Pigeon (Turley)

Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Local Plan Examination

Matter Statement 9 Allocation Sites for Housing and Other Development and Settlement Boundaries

Response on behalf of Pigeon Investment Management Ltd and their Landowners

August 2021

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Matter 9 - Allocation Sites for Housing and Other Development and Settlement Boundaries 2

Appendix 1: Response Form to LA002: Land North of Church Lane, Barham 8

Appendix 2: Framework Masterplan for LA001 and LA002 9

Appendix 3: Outline Heritage Appraisal to Inform the Framework Masterplan 10

Appendix 4: Outline Landscape Appraisal to Inform the Framework Masterplan 11

Appendix 5: Response Form for LA001: Land East of Norwich Road, Barham 12

Appendix 6: Response Form for LA012: Land north of Burstall Lane and west of B1113, Sproughton 13

Appendix 7: Outline Landscape Appraisal for LA042: Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard 14

Appendix 8: Concept Plan for LA042: Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard 15

Appendix 9: Access Strategy and Network Capacity Review for LA042: Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard 16

Appendix 10: Response Form for LA042: Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard 17

Client Pigeon Investment Management Limited Our reference PIGC3025

August 2021

1. Introduction

1.1 This Hearing Statement has been prepared by Turley, on behalf of Pigeon Investment Management Limited (‘Pigeon’) and their Landowners, in respect of a number of land interests within both the Babergh and Mid Suffolk Districts.

1.2 Turley has previously submitted representations in response to the Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils’ (BMSDC) Joint Local Plan Consultation Document in August 2017, the Joint Local Plan Preferred Options in July 2019 (Regulation 18) and the Joint Local Plan Pre-Submission in November 2020 (Regulation 19) consultations.

1.3 A number of Pigeon’s sites are now included within the Plan as draft allocations. These are detailed below. Further details regarding the status of the sites and their proposed schemes are included in the representations that Pigeon made to the Regulation 19 Consultation (December 2020):

 LA042 - Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard;

 LA012 - Land north of Burstall Lane and west of B113, Sproughton;

 LA001 - Land East of Norwich Road, Barham; and,

 LA002 - Land North of Church Lane, Barham.

1.4 Pigeon continues to support the thrust of the emerging Joint Local Plan, taken as a whole, but advocates a number of positive changes to strengthen the overall soundness and deliverability of the emerging Plan. In particular, the Councils’ housing requirement has increased considerably, therefore in order to significantly boost the supply of housing land and delivery in the two districts and support economic growth, the Plan needs to ensure that it identifies ‘deliverable’ sites, in sustainable locations.

1.5 This must be sufficient to provide a continuous delivery of new housing and employment land over the Plan period where there is an identified need.

1.6 Pigeon has therefore requested the right to participate in the relevant Matter 9 Hearing Session to further articulate the issues raised in this Hearing Statement with regard to the draft site allocations which they have a land interest in.

1 2. Matter 9 - Allocation Sites for Housing and Other Development and Settlement Boundaries

9.1 Are the sites allocated for housing and other development in policies LS01 (1-90) and LA001 – LA119 soundly-based; are the criteria and requirements set out in the relevant policies justified and effective; and is there evidence that the development of the allocations is viable and deliverable in the timescales indicated in the Housing Trajectory set out at Appendix 01 of the plan?

2.1 Pigeon consider that their four site allocations LA001, LA002, LA012 & LA042 are soundly-based and can be justified for inclusion in the emerging draft JLP. Each site allocation within the draft JLP has been assessed through the SHELAA process and tested as part of the spatial strategy through the Sustainability Appraisal (SA). The SHELAA and SA are however only two parts of the evidence base and other factors and evidence, such as site suitability and deliverability, the sustainability and other merits of individual sites and the opportunity to deliver much needed local infrastructure, have also been used to select the sites that best align with the preferred spatial option, acknowledging the different circumstances of each spatial strategy option.

2.2 This is reflected in the allocation of Pigeon’s sites, which bring forward land for new pre- schools and primary schools and land for community hubs to include uses such as health provision, village halls, retail and/or floorspace for small or start-up businesses in highly sustainable locations.

2.3 The remaining elements of question 9.1 are set out below in response to each of these allocations.

LA001: Land East of Norwich Road, Barham & LA002: Land North of Church Lane, Barham 2.4 Sites LA001 and LA002 are adjoining parcels of land within the same landownership within the parish of Barham, north-west of Ipswich and positioned in the Ipswich Fringe.

2.5 LA002 has the benefit of a Resolution to Grant Planning Permission, subject to the signing of a S106 and conditions made by Mid Suffolk District Council on 27 January 2021 (ref: 1856/17). In accordance with draft Policy LA002, the hybrid planning application secures delivery of up to 269 new homes including affordable homes together with associated access and spine road including works to Church Lane, land for shop(s)/ community uses, amenity space including an extension to the Church of St Mary’s and St Peter’s grounds and reserved site for Pre-School and two form entry Primary School. The scheme also incorporates PROW improvements, a significant quantity of landscaping and ecological habitat along with new footpaths and cycle ways to link to the existing village of Claydon and local facilities and a highways package of improvements for the village.

2.6 The Site has been marketed by Pigeon in recent months and it has received an extremely positive response, with a number of parties interested in progressing the Site through a

2 Reserved Matters Application and construction. The strong market response to this Site demonstrates that the allocation is viable and a commercially attractive Site to house- builders.

2.7 Given this response and the Resolution to Grant Outline Planning Permission, Pigeon consider that the Site can start to deliver housing completions earlier than indicated in the Housing Trajectory at Appendix 01 of the Plan, which is set at 2027/28. Pigeon consider that the first completions could be expected in 2023 if a Reserved Matters Application is determined in a timely manner. Thereafter, the expected number of completions per year are expected to be nearer to the national average of between 40 - 50 homes per sales outlet per year, rather than 33, so completion of the Site is likely by 2029.

2.8 Whilst Pigeon are supportive of Policy LA002, in order to make the policy effective and in line with national planning policy, Pigeon has previously set out in their Regulation 19 Representations, specific changes to a number of criteria (including the point raised in question 9.5 below) to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the future when the policy is applied by the decision maker. These specific changes are provided at Appendix 1 of this Statement for completeness.

2.9 LA001 is within the same landownership as LA002 and is envisaged to come forward as a coordinated and comprehensive scheme with LA001, which provides a continuity of approach as shown within the Framework Masterplan at Appendix 2 of this Statement.

2.10 To inform the Framework Masterplan, Pigeon sought detailed landscape and heritage advice for LA001. The landscape and heritage appraisals can be found in full at Appendix 3 and 4 of this Statement. These appraisals have demonstrated that whilst the Site does have the ability to accommodate new development, it should ideally be precluded on the eastern parcel of land, nearest the Public Right of Way (PRoW). This is because of glimpsed views between Shrublands Hall and the Church at Barham. Using the ‘north/south’ hedgerow in this part of the Site to frame the glimpsed views which are ideally to be retained reduces the opportunity to bring forward new homes in this area.

2.11 If it is concluded that the glimpsed views are to be maintained, then Pigeon would like to put forward to the Inspectors and the Council the option to realign the northern boundary of LA001.

2.12 The realignment of this boundary (within the same landownership) assists in providing a layout which would be comparable to the illustrative scheme on LA002 and comply with the requirements of Policy LA001. As with the illustrative scheme on LA002, the future layout of LA001 can identify individual areas where new homes will be designed to respond to the characteristics of that part of the Site and its surrounding area. Design Coding, as adopted for LA002, will also be used to assist this process and the delivery of LA001.

2.13 As demonstrated in the Framework Masterplan at Appendix 2, the alternative boundary largely follows the existing LA001 boundary to the north east, using the existing established hedgerow line. To the north-west, the Masterplan proposes a boundary which reflects the existing field patterns to define the extent of the allocation, with a 20m tree belt introduced along the length of the northern boundary. This approach is

3 in keeping with the character of the area and will assimilate the scheme into the local context. The proposed extension to the north-west boundary has been identified as suitable, given the land is situated on lower ground and adjacent to Norwich Road, where landscape and heritage effects are limited.

2.14 At the north eastern boundary of the Site, adjacent to the Public Right of Way (PRoW) it is proposed to retain this as an of amenity space, albeit in excess of emerging Council Open Space standards, continuing the network of open spaces from LA002 into LA001 and providing the opportunity to connect to the wider PRoW network. To the north and north-west, land will be retained in agricultural use, maintaining separation between Barham and Claydon, together with attenuation features to improve surface water drainage for both the existing fields and the proposed scheme.

2.15 The delivery of allocations LA001 and LA002 in this coordinated way provides a comprehensive and deliverable scheme, which prioritises and realises the delivery of important infrastructure for the benefit of the wider community. This includes land for a new pre-school and primary school, which provides places to accommodate children from committed sites within the Parish and adjacent Parishes with planning approval as well as the draft allocations. This coordinated scheme puts the school land at its centre as part of the community and with excellent connections for walking and cycling to the rest of the Parish.

2.16 The Resolution to Grant Planning Permission and commercial interest in LA002 means that the development of these Sites are likely to be to be in parallel but not in the manner set out in the Housing Trajectory at Appendix 01 of the JLP. Pigeon would expect a detailed planning consent for LA001 to be in place during 2024 with first completions during 2024/25. Taking the accepted national average of 40 - 50 homes per year being completed, it is expected that the Site would finish delivering homes in approximately 2030/31, six years earlier than set out in the trajectory.

2.17 Whilst Pigeon are supportive of Policy LA001, in order to make the policy effective and in line with national planning policy, Pigeon set out in their Regulation 19 Representations, specific changes to a number of criteria (including the point raised in question 9.5 below) to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the future when the policy is applied by the decision maker. These are provided at Appendix 5 of this Statement for completeness.

2.18 Pigeon consider that the ability of LA001 to accommodate the requirements of the allocation, having adopted a comprehensive approach to the delivery of LA001 and LA002, can be achieved via a modest amendment to the northern boundary of LA001. A comprehensive approach ensures the provision of significant infrastructure to the scheme and wider area, particularly the delivery of the Pre-school and Two Form Entry Primary School (which has been provided with additional land to future proof its contribution to the area for many years). If the Inspectors were minded to agree and seek this change through a main modification to the Plan, Pigeon and their Landowner would fully support this approach to ensure that a comprehensive scheme could be delivered in conjunction with LA002. Pigeon will be attending the relevant hearing session to articulate these points and further answer the Inspectors questions.

4 LA012: Land north of Burstall Lane and west of B113, Sproughton 2.19 LA012 has the benefit of a Resolution to Grant Planning Permission subject to S106 and conditions made by Babergh District Council on 7 October 2020 (ref: 19/00567). In accordance with the draft Policy LA012, the hybrid planning application secures delivery of:

• the retention, and potential expansion, of the allotments in their existing location;

• the inclusion of land for community/shop/office use;

• a spine road through the Site linking Loraine Way and Burstall Lane providing an alternative route to the B1113/Burstall Lane junction;

• improvements to Burstall Lane and the Wild Man public house junction to improve traffic safety;

• provision of around 105 new homes (including affordable homes, self- build/custom build and homes for older people);

• extensive areas of informal recreational open space, new woodland planting and biodiversity enhancements; and

• new recreational footpaths with links to the existing public rights of way network to improve access to the wider countryside.

2.20 The Resolution to Grant Planning Permission means that the first completions for this Site are likely to align with the Housing Trajectory at Appendix 01 of the JLP. However, as set out to LA001 and LA002, Pigeon would advocate that the scheme would deliver homes at the national average rate of 40 - 50 homes per year rather than 32 per year and as such, would be completed approximately a year earlier than set out in the trajectory.

2.21 Whilst Pigeon are supportive of Policy LA012, in order to make the policy effective and in line with national planning policy, Pigeon set out in their Regulation 19 Representations, specific changes to a number of criteria (including the point raised in question 9.5 below) to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the future when the policy is applied by the decision maker. These are provided at Appendix 6 of this Statement for completeness.

