to the northern part of the site with the southern area being retained as playing field, play area and village hall. This is reflected in the policy wording and supporting text of the Plan. This revised site layout will help to protect the setting of the farmhouse by providing breathing space around the asset.

There is still no criterion in relation to archaeology in the policy. As previously advised 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: 3987

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We welcome the preparation of the HIA for the site. The HIA recommends that archaeological investigation should be required prior to development commencing due to the cropmarks on site.

We therefore welcome the reference to archaeological investigation prior to commencement of development on site in paragraph 3.20.

The current reference to archaeology at criterion 6 is insufficient. We suggest that the wording is slightly amended to read:

Norfolk’s Historic Environment Service is consulted prior to application to determine the need for any archaeological assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 3988

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The HIA recommends that archaeological investigation should be required prior to development commencing. The recommendations of the HIA in relation to archaeology should be included in the policy requirements.

The current reference to archaeology at criterion 6 is insufficient. We suggest that the wording is slightly amended to read:

Norfolk’s Historic Environment Service is consulted prior to application to determine the need for any archaeological assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 3989

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The HIA recommends that archaeological investigation should be required prior to development commencing. The recommendations of the HIA in relation to archaeology should be included in the policy requirements.

The current reference to archaeology at criterion 6 is insufficient. We suggest that the wording is slightly amended to read:

Norfolk’s Historic Environment Service is consulted prior to application to determine the need for any archaeological assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 3991

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Amend archaeology criterion to read

Norfolk’s Historic Environment Service is consulted prior to application to determine the need for any archaeological assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 3992

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Amend archaeology criterion to read

Norfolk’s Historic Environment Service is consulted prior to application to determine the need for any archaeological assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 3993

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

While there are no designated heritage assets within the site, the grade II listed Old Hall Farmhouse lies immediately to the north west of the site. In addition, the scheduled monument (a hillfort, known as ‘Camp in Village’), lies to the north of the site, which also includes the grade I listed Church of St Mary, and grade II listed war memorial and Rectory. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the significance of these heritage assets. We are particularly concerned about the potential impacts on the Farmhouse, given its proximity.

We welcome the preparation of the HIA.

We note that the capacity of the site has been reduced from 25 to 20 dwellings which is welcomed.

We note that criterion 2 refers to protecting views across the north of the site. Whilst this is not exactly what we had previously suggested (we had suggested an area of open space/orchard/playing field in the north eastern third of the site), we welcome this proposed change and recognise that this is helpful in signalling the importance of protecting the setting of the GII listed Old Hall Farmhouse.

We broadly welcome criterion 4 which recognises the archaeological sensitivity of the area. We suggest a very slight amendment to read:

Norfolk Historic Environment Service to be engaged at an early stage and planning applications supported by archaeological assessment, including the results of field evaluation where appropriate;

Support

Representation ID: 3994

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

No comments.

Support

Representation ID: 3996

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome the addition of reference to Bunwell Manor Hotel.

Object

Representation ID: 4001

Received: 30/09/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site, the site lies immediately to the north east of the grade II listed property, The Orchards. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the significance of this heritage asset. We appreciate that the property is well screened by existing landscaping.

We welcome the preparation of the HIA. We welcome paragraph 8.9 and the second bullet point of the policy in relation to strengthening boundary vegetation.

We suggest a slight amendment to the wording to read ‘…wider landscape and to protect the significance of the setting of The Orchards to the south of the site’ because it’s the significance of the asset, not its setting.