Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Object

Representation ID: 61308

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

-Policies for allocated sites need to make reference to important historic environment considerations in order to guide how development should be delivered.
-The NPPF requires Local Plans, to set out a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment. This means ensuring that the proposed sites put forward for development, will assist in delivering such a strategy and not contradict it.
-The selection of sites for development needs to be informed by the evidence base and the Plan should avoid allocating those sites which are likely to result in harm to the significance of the heritage asset.

Object

Representation ID: 61441

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Your Landscape Sensitivity Assessment (November 2013) fails to provide an appropriate historic environment assessment. It fails to assess whether, how and to what degree the settings of affected heritage assets make a contribution to their significance, and set out how the proposed development would affect that significance.

Object

Representation ID: 61444

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

The evidence base, fails to establish how site 1 at Baginton contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It appears neither the Baginton Conservation Area Appraisal nor the industry standard guidance on assessing the impact of development on the setting of heritage assets have been applied. Consequently it is not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with the NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Object

Representation ID: 61446

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

The evidence base, fails to establish how Site 2 at Barford contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It appears neither the Baginton Conservation Area Appraisal nor the industry standard guidance on assessing the impact of development on the setting of heritage assets have been applied. Consequently it is not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with the NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Object

Representation ID: 61449

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

The evidence base, fails to establish how Site 1, Hill Wootton contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It's not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with the NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

The proposed allocation is directly opposite a Grade II listed building. How does the setting contribute to the listed buildings significance and what is the implication of the development on that significance?

Object

Representation ID: 61451

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

-The evidence base fails to establish how Site 1 contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It's not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with the NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
-A sizable development is proposed within the setting of Woodcote House. Evidence needs to demonstrate the significance of the heritage assets has been established and the impacts on that significance understood.

Object

Representation ID: 61454

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

The evidence base fails to establish how Site 1 contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It's not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with the NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
-The surroundings of the Church (Grade II listed) and other neighbouring heritage assets contribute to their significance. A robust setting assessment should be prepared in accordance with the aforementioned advice to inform this proposal.

Object

Representation ID: 61458

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Historic England

-The evidence base fails to establish how the Site contributes to the character, appearance and significance of the Conservation Area; and the effect of the proposed development on those attributes. It's not clear whether the proposals are in accordance with NPPF policies for the protection and enhancement of the historic environment and Section 66 of the Planning Act 1990.
-It will have a direct impact on the significance of the listed building.
-As this complex's setting clearly contributes to its significance, any harm must be limited but may be justified.
-A specific historic environment assessment of the site is essential.