LA042: Land at Tye Farm, Great Cornard 2.22 Pigeon fully support the allocation of Land at Tye Farm in Great Cornard, which is capable of delivering a landscape-led scheme comprising land for a highly sustainable Community Hub (including educational facilities) and residential development.

2.23 The Site adjoins the existing settlement edge and built form of Sudbury and Great Cornard to the west, north-west and south-west and rural landscape to the east, northeast and south.

2.24 The character of the Site is influenced by both the adjoining developed areas and the characteristics that make up the South Suffolk and North Essex Clayland landscape area.

5 2.25 Pigeon has obtained landscape advice, which is included at Appendix 7 of this Statement, to identify how a scheme can be successfully designed and accommodated within the existing landscape, whilst according with the criteria and requirements in Policy LA042.

2.26 The landscape appraisal identifies that localised parts of the Appraisal Site have good containment from the surrounding landscape. The introduction of development on the Appraisal Site is likely to be visible from parts of the surrounding area including limited short distance local views and longer distance views. This is in common with surrounding existing areas of Sudbury and Great Cornard much of which is visible from the surrounding area in both short and long distance views. It concludes that there is good potential for new development on the Site to connect with the existing developed areas and integrate with the existing settlement pattern, requiring a strong framework of landscape planting within and around the development areas to assimilate the scheme into the surrounding environment.

2.27 Having reviewed the draft allocation site further and informed by the landscape appraisal, Pigeon confirm that not only does the Site have the ability to accommodate the level of development set out in Policy LA042, but that it can deliver around 700 new homes and a community hub within the proposed boundary. This is providing a number of landscape-led measures are incorporated into the future scheme from the outset, including but not limited to, a strong eastern landscape edge to the development area; to concentrate areas of higher density development in the northern part of the Site and to retain the steeper sloping land on the western side of the Site as undeveloped and as open space/opportunities for biodiversity improvements. These landscape-led principles have been incorporated into the Concept Plan at Appendix 8 of this Statement.

2.28 Pigeon has sought highways advice, which is set out at Appendix 9 of this Statement. The Access Strategy and Network Capacity Review confirms that the traffic generation from the proposed increase of 200 new homes would have a negligible impact on the highway network and its capacity, taking into consideration the planned growth for Great Cornard as set out in the emerging Joint Local Plan.

2.29 If the Inspectors are minded to agree and seek this change through a main modification to the Plan, Pigeon and their Landowner would fully support this approach to ensure that a landscape-led scheme could be delivered on this Site, respecting the topography and environmental considerations, set out in the draft policy. Pigeon will be attending the relevant hearing session to articulate these points and answer the Inspectors questions.

2.30 Whilst Pigeon are supportive of Policy LA042, in order to make the policy effective and in line with national planning policy, Pigeon set out in their Regulation 19 Representations, specific changes to a number of criteria (including the point raised in question 9.5 below) to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the future when the policy is applied by the decision maker. These are provided at Appendix 10 of this Statement for completeness.

6 2.31 The Housing Trajectory at Appendix 01 of the JLP identifies that the first completions for this Site are programmed for 2028/29, which Pigeon consider is deliverable and realistic, given a hybrid planning application is likely to be prepared and submitted during the course of 2022/23. Pigeon confirm that the number of yearly completions is likely to be 80 - 100 homes per year, given a Site of this scale is likely to have more than one housebuilder constructing at any one time.

9.5 Is the “contributions to the satisfaction of the LPA, towards ....xxxx” wording used in many of the LAXXX policies justified and effective? Would “contributions towards ....xxxx, to ensure that the development is acceptable in planning terms” be more appropriate?

2.32 Pigeon do not consider that the wording of this criterion in the site specific policies is justified or effective. In their response to the Regulation 19 Consultation, Pigeon has advocated that the contributions sought need to meet the tests set out in Paragraph 56 of the NPPF. To specify that the contributions sought will be to the satisfaction of the LPA is not helpful and ambiguous and not in accordance with Paragraph 56 of the NPPF.

2.33 As such, Pigeon have suggested in their representations to the Regulation 19 Consultation that the wording is revised to require ‘Proportional financial contributions will be sought towards XXXX sufficient to mitigate the impact of development.’ Pigeon consider that this phrase or the wording suggested by the Inspectors would ensure that these criteria meet the requirements of Paragraph 56 of the NPPF.

2.34 Furthermore, Pigeon would identify, as they have within their responses to the Regulation 19 Consultation, that a number of the criteria in Policies LA001, LA002, LA012 and LA042 are superfluous, in that they request statements and assessments which are either addressed by other policies within the Local Plan or the Validation Checklist. They are not site specific requirements and as such, to avoid ambiguity, should be removed from the draft policies.

9.6 Are the settlement boundaries as shown on the policies map justified and effective?

2.35 Pigeon support the proposed settlement boundaries, which have been revised to encompass the draft site allocations, which is considered to be justified and effective. Pigeon consider that the Councils’ approach to include the draft site allocations within the settlement boundaries is wholly in line with established practice. If the site allocation boundary for LA001 were to be amended, then Pigeon would request that the settlement boundary is amended to reflect this change too.

7 Appendix 1: Response Form to LA002: Land North of Church Lane, Barham

Working Together

Babergh Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan 2018-2037

Pre-Submission Regulation 19

Paper Representations Form

Pre-Submission Regulation 19 stage of Babergh Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan public representations period runs from 12th November 2020 to 24th December 2020 (6 weeks).

Regulation 19 - Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012

Representations must be received no later than 12 noon on 24th December 2020.

Online facilities are available to draft and submit comments electronically.

Alternatively, please completed this form and return via email: [email protected] or post to Babergh & Mid Suffolk Councils, Planning Policy Team, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich IP1 2BX.

If assistance is required, please contact the Council’s Strategic Planning Policy Team via email address stated above or by telephone on 0300 1234 000 option 5, then 4.

This form has two parts: Part A for personal details and Part B for your representation.

Please make clear what part of the Joint Local Plan you are responding to and complete a separate form for each representation you wish to make.

Please note each representation must be signed and dated.

All comments received will be made publicly available and may be identifiable by name / organisation. All other personal information provided will be protected in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018.

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

Part A

Section 1: Personal Details

Title: Mr

First Name: Simon

Last Name: Butler - Finbow

Job Title (where relevant): Planning Director

Organisation (where relevant): Pigeon Investment Management Limited

Address:

Postcode: IP33 3DJ Telephone:

Email:

Section 2: Agent Details (if applicable)

Please supply the details below of any agent you have working on your behalf.

Agent name: Sophie Pain

Address: Turley 8 Quy Court Colliers Lane Stow-cum-Quy Cambridge

Postcode: CB25 9AU Telephone number:

Email: [email protected]

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 2

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

Part B

Please fill in a separate form for each representation

The Joint Local Plan will be examined by an independent inspector in order to assess whether the plan has been prepared in accordance with the legal and procedural requirements, and whether it is sound.

Section 3: Section of Joint Local Plan

Name or Organisation: Turley

Client: (if relevant) Pigeon Investment Management

To which part of the Joint Local Plan does this representation relate?

Section and Paragraph:

LA002 – Land north of Church Lane, Barham Policy:

Policies Map:

Section 4: Legal Compliance & Duty to Cooperate

Do you consider the Joint Local Plan is: (tick as appropriate)

Yes (Support) No (Object)

1. Legally and procedurally compliant: X

(a) Positively prepared

(b) Justified X

2. Sound: (c) Effective

(d) Consistent with national policy X

3. In Compliance with the Duty to Cooperate X

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 3

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

Section 5: Details of Representation

If you wish to support or object to the legal compliance or soundness of the Joint Local Plan or with the Duty to Cooperate, please use this box to set out and explain your comments. Please be as precise as possible, and provide a 100 word summary of each point.

100 Word Summary

Notwithstanding their support for this proposed allocation, Pigeon object to Policy LA002 on the basis that not all of the criteria are justified or consistent with national planning policy. This relates to Criteria I, II, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII and XIV.

Main Text

Criterion I refers to the need for the development to comply with the relevant policies set out in the Plan. Development needs to be, on balance, in accordance with the whole plan therefore it is considered unnecessary to require this as a specific point within the policy. If the Council consider they need to make reference to this, then this reference should be made in the supporting text to the Policy. Therefore, Pigeon would request that this criterion is removed from the policy as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion II refers to the church remaining as a prominent building and that the rural setting is maintained. As shown on the Concept Plan, the eastern edge of Sites LA001 and LA002 provide for a generous area of Public Open Space/parkland to the west of the church. This combined approach across the two sites will ensure that the church remains as the prominent building from a number of important viewpoints. This is an approach that both Historic England and the Council’s Historic Environment Officer supported in their consultation responses to the ‘live’ planning application. It was recognised that the inclusion of this open land would retain some of the existing rural character and provide a buffer between the church and the built form. Pigeon would object to the wording which requires the rural setting to be maintained. Through the draft allocation of the Site it must be recognised that the setting of the church will change and therefore cannot be maintained, but that as demonstrated in through the Concept Plan, some of the character can be protected. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion V refers to the need for an ecology assessment to be submitted with a planning application. Given the size of the scheme for this draft allocation and other draft policies within the Local Plan, it is considered unnecessary to require this as a specific point and would be addressed via other legislation and validation requirements for any planning application. If the Council consider they need to make reference to this, then this reference should be made in the supporting text to the Policy. Therefore, Pigeon would request that these criterion are removed from the policy as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion VI - through the planning application for this Site, Suffolk County Council as the Local Education Authority has identified that this site should deliver land for a 2 Form Entry Primary School and Early Years Provision. Planning application (1856/17) provides for a serviced site of 3.5 ha and as such the draft policy should be amended accordingly. Furthermore, the County do not seek ‘free’ sites

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 4

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

and therefore this reference needs to be removed from the draft policy. Therefore, Pigeon would request that these criterion are removed from the policy as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion VII – needs to be clear and specific in the infrastructure it is seeking to secure through the Policy. A package of pedestrian/cycle improvements has been agreed with Suffolk County Council which need to be reflected in this criterion. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion VIII - An existing planning application (1856/17) on the allocation is under determination by the Local Planning Authority. During the determination of the application, at no point has the nearby quarry site or A14 been raised as a concern either by the local community or by statutory consultees such as the Council’s Environmental Health Officer. It is considered that this is not a concern for development of this Site as demonstrated through a ‘live’ application and as such, reference to this should be removed from the draft policy.

Criterion IX refers to Rights of Way being retained. As shown on the Concept Plan, there are no existing Rights of Way within the Site allocation. A Public Right of Way lies to the east of the Site allocation and outside of the area. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion X refers to extraction or use of minerals on site where appropriate. Pigeon are supportive of the principle of using mineral resources on-site where those resources are of sufficient quality and are economically viable. However, consideration of whether the resource can be used on site should not be assessed only on the quantity and quality of the material. The extraction of such material will also need to take into consideration the scale and location of the proposed site allocation and whether the size of the scheme has the practical capacity to use it on site. Furthermore, the extraction of such material imposes an additional time constraint on the delivery of any site allocation and notably on smaller, otherwise unconstrained allocations. Therefore the scale of site and its importance to the five year supply also needs to be taken into consideration within the Council’s housing trajectory, including the time necessary for restoration. Pigeon would support this modification to the policy, providing it recognises that such a requirement has to be proportionate to the site allocation and that the above points are taken into consideration when determining whether the resources should be reasonably extracted and used on-site or not. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be removed as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criteria XI & XII refer to contributions being made to the satisfaction of the LPA. Pigeon would object to this wording as it does not meet with the statutory tests that are set out in the NPPF. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion XIII needs to be clear and specific in the infrastructure it is seeking to secure through the policy. Reviewing the Infrastructure Delivery Plan, the Site is within the catchment of Stowmarket HWRC, which with planned development in the area will be over capacity. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Criterion XIV needs to be clear and specific in the infrastructure it is seeking to secure through the policy. It is not clear whether the Council are referring to improvements to existing bus stops, or if they are intending for the scheme to provide new bus stops or indeed both. If it is the latter, then this is subject to the agreement of the service provider and so would be outside of the control of the developer. The Council need to consider what is within the developers control to deliver to ensure that the Policy can be correctly applied in the determination of a planning application. Therefore, Pigeon would request that the wording of this criterion be amended as set out in Section 6 of this form.

