Publication Draft

Object

Representation ID: 66063

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

EH welcomes the principle of this sub objective however suggests a minor clarification to ensure consistency with national planning policy.

Support

Representation ID: 66064

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome, support and endorse this policy.

Support

Representation ID: 66065

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

EH welcomes the principle of the initiative. Due to the national importance of the Castle and the intended role of the masterplan in shaping the future of the site, English Heritage would welcome the opportunity be a partner in its preparation.
If the masterplan is to be a development plan should its preparation be subject to the same rigor and discipline of a local plan?

It should also be recognised that Warwick Castle is also a Scheduled Monument

Support

Representation ID: 66066

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome, support and endorse this policy.

Support

Representation ID: 66067

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome, support and endorse this policy.

Object

Representation ID: 66068

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

As drafted this criteria is inconsistent with the NPPF. Its core planning principles in para 17 mention both the Government's desire to encourage the use of renewable resources and the need to 'conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate for their significance'.

Object

Representation ID: 66070

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Although we support this policy, it is not clear that the implications for the historic environment arising from major development to the south of Warwick have been fully addressed in accordance to such a commitment.

Object

Representation ID: 66071

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Mindful of the commitment in paragraph 5.29 and 5.41 it is of concern there is no criteria in this policy to ensure transport infrastructure responds positively to the historic environment.

It is not clear whether such guidance has been applied to inform an understanding of the implications for the historic environment arising from major development to the south of Warwick.

Object

Representation ID: 66072

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The policy fails to address the appropriate response arising from development that results in increased traffic generation potentially harming the significance of the Districts historic environment.

Whilst a commitment to undertake such an assessment is welcomed it needs to take place at this stage, rather than when a planning application is submitted to inform the principle of the strategic allocations to the south of Warwick.

Object

Representation ID: 66075

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The development affects Thickthorn Manor and the Glasshouse Roman Settlement. There is no evidence to demonstrate a proper assessment has been undertaken to inform the principle of development, nor, without prejudice, the critical design response (mitigation).
It should be appreciated that due to the former Roman occupation of the site there also needs to be an assessment of the likelihood that currently unidentified archaeology, potentially of national importance, will be discovered (NPPF para 169).
Without such an assessment the local authority is unable to assert that the objectives for sustainable development have been met.
There appears to be a failure to demonstrate that great weight has been given to the conservation of the heritage assets (NPPF para 132) nor a recognition of the legislative expectation that special weight is paid to the desirability of preserving the setting of the affected Manor. The Ancient Monument and Archaeological Areas Act gives provision for the protection of the scheduled Roman Settlement.
The significance of a heritage asset derives not only from its physical presence but also from its setting - the surroundings in which it is experienced. Consequently English Heritage considers the Plan is inconsistent with the provisions of the NPPF and therefore unsound.