Regulation 19 Rutland Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 8708

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

A heritage impact assessment should be included. The layout, including avenues and building arrangements, is crucial to its historical character, which should be respected in future plans.

Focus needed on preserving the wartime Watch Office and Cold War missile installations, which are significant non-designated heritage assets.

Clear separation is required between new developments and surrounding areas like Clipham and Stretton.

Evaluation of associated infrastructure, such as bridges and lighting, is essential for understanding their impact on the heritage landscape.

Object

Representation ID: 8709

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

A heritage impact assessment should be included. The layout, including avenues and building arrangements, is crucial to its historical character, which should be respected in future plans.

Focus needed on preserving the wartime Watch Office and Cold War missile installations, which are significant non-designated heritage assets.

Clear separation is required between new developments and surrounding areas like Clipham and Stretton.

Evaluation of associated infrastructure, such as bridges and lighting, is essential for understanding their impact on the heritage landscape.

Object

Representation ID: 8710

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Please also see our comments in appendix 2.

Whilst criteria k) is acknowledged, an appropriate buffer for the Roman Town scheduled monument at Great Casterton should be included within the site allocation map (as previously agreed during the draft SPD and subsequent planning application negotiations for the site).

Criteria k is not a substitute for an appropriate mapped buffer in this instance. Please see all previous correspondence and meeting notes.

What will be done to secure the conservation and appreciation of the stretch of Ermine Roman Road to the south (such as improved management, vegetation clearance, interpretation etc)? This needs to be brought into:
https://rutland.oc2.uk/document/38/3001#d3001

Further assessment is required, including upon the landscape, views into and out of the site in relation to Burghley House GII* RPG.

Object

Representation ID: 8711

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst the paragraph “The broad area suitable for Large Scale Wind Energy Turbines classification does not prejudice other material planning considerations, such as effects on designated sites and their interest features” is welcomed – the drawing should be clearly and legibly marked to indicate that heritage impacts were not assessed in the mapping exercise

The separations on the map for areas potentially suitable for’ - small / medium, medium / large and very large wind turbines together with opportunity areas for solar create inherent difficulties once actual schemes are being designed particularly on their boundaries, your authority may find it difficult to defend these demarcations.

Object

Representation ID: 8712

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst Heritage policy EN12 is largely welcomed, there is an objection to the evidence base as detailed separately.

Object

Representation ID: 8713

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Plan is unsound, contrary to paragraph 35 of the NPPF as it is not in line with national policy and the need to protect the significance of heritage assets and their setting, the policies/sites are not justified as there is no evidence to support their inclusion and the policies/sites will not be effective as there are no considered avoidance/ mitigation/ enhancement measures that could overcome harm to the historic environment

Object

Representation ID: 8714

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The policy criteria are welcomed.

A heritage assessment is required both at Local Plan and application stage in relation to the nearby heritage assets, including the Conservation Area.

Object

Representation ID: 8715

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

A detailed heritage assessment is again required at both Local Plan and application stage. An additional criteria should be included for both a detailed HIA at application stage (together with that carried out at Local Plan stage) and for a criteria to ensure protection of the setting of the Grade II listed School House and other listed buildings.

Object

Representation ID: 8716

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

A detailed Heritage Assessment is again required both at Local Plan stage and application stage.

Whilst criteria f) is welcomed an additional criteria should be included to protect the setting of the Conservation Area.

Object

Representation ID: 8717

Received: 02/12/2024

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

An additional policy criteria is required to address the potential effects on the setting / character of the adjacent Conservation Area.

Design / layout should also reflect the Conservation Area.

An archaeological assessment is required.