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 5

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

To be considered sound, Pigeon would suggest that these parts of the policy are re-worded to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the future when the policy is applied in the decision making process.

Section 6: Proposed Modifications to the Joint Local Plan

Please set out what modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Joint Local Plan legally compliant or sound, having regard to the test(s) you have identified above where this relates to soundness. (NB Please note that any non-compliance with the Duty to Cooperate is incapable of modification at examination) You will need to say why this modification will make the Joint Local Plan legally compliant or sound. It will be helpful if you are able to put forward your suggested revised wording of any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.

In order to make policy LA002 of the Joint Local Plan sound, Pigeon would suggest that the wording of the following criteria are modified in the following way:

LA002 – Allocation: Land north of Church Lane, Barham Site size - 24.9ha Approximately 270 dwellings (and associated infrastructure)

The development shall be expected to comply with the following:

I. The relevant policies set out in the Plan; II. Development is designed to conserve and where appropriate enhance the Church of St Mary (Grade I), Garden Wall and gateway (Grade II), Shrubland Hall (Grade II*) and Registered Park and Garden (Grade I), and Henry VIII Farmhouse (Grade II) and their settings, including avoiding access via the historic trackway to the east of the site and ensuring the church remains a prominent building with its rural character setting maintained. Development should be set back from the eastern edge of site and the south-western edge along Norwich Road; III. Existing vegetation on the eastern edge of the site should be retained for screening; IV. Measures for managing impacts on archaeological remains are provided, including preservation in situ of Anglo-Saxon settlement remains and archaeological excavation of other remains; V. An ecological survey, and any necessary mitigation measures are provided; VI. A free serviced site of 3.5ha should be reserved for a new pre-school and primary school plus proportionate contributions towards the build costs; VII. Proportionate financial contributions will be sought towards provision of a package of pedestrian/cycle improvements for Barham and Claydon; Provision of highway improvements of strategic road network in the area may be required; VIII. Potential noise pollution from the A14 and neighbouring quarry site is effectively mitigated; IX. Rights of Way within the site and within the vicinity of the site should be retained and enhanced; X. Developer should test the potential resources on the site to identify if prior extraction or use of the mineral on site is appropriate; XI. Contributions, to the satisfaction of the LPA, Proportionate financial contributions will be sought towards provision of the new pre-school and primary school, and secondary school provision, sufficient to mitigate the impact of the development; XII. Contributions, to the satisfaction of the LPA, Proportionate financial contributions will be sought towards healthcare provision, sufficient to mitigate the impact of the development;

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 6

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

XII. Contributions, to the satisfaction of the LPA, Proportionate financial contributions will be sought towards additional Household Waste Recycling provision at Stowmarket, will be required sufficient to mitigate the impact of the development XIV. Internal footways provided within the development and linked with adjoining site (LA001), and the provision of bus stops.

Please note your representation should cover succinctly all the information, evidence and supporting information necessary to support/justify the representation and the suggested modification, as there will not be a subsequent opportunity to make further representations based on the original representation at publication stage.

After the representations period of the Pre submission Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan has closed, further submissions will only be at the request/invitation of the Inspector, based on the matters and issues debated at the examination.

Section 7: Participation at the Examination

If your representation is seeking a modification, do you consider it necessary to participate at the oral part of the examination? (please select one answer with a tick)

Yes, I wish to participate at the oral examination X

No, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination

If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

To be able to verbally articulate why these changes are required in order to make the Plan sound.

Please note the Inspector will determine the most appropriate procedure to adopt to hear those who have indicated that they wish to participate at the oral part of the examination.

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 7

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

Section 8: Being Kept Informed

Would you like to be kept informed of the progress of the Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan through to adoption? (please select one answer with a tick)

Yes, I want to be kept informed X

No, I do not want to be kept informed

Please note that if you do not wish to be kept informed of the progress of the Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan through to adoption, you will not receive any subsequent updates relating to the Local Plan examination etc.

Section 9: Signature & Date of Representation

Please sign and date below: Signature:

Date: 24 December 2020

After the end of the representation period the Councils will submit all individual representations received to the Secretary of State, together with a summary of the main issues raised during the representations period.

Information that you provide in your representation, including personal information, may be published or disclosed in accordance with the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR), or the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please tell us, but be aware that under the EIR and FOI, we cannot guarantee confidentiality.

However, if you are submitting representations as an individual, the Council will process your personal data in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and this means that if you request confidentiality, your personal information will not be disclosed to third parties.

For more information on how we do this and your rights with regards to your personal information, and how to access it, please visit our website or call Customer Services on 0300 123 4000 and ask to speak to the Information Governance Officer.

If you wish to request that the personal details submitted with this representation are treated in confidence and not published. (please tick the box) Please explain below, why you have made this request:

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 8

Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan

Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils

Strategic Planning Policy Team, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich IP1 2BX

Planning Policy Team | 0300 1234 000 option 5 then 4 | [email protected]

Pre-Submission (Nov 2020) Paper Representations Form 9

Appendix 2: Framework Masterplan for LA001 and LA002

Copyright of Turley This drawing is for illustrative purposes only and should not be used for any construction or estimation purposes. To be scaled for planning application purposes only. No liability or responsibility is accepted arising from reliance upon the information contained within this drawing. Plans reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright and database right [2021]. Ordnance Survey Licence number [0100031673].

KEY

Site boundary - 39.17 ha

LA001 Allocation - 10.61 ha

LA002 Allocation - 25.10 ha

Additional Land for LA001 - 1.42 ha

CLIENT Pigeon

PROJECT Church Lane, Barham

DRAWING Site Location and Allocation Plan

PROJECT NUMBER PICG3034

DRAWING NUMBER CHECKED BY 1201 CD

REVISION STATUS B Submission

DATE SCALE 13/08/2021 1:5,000 @ A3 Site Boundary

Public Right of Way

Proposed Settlement Boundary

5m Contours

New Homes

Pre & Primary School Site Green Infrastructure and Amenity Space Meadow Grassland

SuDS Proposed Spine Road with pedestrian/ cycle Proposed Secondary/Tertiary Streets

Indicative building frontages 1 Retained Hedgerows 1 Proposed Hedgerow Planting 1 Landscaping Belt (c.20m in 1 width)

0 metres 250

(1:5,000)

Copyright of Turley CLIENT PROJECT NO. STATUS This drawing is for illustrative purposes Plans reproduced by permission Pigeon PIGC3034 Submission only and should not be used for of Ordnance Survey on behalf any construction or estimation of The Controller of Her DRAWING NO. SCALE purposes. To be scaled for planning Majesty’s Stationery Office. © PROJECT Church Lane, Barham application purposes only. No liability Crown Copyright and database 3001 1:5,000 @ A3 or responsibility is accepted arising right [2020]. Ordnance Survey REVISION DATE CHECKED BY from reliance upon the information Licence number [0100031673]. contained within this drawing. DRAWING: Framework Masterplan E 13/08/2021 CD Appendix 3: Outline Heritage Appraisal to Inform the Framework Masterplan

Outline Heritage Appraisal Land East of Norwich Road, Barham

August 2021

Contents

1. Introduction 3

2. Heritage Assets 5

3. Summary of Historic Map Regression 8 4. Statement of Significance 11

5. Summary Assessment and Mitigation 16

Appendix 1: Framework Masterplan 19 Appendix 2: Legislative, Policy and Guidance Context 20

Client Pigeon Investment Management Limited on behalf of Pigeon Capital Management 2 Ltd (‘Pigeon’) and the Cutting Family (‘the Landowners’) Our reference PIGC3034

August 2021

1. Introduction

Purpose of this Report

1.1 This Outline Heritage Appraisal has been prepared by Turley Heritage on behalf of Pigeon Investment Management Ltd on behalf of Pigeon Capital Management 2 Ltd (‘Pigeon’) and the Cutting Family (‘the Landowners’) in relation to the draft allocation of Site LA001 in the Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Joint Local Plan Pre-Submission (Regulation 19) Document. Site LA001 (“the Site” – see Figure 1.1) relates to a parcel of land to the east of Norwich Road, Barham.

1.2 Site LA001 sits alongside ‘Land North of Church Lane, Barham’ which is a draft mixed-use allocation (‘Site LA002’). A hybrid planning application (Ref: 1856/17) was submitted by Pigeon for Site LA002 in May 2017 for up to 269 new homes including affordable homes together with associated access and spine road including works to Church Lane, land for shop(s)/ community uses, amenity space including an extension to the Church of St Mary and St Peter’s grounds and reserved site for Pre-School and two form entry Primary School. LA002 has the benefit of a Resolution to Grant Planning Permission, subject to the signing of a S106 and conditions made by Mid Suffolk District Council.

Figure 1.1: Site location plan.

1.3 LA001 & LA002 are within the same landownership. The Sites are envisaged to come forward as a coordinated and comprehensive scheme, which provides a continuity of approach as shown within the Framework Masterplan at Appendix 1 of this Statement.

1.5 The purpose of this Outline Heritage Appraisal is to inform a revised development concept plan for LA001 informing a revised northern boundary and its integration with the illustrative layout of LA002. A ‘Framework Masterplan’ has been produced for the two sites combined, to demonstrate how these sites can be delivered as a comprehensive and coordinated scheme. The Framework Masterplan is included at Appendix 1.

1.6 There are no built heritage assets located within the Site, but there are a number located close-by and within the wider vicinity. These are identified in Section 2 below, where they are scoped accordingly, and their significance proportionately summarised at Section 4, including any contribution made by setting to their significance.

1.7 This appraisal is informed by and incorporates the findings of our preliminary desk-based review of the Site and built heritage assets with the potential to be affected, including a review of the relevant Historic Environment Record via the Heritage Gateway. This is also based on a number of visits to the Site and surrounding area to consider the relationship between the Site and nearby heritage assets, and any contribution which it makes to their setting.

1.8 This appraisal is prepared to assist considerations related to the draft allocations within the emerging Local Plan, having regard to the requirements of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which places a duty upon the local planning authority in determining applications for development affecting listed buildings or conservation areas. In respect of listed buildings, it requires special regard to be given to the desirability of preserving a building or its setting1.

1.9 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2021) provides the Government’s national planning policy of the conservation of the historic environment. In respect of information requirements it sets out that:

“In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.”2

1.10 Paragraph 195 then sets out that local planning authorities should also identify and assess the particular significance of heritage assets that may be affected by proposals. They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of proposals in order to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.

1.11 The relevant legislation, planning policy and guidance, in heritage terms, for the purposes of the Outline Heritage Appraisal is included at Appendix 2.

1 Section 66 2 MHCLG, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2021 – para. 194

2. Heritage Assets

Heritage Assets, Significance and Setting

2.1 Heritage assets and significance are defined in Annex 2 of the NPPF. These definitions are clear that it is the heritage interest of both designated and non-designated heritage assets that imbue them with significance that merits consideration in the planning process. The NPPF definition of significance states that ‘heritage interest’ may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic, and that significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.

2.2 The NPPF defines a heritage asset as:

“A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing)”.3

2.3 Designated heritage assets are those which possess a level of heritage interest that justifies designation under relevant legislation and are then subject to particular procedures in planning decisions which involve them, including listed buildings. These include, amongst others, listed buildings and conservation areas.

2.4 Listed buildings are designated heritage assets that have special architectural or historic interest that are, for the time being, included in a list compiled or approved by the Secretary of State under Section 1 of the Planning Act 1990; for the purposes of that Act. The Principles of Selection for listed buildings are published by Department of Culture, Media and Sport,4 and supported by Historic England’s List Selection Guides for each building type.5

2.5 The NPPF identifies that ‘heritage assets’ also include those identified by the local planning authority (including local listing). These are referred to as “non-designated” heritage assets. None have been identified in the study area.

