The Range, Land Off the A350, Chippenham, Wiltshire
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Range, Land off the A350, Chippenham, Wiltshire Addendum to Heritage Assessment March 2015 The Range, Land off A350, Chippenham Addendum to Heritage Assessment First Industrial Developments 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. We have re-evaluated the impacts on the designated heritage assets affected by the proposed development on land off the A350, Chippenham as requested by English Heritage and the Wiltshire Conservation Officer in their comments to Wiltshire Council. 1.2. The Conservation Officer argues that the development proposed, as currently configured, would cause significant harm to the conservation area and to the settings of the listed buildings contrary to the provisions of the NPPF, associated guidance and the Wiltshire Core Strategy policies 57 & 58. We were made aware that the Conservation officer had not visited the site at the time of her response. 1.3. The English Heritage Inspector considers that this development will cause considerable harm to the significance of the archaeological remains of the Romano- British settlement on the site. As far as we are aware English Heritage Inspector had not visited the excavations at the time of her response and based her assessment of the site’s significance on incomplete information. She further states that there would be harm to the setting of Allington Conservation Area and Bolehyde Manor and should be refused on the grounds that it does not comply with Paragraphs 128, 132, 134 and 137 of the NPPF. 1.4. Additional assessment work has been undertaken to address the comments of the Wiltshire Council Conservation Officer and English Heritage Inspector. This has included an intensive site walkover and review of new material considerations. 1.5. This reassessment addresses the specific concerns raised by the Conservation Officer and English Heritage by taking into account the English Heritage guidance (2011) but also recent case law on how heritage duties have to be applied including Barnwell 2014 and Forge Field 2014. In addition, the appeal decision by the Secretary of State in respect of Land at Javelin Park, Near Haresfield, Gloucestershire in January 2015 is relevant, as this highlights the lack of relevance of inter-visibility to harm to the significance of the setting of a designated asset. This has resulted in a change to the conclusions relating to impacts on designated heritage assets reached in the Heritage Assessment dated November 2014. 2. THE POLICY CONTEXT THE PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990 2.1. This Act states that: “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.” (s.66.1). 2.2. This is a statutory duty, and recent High Court Judgments have established that the intention is that decision makers should not simply give “careful consideration” to the desirability of preserving 2 The Range, Land off A350, Chippenham Addendum to Heritage Assessment First Industrial Developments listed buildings and their settings, but “considerable importance and weight” (Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v. East Northamptonshire District Council, 2014, Forge Field Society v. Sevenoaks District Council, 2014). NATIONAL POLICY: NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF) 2.3. The NPPF is clear in defining the protection of the historic environment as an integral part of the ‘golden thread’ of ‘sustainable development’. 2.4. In para.7 it is stated that to achieve sustainable development the planning system must perform a number of roles, including “an environmental role – contribution to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment….” 2.5. Effectively the NPPF defines sustainable development as development that satisfies the Framework set out within it, and this includes policies set out in Section 12 ‘Conserving and enhancing the historic environment’. 2.6. The NPPF defines ‘Significance’ as follows: “The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting” (Annex 2: Glossary) 2.7. Para 131 of NPPF states that “In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets…” and “…the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness”. 2.8. Para 132 reiterates the Act in stating that “great weight” should be given to the conservation of heritage assets and their significance, clarifying that “significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting”. It states that: “As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification.” 2.9. When read in conjunction with the Act and the presumption against harm to the significance of heritage assets, it seems that any such ‘clear and convincing justification’ for development must be given in terms of factors having considerable weight sufficient to outweigh the Act. 2.10. Para 134 of the NPPF states where the development would lead to less than substantial harm that harm should be “weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use”. It is noted here that the reference to ‘optimum viable use’ applies to the heritage asset in question, and not to the application site. 2.11. Para 135 states that “The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgment will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.” relevance 2.12. Para 137 states that “Local planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development …. within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance.” relevance 3 The Range, Land off A350, Chippenham Addendum to Heritage Assessment First Industrial Developments LOCAL POLICY: THE WILTSHIRE CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT 2.13. Since preparation of the Environmental Statement, The Wiltshire Core Strategy Development Plan Document was formally adopted by Wiltshire Council on January 20th 2015 and replaces policies in the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011. Policies HE5-HE8 of the Local Plan have been replaced by Core Policies 57 and 58 Core Policy 57: Ensuring high quality design and place shaping A high standard of design is required in all new developments, including extensions, alterations, and changes of use of existing buildings. Development is expected to create a strong sense of place through drawing on the local context and being complimentary to the locality. Applications for new development must be accompanied by appropriate information to demonstrate how the proposal will make a positive contribution to the character of Wiltshire through: i. Enhancing local distinctiveness by responding to the value of the natural and historic environment, relating positively to its landscape setting and the existing pattern of development and responding to local topography by ensuring that important views into, within and out of the site are to be retained and enhanced iii. Responding positively to the existing townscape and landscape features in terms of building layouts, built form, height, mass, scale, building line, plot size, elevational design, materials streetscape and rooflines to effectively integrate the building into its setting iv. Being sympathetic to and conserving historic buildings and historic landscapes Core Policy 58 Ensuring the conservation of the historic environment “aims to ensure that Wiltshire’s important monuments, sites and landscapes and areas of historic and built heritage significance are protected and enhanced in order that they continue to make an important contribution to Wiltshire’s environment and quality of life.” Development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance the historic environment. Designated heritage assets and their settings will be conserved, and where appropriate enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance, including: i. Nationally significant archaeological remains ii. World Heritage Sites within and adjacent to Wiltshire iii. Buildings and structures of special architectural or historic interest iv. The special character or appearance of conservation areas v. Historic parks and gardens vi. Important landscapes, including registered battlefields and townscapes. 2.14. The Core Strategy goes on to say that “Distinctive elements of Wiltshire’s historic environment, including non-designated heritage assets, which contribute to a sense of local character and identity will be conserved, and where possible enhanced. The potential contribution of these heritage assets towards wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits will also be utilised where this can be delivered in a sensitive and appropriate manner in accordance 4 The Range, Land off A350, Chippenham Addendum to Heritage Assessment