2.6 The NPPF defines the ‘setting’ of a heritage asset as:

The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.6

3 National Planning Policy Framework 2021 – Annex 2: Glossary 4 DCMS, Principles of Selection for Listed Buildings, 2018 5 Historic England, Listing Selection Guides (all types), 2017 amendments 6 MHCLG, National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Annex 2: Glossary

2.7 Historic England also provides guidance 7 in respect of the setting and views of heritage assets, providing detail on understanding setting and views, and the associated assessment of the impact of any changes. This presents a series of attributes of a setting which can be used to help assess its contribution to the significance of a heritage asset. These can comprise the asset’s physical surroundings; the experience of the asset; and the asset’s associative attributes.

Identified Heritage Assets

2.8 The built heritage assets within the vicinity of the Site with the potential to be affected by the Framework Masterplan development have been carefully considered and scoped accordingly. Those with the potential to be affected and therefore scoped into this baseline analysis. These include:

• Church of St Mary and St Peter (Grade I listed) – full list entry details available here.

• Shrubland Hall (Grade II* listed) – full list entry details available here.

• Shrubland Hall Park and Garden (Grade I registered) – full list entry details available here.

2.9 It should be noted that this assessment is undertaken within the context of the heritage appraisal work for the hybrid planning application (Ref: 1856/17) for Site LA002. The conclusions drawn with that application allows a number of identified heritage assets within the immediate vicinity to be scoped out from further assessment, as these will not be affected by the nature of the proposed development on LA002, or the combined approach to development proposed by the Framework Masterplan. Accordingly, the same conclusions can be drawn in this instance, allowing the following heritage assets to be scoped out from further assessment:

• Garden Wall and Gateway to Barham Hall (Grade II listed) – full list entry details available here.

• Henry VIII Farmhouse (Grade II listed) – full list entry details available here.

2.10 Please refer to the respective statutory list entries for further and full details of the above heritage assets.

2.11 Other heritage assets identified within the wider vicinity of the Site have been carefully considered, but have been scoped out from further consideration by this appraisal based on an understanding of the potential impact of the scale and form of the Framework Masterplan proposals. This is due to the physical separation distance; the screening effects of intervening built form/development and mature planting; and/or, the orientation of streets / local views, which taken together (or in combination) would otherwise limit the potential visibility and effect of any such proposed development on the particular heritage significance (and setting) of these heritage assets.

7 Historic England, The Setting of Heritage Assets, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: 3 (2nd Edition) 2017

Relevant Heritage Context 2.12 Immediately to the east of the site is the Grade I listed Church of St Mary and St Peter, the earliest part of which has possible Saxon origins. The church was retitled ‘Church of St Mary and St Peter and St Peter’ following the closure of St Peter’s in Claydon in the late 1970s. The church was listed in December 1955 prior to this event.

2.13 Approximately 1.6km to the north of the site is Shrubland Hall which is Grade II* listed. There are a number of associated heritage assets, including coach house block (Grade II listed), numerous Grade II and Grade II* listed ancillary and garden structures, Grade II listed lodges, and a Grade I registered park and garden (RPG) (located approximately 800m from the northern site boundary). At the south-eastern entrance to the park is a Grade II listed gate lodge and separately Grade II listed gateway and screen walls.

Figure 2.1: Extract of Constraints Plan, with nearby heritage assets indicated by the orange markers.

To the east are the Church of St Mary and St Peter (Grade I) and garden walls associated with Barham Hall (Grade II); to the south- west is Henry VIII Farmhouse (Grade II) and to the north-west are the various designated heritage assets of Shrubland Hall and its Registered Park and Garden, albeit the Hall is not shown.

3. Summary of Historic Map Regression

Historic Map Regression

3.1 Figure 3.1 is the tithe map of 1840, which shows Church Lane, with the church at Barham and Barham Hall to the east and the now listed farm complex to the west.

Figure 3.1: Tithe map of 1840.

3.2 The Ordnance Survey (OS) plan of 1888-1890 (Figure 3.2) shows the combined Site (LA001 and LA002) divided into fields with a chalk pit in the westernmost parcel (of LA002). The northern site boundaries to the respective draft allocations, broadly follows historic field boundaries; however, the internal boundaries have since been lost to form larger field parcels. Immediately at the north-eastern corner of LA002 was a ‘Hop Ground’ which has since been given over to arable agriculture as part of LA001. A path is shown leading from the churchyard along the eastern site boundary, through the hop ground and into Shrubland Hall. The section between the church and Sandy Lane survives as a bridleway. Church Lane is shown in its current position but at that time was a rural lane leading from the turnpike to the church and beyond.

3.3 The landscape at this time was predominantly rural, comprising a series of fields with treed boundaries and a series of wooded land parcels. The designed landscape with its plantations, formal gardens and drives to the north at Shrubland Hall is a marked change from the agricultural character of the wider landscape.

Figure 3.2: 1888-1890 1:10,560 OS plan – draft allocations LA001 and LA002 indicatively shown outlined red and blue respectively.

3.4 To the south of Church Lane at this time was another series of fields with the rectory placed within its own enclosure approximately equidistant along Church Lane between Norwich Road and Barham Hall. It was presumably the rectory to the church at Barham, and unusually had an observatory within its grounds.

3.5 The churchyard at this time was more closely drawn around the church, forming a broadly square enclosure. It has since been extended to include land to the west up to the bridleway. Although the current access from Church Lane is therefore historic, at this time it would not have led directly into the churchyard as it does today.

3.6 There was little change over the end of the C19 and into the C20 as indicated by a review of the 1904 and 1926 1:2,500 OS plans (not included).

3.7 By 1957, Claydon had expanded northwards with development along Norwich Road, however it was not until the 1960s that Claydon really grew substantially to its present size. This is evident from a review of the 1969 1:10,560 OS survey (not included). The rectory survived as part of this development, but had been demolished by the time of the 1978-1989 1:10,000 OS survey to make way for Old Rectory Close (see Figure 3.3).

3.8 Residential development has more recently been constructed along the southern boundary of the registered park and garden, around Hall farm / along Sandy Lane, between the RPG and the draft allocated sites.

Figure 3.3: 1977-78 1:10,000 OS plan – draft allocations LA001 and LA002 indicatively shown outlined red and blue respectively.

3.9 Claydon expanded dramatically during the mid-C20 with the building of several new estates to the north of the original linear village core. It has since been further enlarged during more recent years with the building of Exeter Road and Hereford Drive.

4. Statement of Significance

4.1 The NPPF is clear that local planning authorities require applicants to demonstrate an understanding of the significance of any ‘heritage asset’ affected by a development proposal, including any contribution made by its setting. It also makes clear that the level of detail required should be ‘proportionate to the assets’ importance, and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance’ (paragraph 194).

4.2 This section of the report is therefore intended to establish the significance of the relevant heritage assets identified at Section 2 above, on a proportionate basis, as the only heritage assets with the potential to be affected.

Heritage Assets

Church of St Mary and St Peter (Grade I) 4.3 The church dates to at least the early C14, with additions made throughout the later medieval period and beyond. The south tower, chancel and nave date to the C14, with a later C14 2-bay chapel added to the north of the nave. In the following century, the nave was enlarged and a 7-bay hammerbeam roof was added with clerestory windows. The upper part of the roof was renewed in the C19. Like many churches, changes were made throughout the C19, including the addition of new windows and replacement angels to the hammerbeam roof.

4.4 The church fabric documents the evolution of the church through the mid-late medieval period and beyond to the present, including the late-1980s extension works. It therefore has historic interest related to its existence for multiple centuries dating from the medieval period and as a focus within earlier local communities.

4.5 The church is of architectural interest, detailing changing ecclesiastical architectural styles and use of materials from the early C13 onwards. The building is predominantly constructed in flint, with red brick clerestory section to the nave and stone tracery to the windows. The roof is clay plain tile. The restoration by E. C. Hakewill in the mid-C19 has added an additional layer of interest, chronicling the Victorian fashion for the ‘restoration’ of churches in the Gothic Revival style. Such Victorian features include the flushwork around the main entrance and battlements to the tower. The 1980s extension, designed by Whitworth and Hall, is of no architectural interest.

Setting 4.6 The church is positioned within a rolling landscape and located on a high point, overlooking the valley which sweeps down towards the River Gipping to the west. Although outside of the current village core of both Claydon and Barham, the church stands together with the Barham Hall site to the south, which includes the remains of the C16 hall and later replacement hall. The two sites therefore share a longstanding relationship with each other.

4.7 The immediate setting of the church is the churchyard which permits a perambulation of the church to enjoy an appreciation in the round. The churchyard shares a close relationship with the church and clearly makes a particularly important contribution to the way in which it is experienced and thereby its significance.

4.8 The churchyard boundary is clearly delineated with mature trees and hedgerows which lend the site a strong sense of enclosure and screen views into the churchyard from outside. The boundary planting and mature trees within the churchyard, together with the high hedgerows flanking Church Lane and along the eastern boundary of the combined Site, restrict many of the closer range views to the church. The church tower is the most visible element of the building, which becomes more visible at greater distance particularly in winter months, but for the most part is well-screened.

4.9 The immediate setting of the churchyard to the north, east and west is arable fields, although nearby is a cluster of buildings to the east along Church Lane, and a minerals extraction site to the north. To the south-east is the large mid-late C20 extension of Claydon which extends as far north as Church Lane.

4.10 The main approach to the church is from Church Lane. Approaching from the east, the church tower is a feature in more distant views, although at greater proximity the mature hedgerow on the northern side of the road and mature planting within the churchyard provides a dense screen which significantly reduces its visibility. Owing to the topography of the land, the draft allocation sites do not feature in the experience of the church from this direction. When approaching from the west along Church Lane, the church is experienced at distance within a dense and mature tree cluster, which provides extensive screening, except for glimpses to the top section of the tower.

Shrubland Hall (Grade II*) and RPG (Grade I) 4.11 The site at Shrubland Hall is subject to a number of statutory designations. The garden/boundary structures and ancillary buildings including the gate lodges are not assessed as there will be no potential impact on their significance. These assets do not share a visual relationship with the Site, and the main positive element of their settings is the relationship shared with other assets across the site and its landscaping – which will remain unaffected.

4.12 This assessment is thus limited to the Hall given that the tower element is a feature within the wider landscape, and the registered park and garden, and given that the southern boundary shares a limited visual relationship with the draft allocated sites.

4.13 The Shrubland Estate is understood to date from the early C16 with the construction of the Old Hall by the Booth family. Sections of the Old Hall exist and this is listed Grade II. The Old Hall chapel is believed to include medieval fabric, suggesting that the estate was built around an earlier settlement. The C17 deer park is concentrated in the central section of the site which includes ancient trees.

4.14 The estate passed into the Bacon family by the early C17 and remained in this family’s possession until its sale to the Middletons in the late C18. It was the Reverend John Bacon who commissioned James Paine to design a new hall in the 1770s. The hall was later remodelled in the early 1830s by Gandy Deering, working under the commission of

Sir. W. F. Middleton. The hall was remodelled again soon after, this time by Charles Barry.

4.15 In the C20, the Hall was used in the First World War as a convalescent home. In the Second World War, the Old Hall was put to use as a brigade headquarters. In more recent years the Hall has been used as a health clinic but was sold in 2009 and the grounds are now in divided ownership.

4.16 Shrubland Hall is located on the top of an escarpment. It is a three-storey structure in the Italianate-style in gault brick with limestone and stucco detailing. The west front is the garden front and incorporates Paine’s original five bay central block with an additional three bays to either side by Gandy Deering. In the south-west corner is a tower of c.1850 with belvedere. Barry’s plans to add a central and north tower were rejected. To the west are the formal gardens which incorporate the Upper Gun and Balcony terraces (both Grade II* listed) that are linked to the gardens below by a Grand Descent (Grade II* listed) which constitutes a flight of 115 ornamented steps in five flights to the Panel Garden. The bottom flight splits into two curved stairs beneath which is a pool and grotto. On axis with the stairs is an Italianate loggia (Grade II* listed).

4.17 The eastern elevation is the main approach and was remodelled by Gandy Deering. It incorporates a pair of single storey wings of three bays each, and included within the listing are the semi-elliptical gault brick screen walls with gateways at either end.

4.18 The Hall is served by three main drives, the southern one of which is accessed from the southern corner of the park from Norwich Road located to the north of the combined Site. This drive is the principal approach, and was moved to this location in the C19 which marked a departure from the main approach designed by Humphry Repton further to the west.

4.19 The registered park and garden is Grade I and of significance as a multi-phase garden, with a mid C19 Italianate garden by Charles Barry set within a C17 park which was extended in the late C18 and early C19 with input from Humphry Repton and William Woods. The park and garden is on Historic England’s Heritage at Risk Register which would seem to be on the basis of decaying garden features and planting, past management of the landscape around Old Hall, and proposals implemented within the expanded park.

4.20 The pleasure grounds comprise approximately 25 hectares of the 175-hectare park, and as noted above are located to the west of the Hall which occupies a broadly central location. The register entry notes how views east are limited due to the topography and planting. It identifies planned views to the north and north-west through woodland along The Vista and to a tower in the northern plantations built as an eye catcher (Grade II listed). The eastern edge of the park is bordered by Sandy Lane which joins Barham in the south to Coddenham in the north-east. The eastern portion has a different character to the land to the west and north of the Hall, being predominantly parkland laid out in the C19.

4.21 The register entry notes how the topography permits views south and west across the Gipping valley of an undulating agricultural landscape. The degree to which ‘borrowed views’ southwards across the Site can be appreciated is questionable given the degree

of planting along the southern boundary bordering Sandy Lane. These shelter belts are shown on the earliest OS plans and were part of the C19 planting scheme. It is suggested that these wider views noted in the register entry are incidental rather than planned; the eye catchers and planned vistas are clearly to the north of the Hall together with the pleasure gardens, and the boundary planting along the southern edge would have created a degree of enclosure in views outwards in this direction from within the park.

Setting 4.22 The setting of the Hall is chiefly made up from its surrounding designed landscape and garden structures mentioned above. The two share an integral relationship, with the landscape carefully planned around the Hall and vice versa. The Hall is orientated on a broadly north to north-east/south to south-west axis, with the garden front looking north-west over the pleasure grounds and towards the northern eye catcher and planned vistas. The eastern front forms the main point of arrival but views outwards from the main drive south and east would appear to have been filtered by the mature boundary planting. Views were therefore largely enclosed within the park rather than borrowing from the wider landscape.

4.23 The Hall has not been visited, other than from public rights of way within the registered park and garden (see Figure 4.1), therefore views from the principal rooms, located on the first floor, have not been tested. However only the tower can be seen from the Site (and even then at considerable distance), therefore it is assumed that the draft allocated sites will not be visible from elsewhere within the Hall. The tower is located on the south-west corner. The draft allocated sites form part of the wider agricultural landscape referenced in the register entry that forms part of the character of the view in this direction. The combined sites, however, are one part of a much larger landscape that wraps around the southern and eastern park boundaries and which does not make an integral contribution to this character.

4.24 Historic maps would suggest that a footpath connected the parkland at Shrubland to the church following field boundaries. This suggests a historic association between the estate and the church, although there is little visual inter-relationship between these heritage assets.

4.25 Overall, the planned landscape would appear to have consciously sought to screen the southern boundary from the land beyond to create a sense of enclosure and privacy – creating an ‘inward looking’ focus for what is now the RPG. This southern belt largely contained views from the main drive and within the eastern portion of the estate to within the parkland. The registered landscape does not therefore rely upon borrowed views to the wider landscape, including towards the draft allocated sites, which only form a slight peripheral element, and only then, possibly the far north-east section of LA001 – beyond the arable field to its north. It should also be noted that residential development has more recently been constructed along the southern boundary of the registered park and garden between it and the draft allocated sites.

Figure 4.1: View south/south-west (away from the Hall) along the main driveway towards the direction of Sandy Lane.

Figure 4.2: View south-east towards the direction of draft allocated Sites, with the arable field to the north of LA001 visible above the boundary planting as a background element, owing to the higher topography – indicated by blue arrow.

5. Summary Assessment and Mitigation

5.1 The key above ground heritage matters related to sites LA001 and LA002, are the potential impact on the wider setting, experience and appreciation of the Church of St Mary and St Peter (Grade I), Shrubland Registered Park and Garden (Grade I), and Shrubland Hall (Grade II*).

5.2 These are the relevant heritage assets identified, as agreed, as being appropriate for consideration within the wording of the draft policies for Sites LA001 and LA002, which is also informed by the assessment, considerations and discussions with the relevant stakeholders undertaken in relation to application ref. 1856/17 for site LA002.

Heritage Opportunities, Constraints and Mitigation

5.3 The combined Site is not covered by any statutory or non-statutory heritage designations (nor are there any elements likely to be identified as potential heritage assets within the Site). Accordingly, there are no direct or physical impacts arising to the identified heritage assets from the Framework Masterplan proposals requiring consideration.

5.4 Draft policies LA001 and LA002 of the emerging Joint Local Plan support appropriate development across the combined Site, which incorporates significant community infrastructure along with extensive amenity space and the delivery of new homes. These policies were drafted within a full understanding of the wider heritage context.

5.5 The change to the character of the combined Site (LA001 and LA002) that would result from the Framework Masterplan has been considered acceptable with the proposals for LA002 (under planning application ref: 1856/17) and remains acceptable and appropriate for the Framework Masterplan to the combined Site.

5.6 The accompanying Outline Landscape Appraisal (prepared by Turley, dated August 2021) identifies that the Framework Masterplan ensures a sense of separation between settlements as particularly perceived from nearby public rights of way.

Shrubland Hall and RPG 5.7 Figure 4.4 indicates that there is a limited view available towards the direction of the Site from the PRoW within the RPG, but this is only to the far eastern part of LA001. This view exists as a limited background element in views southwards across the quality of the RPG landscape towards its mature planted southern boundary / tree belt screening. The limited view towards the Site is not integral to the enjoyment of the RPG and, similarly, was not integral to the historic design intentions of the registered landscape. Thus, although development on the eastern part of the Site (LA001) has the potential to be minimally visible from this location within the parkland, this peripheral change within the wider setting would have a limited impact on the experience, appreciation and significance of the RPG.

5.8 Notwithstanding this, the Framework Masterplan proposes two important measures to mitigate the limited potential impact. These include re-positioning the north-western part of the northern boundary of LA001 and relocating the northern planting buffer along the repositioned northern boundary to LA001. The combination of these elements

will allow for a more characteristic and successfully integrated development, whilst at the same time, restricting development to the north-eastern part of LA001, to minimise the potential impact of new development in views from the RPG.

5.9 The green buffer has been carefully considered, however future more detailed assessment, including verified views assessment, may confirm that the extent of the buffer shown on the Framework Masterplan is not necessary, as there would be no impact on the view, and setting of the RPG.

5.10 The Framework Masterplan development across the combined Site also has the potential to be visible from Shrubland Hall tower. However, this would be at considerable distance which will lessen its prominence and visual impact, in combination with the designed set backs, green edges and proposed planting buffer along the northern edge of LA001. Additionally, as noted above, development would not be consistently visible in views throughout the southern edge of the park due to the changing topography and existing mature planting, which significantly limits views to the wider landscape – this would only therefore be visible in this aspect from the tower.

5.11 Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that the Framework Masterplan proposals will affect a change in the view from the tower, with the substitution of agricultural land for built form in this location within the greater surroundings of this estate. This is not considered to have a significant adverse impact on this view given the distance and prominence of existing built form of Claydon and development within the valley, together with the extensive nature of views from the tower in all directions, and arguably greater importance of those views northwards over the more formal elements of the registered park and garden.

Church of St Mary and St Peter 5.12 The Framework Masterplan for the combined Site demonstrates how the proposed scale of development can be accommodated within the Site area whilst maintaining a significant area of green space between the new built form and the church. In particular, the Framework Masterplan proposes to maintain green buffers to the eastern parcels of both LA001 and LA002, resulting in a north-south green corridor along the eastern edge of the combined Site – and maintaining the rural character of the setting of the church.

5.13 The Framework Masterplan demonstrates that the experience of the church on the approach along Church Lane from the east would remain unchanged, and the rural character of the setting to the immediate north, east and south would similarly be entirely retained as existing. The mature hedgerow/planting to the northern side of Church Lane will continue to filter views to development on the approach to the church from the west, which would further be mitigated by the heights of development in this location remaining in line with the acceptable position application ref. 1856/17.

5.14 Based on the Framework Masterplan proposals across the combined Site, the experience travelling along the historic track between the church and Shrubland Hall, which follows the bridleway along the eastern boundary of the Site, will not be affected. This is such that the experience and appreciation of these heritage assets, travelling towards them respectively, will be maintained by the green buffer and set back of developable area/development edge within the Site as shown on the Framework Masterplan.

Additional Mitigation

5.15 As indicated above, the eastern parcel of LA001 will remain undeveloped. This will help to mitigate the potential impact of new development on the experience and appreciation of Shrubland Hall from the historic trackway/PRoW adjacent to the east of the Site. Presently, views are available towards the tower of the Hall; restricting development in this eastern location (as proposed by the Framework Masterplan), will avoid new built form distracting from the appreciation, experience of and views towards the Hall tower. This will also mitigate against the potential impact of new development becoming visible from within the RPG, to maintain its important and characteristic sense of seclusion – and therefore maintain the elements of setting which contribute positively to its significance. Notwithstanding this, the visual impacts of the Framework Masterplan development would be mitigated further through landscaping along the northern boundary of the Site, with a 20m planting buffer proposed.

5.16 The proposed green buffer/corridor shown along the eastern extent of the combined Site on the Framework Masterplan, will also provide a degree of mitigation of the impacts of the proposals on the setting of the church. This will maintain the setting of the church and its experience and appreciation travelling southwards along the historic trackway/PRoW. Additionally, the retention of a corridor of open space across the full north-south axis of the eastern part of the combined Site, will maintain the sense of separation from the modern-day settlement of Claydon that characterises the church’s setting today.

5.17 Proposed mitigation will be subject to future detailed design, including the extent of the eastern green buffer, appropriately scaled built form along the eastern edge of the developable area (within the Site) and in combination with the topography, along with the retention of the existing and proposed landscaping (which can be carefully controlled).

Appendix 1: Framework Masterplan

Site Boundary

Public Right of Way

Proposed Settlement Boundary

5m Contours

New Homes

Pre & Primary School Site Green Infrastructure and Amenity Space Meadow Grassland

SuDS Proposed Spine Road with pedestrian/ cycle Proposed Secondary/Tertiary Streets

Indicative building frontages 1 Retained Hedgerows 1 Proposed Hedgerow Planting 1 Landscaping Belt (c.20m in 1 width)

0 metres 250

(1:5,000)

Appendix 2: Legislative, Policy and Guidance Context

Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 places a duty upon local planning authority in determining applications for development affecting listed buildings to pay special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting. The meaning of preservation in this context, as informed by case law, is taken to be the avoidance of harm.

It has been confirmed8 that Parliament’s intention in enacting section 66(1) was that decision-makers should give “considerable importance and weight” to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings, where “preserve” means to “to do no harm” (after South Lakeland). These duties, and the appropriate weight to be afforded to them, must be at the forefront of the decision makers mind when considering any harm that may accrue and the balancing of such harm against public benefits as required by national planning policy. It has been confirmed9 that ‘considerable importance and weight’ is not synonymous with ‘overriding importance and weight’.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2021)

The NPPF 2021 provides the Government’s national planning policy on the conservation of the historic environment. Paragraph 199 requires that great weight should be given to their conservation - where conservation remains defined as the process of maintaining and managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains and, and where appropriate, enhances its significance. This reflects the requirements of the relevant statutory duties of the Planning Act 1990 and the paragraph further reflects the affirmation provided by recent case law that great weight must be given, irrespective of the degree of harm to significance, to the preservation of heritage assets.

Paragraph 200 requires that harm to or loss of significance of a designated heritage asset should have clear and convincing justification. It confirms that substantial harm to or loss of a designated heritage asset should be exceptional in the case of grade II listed buildings or park and gardens; and, be wholly exceptional in the case of more highly graded heritage assets.

Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significance of) a designated heritage asset, paragraph 201 states that local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial

8 HMSO (1990) Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Limited and (1) East Northamptonshire District Council (2) English Heritage (3) National Trust (4) The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Governments, Case No: C1/2013/0843, 18 February 2014 9 Land at Razor’s Farm, Chineham, Basingstoke RG24 8LS. Appeal Reference: APP/H1705/A/13/2205929, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government letter 22nd September 2014, paragraph 21

harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply:

a) the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and

b) no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and

c) conservation by grant-funding or some form of not for profit, charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and

d) the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.

Paragraph 202 deals with instances of where development proposals will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset. Harm in this category should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

By contrast, paragraph 203 requires that the effects of proposals that directly or indirectly affect the significance of non-designated heritage assets to be taken into account in the determination of such applications requiring a balanced judgement to be reached weighing the scale of harm and significance of the heritage asset.

Paragraph 206 relates to opportunities for new development within (inter alia) the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance – noting that proposals that preserve or better reveal elements that contribute positively to the asset should be treated favourably.

Local Development Plan

It is noted that Babergh and Mid Suffolk are progressing a new Joint Local Plan. However, as it stands, the present Development Plan for Mid Suffolk comprises:

• The saved policies of the Mid Suffolk Local Plan, adopted 1998 (1992-2006);

• The policies of the Mid Suffolk Local Plan First Alteration, adopted July 2006 (2006 – 2011);

• The Mid Suffolk Core Strategy, adopted September 2008 (2007 – 2025); and

• The Mid Suffolk Core Strategy Focused Review, adopted December 2012 (extending the plan period to 2027).

Policies of particular relevance, in heritage terms, include:

• Core Strategy 2008 Policy CS 5 Mid Suffolk’s Environment

• Mid Suffolk Local Plan 1998 saved policy HB1 Protection of Historic Buildings

• Mid Suffolk Local Plan 1998 saved policy HB7 Protecting Gardens and Parkland of Historic Interest

Joint Local Plan 5.18 The Joint Local Plan Preferred Options Regulation 19 document was published in November 2020. In that document, the combined Site is identified to be allocated for development under draft policies LA001 and LA002. The part II requirements of these draft allocation policies directly relate to heritage a:

• LA001 – Allocation: Land east of Norwich Road, Barham

‒ II. Development is designed to conserve and where appropriate enhance the Church of St Mary (Grade I), Garden Wall and gateway (Grade II), Shrubland Hall (Grade II*) and Registered Park and Garden (Grade I) and their settings, including avoiding access via the historic trackway to the east of the site and ensuring the church remains a prominent building with its rural character setting maintained

• LA002 – Allocation: Land north of Church Lane, Barham

‒ II. Development is designed to conserve and where appropriate enhance the Church of St Mary (Grade I), Garden Wall and gateway (Grade II), Shrubland Hall (Grade II*) and Registered Park and Garden (Grade I), and Henry VIII Farmhouse (Grade II) and their settings, including avoiding access via the historic trackway to the east of the site and ensuring the church remains a prominent building with its rural character setting maintained. Development should be set back from the eastern edge of site and the south- western edge along Norwich Road.

Best Practice Guidance/Advice

• National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) (2019).

• Department of Culture, Media and Sport Circular: Principles of Selection for Listing Buildings 2018.

• Historic England Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision Taking in the Historic Environment 2015.

• Historic England, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting of Heritage Assets 2017.

• Historic England: Advice Note 12: Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in Heritage Assets 2019.

Turley Office 8 Quy Court Colliers Lane Stow-cum-Quy Cambridge CB25 9AU

T 01223 810990

Appendix 4: Outline Landscape Appraisal to Inform the Framework Masterplan

Outline Landscape Appraisal Land East of Norwich Road, Barham

August 2021

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Relevant Planning Policy Context and Designations 3

3. Summary Landscape Appraisal 6

4. Summary Visual Appraisal 12

5. Landscape Opportunities and Constraints and Key Development Principles 20

6. Summary of Potential Landscape and Visual Effects 23

7. Summary 26

Appendix 1: Framework Masterplan 28

Isabel Jones [email protected] Client Pigeon Investment Management Limited Our reference PIGC3034

10 August 2021

1. Introduction

1.1 This Outline Landscape Appraisal has been prepared by Turley Landscape and VIA on behalf of Pigeon Investment Management Ltd on behalf of Pigeon Capital Management 2 Ltd (‘Pigeon’) and the Cutting Family (‘the Landowners’) in relation to the draft allocation of Site LA001 in the Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Joint Local Plan Pre-Submission (Regulation 19) Document. Site LA001 (“the Site” – see Figure 1.1.) relates to a parcel of land to the east of Norwich Road, Barham.

1.2 Site LA001 sits alongside ‘Land North of Church Lane, Barham’ which is a draft mixed- use allocation (‘Site LA002’). A hybrid planning application (Ref: 1856/17) was submitted by Pigeon for Site LA002 in May 2017 for up to 269 new homes including affordable homes together with associated access and spine road including works to Church Lane, land for shop(s)/ community uses, amenity space including an extension to the Church of St Mary’s grounds and reserved site for Pre-School and two form entry Primary School. LA002 has the benefit of a Resolution to Grant Planning Permission, subject to the signing of a S106 and conditions made by Mid Suffolk District Council.

1.4 The Sites are located to the north side of Church Lane which borders the northern edge of Claydon, a settlement situated approximately 4 miles from Ipswich. Although adjoining Claydon, the draft allocation sites are technically located within the village of Barham which lies in fragmented pockets of development to the north-east and north of the Sites.

1.5 The purpose of this Outline Landscape Appraisal is to inform a revised development concept plan for LA001 informing a revised northern boundary and its integration with the illustrative layout of LA002. A ‘Framework Masterplan’ has been produced for the two sites combined, to demonstrate how these sites can be delivered as a comprehensive and coordinated scheme. The Framework Masterplan is included at Appendix 1.

Site description

1.6 Site LA001 comprises a series of arable fields and a field of meadow and scrub to the east. The boundaries of the Site are partially open and partially contained by hedgerows and trees. Site LA002 lies directly to the south and adjoins the existing settlement boundary of Claydon with part Barham. It is intended that the settlement boundary for Claydon with part Barham would extend to the north to encompass the two site allocations as illustrated on Figure 1.1. The settlement area to the north is known as Barham – Sandy Lane.

Figure 1.1: Extract from Mid Suffolk and Babergh District Council Joint Local Plan – Pre-Submission (Reg 19) – November 2020: Site allocations identified in red with purple line indicating new settlement boundaries

Surveys

1.7 A preliminary desk study was undertaken to establish the physical components of the Appraisal Site and its surroundings along with potential visual receptors. Ordnance Survey (OS) maps and aerial photography were utilised to identify these features. Further to studies undertake in relation to LA002, a field study was undertaken by a chartered landscape architect from Turley Landscape and VIA in July 2021, during which the visibility was good. Features of the Appraisal Site and the surrounding area were identified and verified along with the visual receptors previously established. The field study also involved travelling through parts of the study area and producing a working photographic record of key views and features.

Methodology

1.8 The appraisal is carried out in accordance with the principles set out in Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd edition, (Landscape Institute and Institute for Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013); An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Natural England, 2014); and, Landscape Character Assessment: Technical Information Note 08/2015 (Landscape Institute, 2016).

2 2. Relevant Planning Policy Context and Designations

Designations

2.1 There are no landscape designations covering the Appraisal Site. The landscape to the immediate west of Norwich Road (c.10m to the west of the Site at its closest point), associated with the Gipping Valley, was identified as a Special Landscape Area (SLA) in the adopted Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998) (Policies CL2, Prop.6 and Prop.7). The parkland at Shrubland Hall to the north of Sandy Lane is also a SLA. Policy CL2 states that particular care will be taken to safeguard landscape quality, and where development does occur it should be sensitively designed with high standards of layout, materials and landscaping. The SLAs were originally designated in the County Structure Plan and defined as follows:

• River valleys which still possess traditional grazing meadows with their hedgerows, dykes, and associated flora and fauna;

• Areas of breckland including remaining heathland, and the characteristic lines and belts of Scots Pine;

• Historic parklands and gardens;

• Other areas of countryside where undulating topography and natural vegetation, particularly broadleaved woodland, combine to produce an area of special landscape quality and character.

2.2 The mature tree belt to the west of Norwich Road and the fragmented western site boundary vegetation provides visual and physical separation between the Site and the Gipping Valley SLA. The Site forms part of the valley sides associated with the River Gipping, but is not part of the grazing meadow landscape that forms the SLA. It is an undulating landscape, but is not considered to possess the distinctive qualities described above that would elevate it above the ordinary. The Site is therefore not considered to contribute to the special qualities of the SLA.

2.3 The SLA designation indicates landscape value at a local level to the immediate context of the Site but the SLA designations are not intended to be retained in the emerging Joint Local Plan. However, consideration will be given later in the appraisal as to whether development within the Site would affect the special qualities of the SLA.

2.4 Within the surrounding area, there are a series of listed buildings including the Henry VII Farmhouse (grade II) to the south; the Church of St Mary (grade I) to the southeast; the garden wall and gateway, parallel and adjacent to Church Lane and 20 north of Barham Hall (grade II) also to the southeast; and, the Sorrel Horse Inn (grade II), Shrubland Hall Lodge (grade II) and gateway and screen walls 2m west of Shrubland Hall Lodge (grade II) all to the northwest of the Site.

3 2.5 The Shrubland Hall Registered Park and Garden and SLA is located to the north of the Site (c.500m away at its closest point) and includes a cluster of grade II and grade II* listed buildings including Shrubland Hall itself. Shrubland Park is also a SLA. Detailed information relating to these heritage assets is provided in the Heritage Appraisal by Turley Heritage.

Relevant Planning Policy Summary

2.6 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out a hierarchical approach to landscape protection. Paragraph 174 states that the planning system should ‘contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment’ by a number of things including:

a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes…(in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan);

b) recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

2.7 No specific guidance is provided on what constitutes a ‘valued landscape’. However, paragraph 175 states that ‘Plans should: distinguish between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites; allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework; take a strategic approach to maintaining and enhancing networks of habitats and green infrastructure; and plan for the enhancement of natural capital at a catchment or landscape scale across local authority boundaries’.

2.8 Mid Suffolk and Babergh District Councils are progressing towards a new Joint Local Plan. Once adopted, the Joint Local Plan will replace the Babergh Core Strategy (2014), Babergh Local Plan (2006), Mid Suffolk Core Strategy and Focused Review (2008) and Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998) and First Alteration to the Mid Suffolk Local Plan (2006).

2.9 The Joint Local Plan Pre-Submission (Regulation 19) Document allocates Site LA001 for around 325 dwellings, whilst LA002 for around 270 dwellings together with provision of land for a 2 form entry Primary School and early years provision. The emerging Joint Local Plan states development within Site LA001 shall be expected to comply with a series of principles. Those considered relevant to this LVA are listed below, with modifications recommended by Pigeon incorporated as set out in their response to the Regulation 19 Consultation:

• Development is designed to conserve and where appropriate enhance the Church of St Mary (Grade I), Garden Wall and gateway (Grade II), Shrubland Hall (Grade II*) and Registered Park and Garden (Grade I) and their settings, including avoiding access via the historic trackway to the east of the site and ensuring the church remains a prominent building. Development should be set back from the eastern edge of site; • Existing vegetation on the eastern edge of the site should be retained for screening; • Important hedgerows should be retained; • Rights of Way within the vicinity of the site should be enhanced; and, • Internal footways provided within the development and linked with adjoining site (LA002), and the provision of bus stops.

4 2.10 The Policies regarding SLAs within the adopted Mid Suffolk Local Plan are proposed to be replaced with emerging Policy LP19 - Landscape. This policy sets out guidance for protecting and enhancing landscape character. Where significant landscape and visual impacts are likely, the policy states that a LVIA or Landscape Appraisal should be prepared and should ‘identify ways of avoiding, reducing and mitigating any adverse effects and opportunities for enhancement’.

2.11 The Joint Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Landscape Guidelines (2015) are intended to improve the quality of development in the countryside to ensure it integrates positively with the existing character. The descriptions of landscape character are summarised in Section 3. The guidelines also identify a number of overarching landscape features which are important to the underlying landscape character of the districts when considered as a whole. The Council will support development that safeguards, restores or enhances these features. The following features are relevant to Site LA001 and surrounding context:

• Arable / pastoral landscape; • Network of Rural Lanes; • Hedgerows and Woodlands; • Plateaux and River Valleys; and, • Distinctive built heritage of Churches, Timber Framed buildings and Farmsteads.

5 3. Summary Landscape Appraisal

Landscape Character Context

3.1 The landscape character context is set out in the Joint Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Landscape Guidelines (2015) and the Suffolk County Council Landscape Character Assessment (2010). The district scale Landscape Guidelines has used the Landscape Character Assessment areas as defined by Suffolk County Council and then included information and detail to ensure each Landscape Character Area (LCA) clearly relates to Babergh and Mid Suffolk.

3.2 Both Site LA001 and LA002 fall within the ‘Rolling Estate Farmland’ Landscape Type as identified in the Suffolk County Council Landscape Character Assessment (2010). This is described as a ‘valley side landscape of deep loams, with parklands plantations and Ancient Woodlands’.

Figure 3.1: Landscape character map taken from the Suffolk County Council Landscape Character Assessment (2010): Light brown colour indicates the Rolling Estate Farmland character type

3.3 The identified key characteristics of the Rolling Estate Farmlands are set out below with features of particular relevance to Site LA001 underlined:

• Gently sloping valley sides and plateau fringes

6 • Generally deep loamy soils

• An organic pattern of fields modified by later realignment

• Important foci for early settlement

• Coverts and plantations with some ancient woodlands

• Landscape parks with a core of wood pasture

• Location for mineral workings and related activity, especially in the Gipping valley

3.4 The Suffolk Landscape Character Assessment identifies the following land management guidelines:

• Reinforce the historic pattern of sinuous field boundaries.

• Recognise localised areas of late enclosure hedges when restoring and planting hedgerows.

• Maintain and increase the stock of hedgerow trees.

• Maintain the area of woodland cover.

• Maintain and restore historic parklands and their features.

3.5 The district scale Landscape Guidelines identifies further key characteristics for ‘LCA 15: Rolling Estate Farmlands’ at a finer grain. The key characteristics relating to landscape character and settlement character are set out below with features of particular relevance to Site LA001 underlined.

• Enclosure pattern can be complex with slopes dissected by short streams and consisting of small woodland plantations and parklands. The Grade I registered parkland around Coddenham is extremely significant.

• The sense of estate ownership over much of this rolling landscape, with ancient woodland blocks on the edges of the landscape and well maintained areas of hedges and trees is still very strong.

• The valley–side locations of this landscape type, with their combination of access to water and arable potential not only attracted settlement from an early date but also industrial uses with the sand and gravel resources of the Gipping valley extensively exploited leaving a series of large lakes including Broomfield Pit workings in Barham. The outcrops of chalk on the valley sides were also exploited resulting in pits in Claydon and Coddenham.

• The Rolling Estate Farmlands support villages, hamlets and farmsteads and the spatial relationship of this landscape to the valley floor means that any change and or development would be visually significant.

7 3.6 The aim for this character area is to retain, enhance and restore the distinctive landscape and settlement character. The following objectives and key design principles are also identified.

Objectives

• To maintain and enhance the landscape areas and the distinctive settlement pattern.

• To safeguard the woodland plantations and Parkland areas.

• To safeguard and enhance the estate features.

Key Design Principles

• Maintain the distinctive settlement pattern, ensuring the sense of separation between settlements is maintained.

• Reinforce and recreate the estate features in new developments.

• Plantation woodlands, parklands and old existing hedges are to be protected and maintained within this landscape character

Landscape Features

3.7 The following features have been identified as contributing to both the landscape character of the Site and its surrounding area. They also influence the visibility of the Appraisal Site from the surrounding area.

Site Features 3.8 Site LA001 comprises typically arable fields with varied levels of vegetation to the Site boundaries. The irregularly shaped eastern field is occupied by grassland and scrub. The Site is located directly to the east of Norwich Road which connects Claydon with Barham – Sandy Lane. To the north are further arable fields; to the east the boundary follows public bridleway which runs along the plateau edge between Sandy Lane and Church Lane; and, to the south are further arable fields within Site LA002.

3.9 The boundaries of the Site are delineated by the following features:

• To the north, the boundary is partially open with the arable field extending beyond the Site boundary. To the eastern side of the northern boundary is a native hedgerow with intermittent trees. • To the west, the boundary vegetation with Norwich Road is fragmented with intermittent tree belts and unmanaged hedgerow. There is a vegetated bank to the edge of the arable field with the landform rising up which provides a degree of containment to the Appraisal Site during summer, where tree planting is sparse. • To the east, the curving boundary running along the public bridleway is formed by a post and wire fence with occasional clumps of bramble. To the northeast corner, a scrubby hedgerow separates the Site from an elevated

8 rectangular field occupied by scrub and meadow which was potentially formerly associated with the gravel pits to the east. • To the south, the boundary with Site LA002 is partially open and partly follows remnant field boundary hedgerows. Sites LA001 and LA002 occupy parts of the same field to the western side with no physical boundary between the two.

Topography 3.10 The Site is located on a gently sloping valley side which broadly falls from east to west towards the River Gipping. The lowest part of the Site runs along the southwest boundary with Norwich Road. The topography is locally undulating with the most elevated parts located to the northeast and southeast corners (Figure 3.2) which allow for some panoramic cross valley views.

Figure 3.2: View from southeast corner of Site looking west across Gipping Valley: Easternmost field of Site LA001 to foreground of view (right of fenceline)

3.11 In the surrounding area, the landform reaches a plateau to the north and northeast of the Site where there is a gravel extraction pit. Rolling agricultural fields are seen on both sides of the River Gipping. In views across the Site, elevated land to the west of Great Blakenham, which includes a large recycling plant, is visible. Built form tends to be located on the lower valley sides.

Land Use 3.12 The majority of Site LA001 is arable farmland. The easternmost field is not currently under crop production, occupied by scrub and grassland. Land uses in the surrounding area include residential (both existing and planned), the parish church, further arable farmland and horse paddocks, light industrial uses and recycling plant and areas of woodland and parkland. There is also a medical centre housed in a temporary Portakabin type structure to the south of Barham Church Lane which was closed at the time of the site visit. The nearest convenience store is a Co-op Foodstore located c.700m to the south of the Appraisal Site.

Settlement Pattern and Built form 3.13 The Site is located between two contrasting areas of settlement. The village of Claydon has developed from its historic core associated with Station Road, Ipswich Road and

9 Church Lane (associated with St Peter’s Church). A review of historic OS maps demonstrate a formerly linear settlement which gradually extended north along Ipswich Road. The residential areas closest to Site LA001 were built in the 1960s when the settlement pattern significantly changed spreading eastwards along the southern side of Barham Church Lane (leading to the Church of St Mary).

3.14 The settlement area to the north of the Appraisal Site is part of the village of Barham which is a dispersed settlement with clusters of residential properties and greens located to the northwest and northeast of the Site, the latter located c.900m away to the eastern side of Sandy Lane Pit. Barham – Sandy Lane, which is closest to the Site to the northwest, includes a small number of residential streets extending to the east and west of Norwich Road. There is a cluster of recent development associated with Sturgeon Way. A row of redundant chicken sheds extend east from Sturgeon Way but are separated from the wider residential areas by a dense row of conifers. Barham Manor (grade II) and the Church of St Mary (grade I) are also associated with Barham village.

Figure 3.3: OS map demonstrating the surrounding areas of settlement to the south, north and east of Site LA001 indicative boundary marked in red

3.15 There is no built form within the Site itself. The nearby residential areas comprise a mix of typical post war bungalows and two storey semi-detached properties and short terraces. A more recent development is located to the southeast at Hereford Drive comprising two and two and a half storey detached and semi-detached dwellings. The typical building materials include red and buff brick with intermittent coloured rendered facades.

3.16 The grade II listed Henry VIII farmhouse located at the junction of Church Lane and Norwich Road is a double fronted, timber framed red brick farmhouse with end

10 chimneys at both gables. Other more distinctive properties include a number of cottages along Norwich Road. Noticeable buildings which contribute to views from the surrounding rural landscape are Shrubland Hall and the church of St Mary both of which have towers that are visible on the skyline, particularly during winter months.

Vegetation and Open Space 3.17 The Appraisal Site contains a number of linear native hedgerows with trees including along parts of the north and south boundaries. There is a line of mature trees separating part of the easternmost field from the central field. The vegetation along the western boundary with Norwich Road is fragmented with the majority of the Site boundary enclosed by an unmanaged hedgerow and lines of trees present to the corners of the Site and wider stretches of the road. Tree and shrub species within the Site and surrounding context include Elder, Hawthorn, Ash, Field Maple, Wych Elm, English Oak and Cherry.

3.18 In the wider landscape, the pattern of field boundary hedgerows with trees continues. There are also dense areas of woodland and plantation belts associated with the River Gipping and the parkland at Shrubland Hall and Barham Hall. To the east of Shrubland Park, there are a series of plantations including Oak Wood / Broomwalk Covert which is an Ancient and Semi-Natural Woodland. These features often combine to create wooded horizon lines and enclose parts of the surrounding landscape.

Access 3.19 There are no public rights of way running across the Appraisal Site and no existing vehicular access points. A five bar field gate provides farm access into the arable fields from Norwich Road within Site LA002. Norwich Road, which runs parallel to the western boundary is part of National Cycle Route 51.

3.20 A network of public rights of way provide access from surrounding residential areas to the wider countryside. This includes bridleways (Refs: E120/017/O & E120/018/O) which run alongside part of the northeast boundary and links Sandy Lane to the north with Barham Church Lane to the south. To the north of the Site, public footpaths (Refs: E120/013/O & E120/016/O) extend northeast from Norwich Road and connect with Barham Green.

11 4. Summary Visual Appraisal

4.1 The visibility of Sites LA001 and LA002 from the surrounding area was established through both desktop analysis of the surrounding area and by confirming on site the localised screening effect of the landform, vegetation and built form.

Approximate Zone of Visual Influence 4.2 The visibility of the combined Site in the surrounding landscape varies due to the sloping and undulating topography and the presence of boundary vegetation. Key elements that provide visual containment to the Appraisal Site and within the local area include: the residential built form within Claydon to the south; the conifer tree belt associated with the redundant chicken sheds to the north; the mature tree belts and plantation woodland associated with Shrubland Park also to the north; the plateau landform and Queech Wood to the east; intermittent trees and hedgerow alongside Norwich Road to the west along with mature trees associated with the River Gipping; and, mature trees and woodland associated with Barham Hall and the Church of St Mary to the south. These elements provide a degree of enclosure to the Site and restrict its visibility from parts of the surrounding area.

4.3 From elevated parts of the Site there are open views across the Gipping Valley to the east facing valley slopes. The Site is therefore likely to be visible from parts of this wider landscape. However, there is limited public access in this area, and views are restricted by the recycling plant, industrial buildings, residential properties and dense plantation belts within Great Blakenham and Little Blakenham.

Key Views and Visual Receptors 4.4 The key receptors which have been identified as having existing views of the Appraisal Site and/or with views with potential to be affected if development were introduced on the site are:

• Road users and pedestrians on Norwich Road; • Users of public bridleway E120/018/O (which borders the eastern boundary) and E120/017/O; • Users of public footpaths E120/013/O and E120/016/O (to the north of the Site); • Users of public right of way network crossing Shrubland Hall (Registered Park and Garden); • Road users and pedestrians on Sandy Lane; • Visitors to Church of St Mary; and, • Road users and pedestrians on Barham Church Lane and residential streets to the south.

4.5 The key views towards the Appraisal Site from the above receptors are briefly described in the following paragraphs.

4.6 Road users, pedestrians and cyclists on Norwich Road – When leaving Claydon, there are glimpsed views of the southern edge of Site LA001 seen behind Site LA002 (as demonstrated in Figure 4.1). There are then open views across Site LA002 to the

12 southern edge of Site LA001 due to there being no physical boundary between the two. The wider extent of the Site is obscured due to the rolling topography. The proposed development within Site LA002 with a resolution to grant planning permission would change these views, introducing built form and open space to the background and obscuring the wider rural landscape.

4.7 When travelling adjacent to the western boundary of the Site, roadside vegetation including intermittent tree belts, typically obscure the wider landscape within the Site (as demonstrated by Figure 4.2). Where hedgerows are less dense, filtered views would be possible into the Site, although due to topography, only the western edge would be visible. Moving further north on the road close to the junction with Pesthouse Lane (as demonstrated by Figure 4.3), breaks in vegetation allow views towards the northern edge of the Site including the elevated northeast corner of the Site. Within the settlement areas, views towards the Site are obscured by residential properties. The intermittent views across arable fields contribute to the sense of separation between Claydon and Barham – Sandy Lane.

Figure 4.1: View north towards Appraisal Site from Norwich Road at the junction with Barham Church Lane

Figure 4.2: Typical views from Norwich Road as it passes along the western boundary of Appraisal Site

Figure 4.3: View southeast from Norwich Road at junction with Pesthouse Lane towards the northern edge of the Appraisal Site including the elevated northeast corner

4.8 Users of public bridleway E120/018/O (which borders the eastern boundary) and E120/017/O – Public right of way that connects Sandy Lane with Barham Church Lane. Typically running along an elevated part of the valley slopes, to the edge of the plateau. The bridleway provides views towards the Church of St Mary and Shrubland Hall (as demonstrated by Figure 4.4). The elevated nature of the route allows for some

14 panoramic cross valley views to the west with short stretches enclosed by vegetation to either side (as demonstrated by Figure 4.5). These views are influenced by development to the western side of the river including the recycling plant. The visibility of the Site varies due to the rolling topography and presence of vegetation to the west of the path. An area of platuea land occupied by scrub which the Site wraps around obscures parts of the Site (as demonstrated by Figure 4.6). A tree belt within the Site towards the northeast edge also provides some containment to the Site in views from the bridleway with the facing valley side seen on the horizon.

Figure 4.4: Views from public bridleway E120/018/O towards the Church of St Mary (left) and Shrubland Hall (right)

Figure 4.5: View across the Gipping Valley from elevated parts of the bridleway E120/018/O residential dwellings industrial areas at Great Blakenham and opposite valley slopes seen in the distance

Figure 4.6: View across easternmost field of Appraisal Site from bridleway E120/018/O demonstrating the influence of topography and existing vegetation and increased containment of the lower lying western parts of the Site

4.9 Users of public footpaths E120/013/O and E120/016/O (to the north of the Site) – Public right of way leading northeast from Norwich Road, running along the southern edge of Barham – Sandy Lane. The more elevated eastern side of the path provides open views southwest across agricultural land to the western side of the River Gipping. The industrial areas and recycling plant to the south of Great Blakenham is seen to the background of views and has an urbanising influence (as demonstrated by Figure 4.7). In these views, the Site is partially obscured by the rolling topography and field hedgerows. Travelling further southwest on the path, views are possible of the northern boundary of the Site which runs along the spine of the hill. Part of the northern boundary is open allowing views of the arable field within the Site with glimpsed views of mature trees and houses on Barham Church Lane seen in the distance (as demonstrated by Figure 4.8).

Figure 4.7: View looking southwest towards Appraisal Site from public footpath E120/016/O, recycling plant seen in distance

Figure 4.8: View south from public footpath E120/013/O across Appraisal Site with edge of Claydon glimpsed in the background

4.10 Users of public right of way network crossing Shrubland Park (Registered Park and Garden) – The footpaths partly run through dense plantation belts. There is a central clearing to the south of the grade II* listed Shrubland Hall where views become more open looking south across open parkland with trees (as demonstrated by Figure 4.9). To the background of the view, the elevated arable field to the northeast of the Site is noticeable and the mature tree belt and hedgerow within the Site is also seen. The elevated parts of the easternmost field within the Site and parts of Site LA002 are also visible with mature trees associated with St Mary’s Church and Barham Hall seen behind. Development currently proposed within Site LA002 would be glimpsed in these views.

Figure 4.9: View towards Appraisal Site from public right of way crossing Shrubland Hall Registered Park and Garden, elevated field to north of Site noticeable to background of view

4.11 Road users and pedestrians on Sandy Lane – Views from Sandy Lane are partially enclosed residential properties and vegetation within gardens. The mature tree belts and fencing to the edge of Shrubland Hall parkland contribute to the estate character of views. Once past the residential properties, occasional breaks in roadside vegetation allow views across arable fields towards the Site. The field adjacent to the Site is more prominent in these views, with the northern boundary hedgerow seen on the skyline. The tower of St Mary’s church is also glimpsed on the skyline to the background of

17 views. During summer, from the majority of the road views are contained by roadside vegetation. On the corner of Sandy Lane with Broomwalk Plantation and the bridleway (as demonstrated by Figure 4.10), views extend towards the hedgerow on the northern boundary of the Site which is glimpsed on the skyline. The wider extent of the Site is obscured due to the rolling topography. Glimpsed in the distance on the horizon are mature trees on Barham Church Lane and the recycling plant with tall metal chimney.

Figure 4.10: View towards Appraisal Site from Sandy Lane where it meets bridleway E120/017/O and Broomwalk Plantation

4.12 Visitors to Church of St Mary – The Church of St Mary is enclosed by mature trees and a native hedgerow. As a result of this, the surrounding context is often contained from views, particularly in summer. There are glimpsed views out towards the east facing slopes of the Gipping River Valley. There are glimpsed views into the adjacent arable field to the west which is in Site LA002. The Site itself, is not visible in these views (as demonstrated by Figure 4.11).

Figure 4.11: View west towards Appraisal Site from the Church of St Mary, Appraisal Site obscured by vegetation and Site LA002

4.13 Road users and pedestrians on Barham Church Lane and residential streets to the south – Views from Barham Church Lane are typically enclosed by field boundary

18 vegetation, particularly to the eastern end of the lane (as demonstrated by Figure 4.12). There are occasional glimpsed views into the adjacent arable fields within Site LA002 which contribute to the rural character of the area. Further west along the lane, close to the entrances to Old Rectory Close and Kirby Rise, there are views of the rolling arable fields to the north of Barham Church Lane within Site LA002. From parts of the road, the tower of Shrubland Hall (grade II*) and St Mary’s Church (grade I) are visible. The rolling topography of Site LA002 obscures the majority of the landscape within Site LA001 within these views, with the exception of the mature tree belt towards the east of the Site (as demonstrated by Figure 4.13). Similar views of the rolling arable fields are possible from parts of Kirby Rise and the residential properties that face north from Barham Church Lane.

Figure 4.12: View west from Barham Church Lane, close to entrance to the Church of St Mary, views contained by roadside vegetation

Figure 4.13: View north towards Appraisal Site from Barham Church Lane at the junction with Kirby Rise, majority of Site obscured due to topography

19 5. Landscape Opportunities and Constraints and Key Development Principles

5.1 The key landscape opportunities and constraints which have been identified following the initial landscape and visual appraisal of Site LA001 in combination with LA002 can be summarised as:

• The combined Site forms part of a larger area of undeveloped landscape which separates the northern edge of Claydon and the southern edge of part of the dispersed village of Barham. Whilst the extent of the gap would need to be reduced to accoomdate development, a sense of separation between these settlement areas should be maintained;

• The combined Site is not covered by any landscape designations and is a draft allocation in the Local Plan. It is representative of some of the typical characteristics of ‘LCA 15: Rolling Estate Farmlands’ as identified in the district and county landscape character assessment. However, sensitive characteristics such as historic parkland and Ancient Woodland are not present within the combined Site;

• There are some open views across parts of the combined Site from public rights of way to the north and east, and Norwich Road to the west. There are views across the eastern edge of the Site towards Shrubland Tower (grade II*) and St Marys Church (grade I). The elevated slopes to the eastern edge of the Site are visible from localised parts of Shrubland Hall (Registered Park and Garden) including from stretches of the public rights of way that cross it;

• Existing hedgerow boundaries are in variable condition with some that would benefit from reinforcement and additional hedgerow trees;

• The eastern side of the site is considered to be potentially more sensitive than the western side due to its glimpsed visual connections with Shrubland Hall parkland and St Mary’s Church and open views across it from public bridleway (Refs: E120/017/O and E120/018/O) which is an historic trackway;

• The rolling topography of the Site and surrounding landscape provides a degree of containment to areas within the Site and opportunities for landscape mitigation measures that reflect characteristics of the wider landscape; and,

• The Site is located within walking distance to local shops within Claydon and a new primary school and community hub is proposed in Site LA002.

5.2 Overall, from a landscape and visual perspective it is considered that Site LA001 has potential to accommodate development in the majority of the Site as part of a coordinated masterplan approach with Site LA002. The easternmost field is impacted upon by the visual links this area has with surrounding heritage assets and adjacent public rights of way, which the design of the scheme will need to take into account.

20 5.3 Based on this LVA and that from the accompanying Heritage Appraisal new development should ideally be precluded on the eastern parcel of land, nearest the Public Right of Way (PRoW) because of its more elevated topography and glimpsed views between Shrublands Hall and the Church at Barham. If it is concluded that the glimpsed views are to be maintained, then Pigeon would like to put forward to the Inspectors and the Council the option to realign the northern boundary of LA001. As with the scheme progressed on LA002, the future layout of LA001 can identify individual areas where new homes will be designed to respond to the characteristics of that part of the site and its surrounding area.

5.4 The amended northern boundary has been identified through considering the sensitivity of the landscape to the north of Site LA002 and the contribution to the sense of separation between Claydon and Barham – Sandy Lane. The boundary follows the existing established hedgerow to the north eastern side and extends to the northwest, slightly set back from the 25m contour line. This would maintain a clear agricultural gap between the two settlement areas whilst ensuring that the eastern part of the site is used for amenity space and the arable land to the northeast (outside of the Site) is kept free from development.

5.5 An Illustrative Framework Masterplan prepared by Turley Design is provided in Appendix 1 which responds to the landscape opportunities and constraints identified above and would accommodate up to 595 residential dwellings with associated open space across Sites LA001 and LA002. This masterplan seeks to provide a coherent approach to development across the two draft allocation sites (LA001 and LA002).

5.6 The Framework Masterplan across the combined Site is based on the following key development principles:

• Easternmost fields to be kept free from built development to preserve views across the Site towards the Church of St Mary and views to and from Shrubland Hall whilst setting development back from the public right of way running along the plateau edge to the east;

• Open corridor of landscape on elevated slopes and surrounding the church of St Mary maintained with development set on lower lying land that has greater containment due to existing mature tree belt to the eastern development edge within Site LA001, vegetation on Norwich Road and the rolling topography. Corridor of open space reflects approach taken for the planning application for Site LA002.

• Vehicular access to the Site LA001 provided from Norwich Road, with road located to avoid existing mature trees;

• New and reinforced tree belt (minimum 20m in width) created along new northern and eastern edge of developable area, providing containment to development within the Site, reinforcing part of the hedgerow structure and forming robust edge to the settlement. This sinuous plantation would reflect existing characteristics of the landscape and enclosure to the new settlement edge to preserve visual separation;

21 • Street tree planting incorporated within the layout to increase tree canopy cover and break up areas of built development;

• Positive frontage and open space corridors created along the northern and eastern edges of the development which face towards open countryside;

• Open arable field to the north of Site would be retained to maintain separation between Claydon and Barham – Sandy Lane;

• Open space located within easternmost fields which provide vantage points for cross valley views and views towards nearby heritage assets; and,

• Sinuous landscape structure reinforced with existing hedgerows retained and enhanced and new plantation belts introduced that reflect existing landscape character.

22 6. Summary of Potential Landscape and Visual Effects

6.1 An initial assessment has been undertaken of potential landscape and visual effects if development (comprising a residential development that incorporates buildings of a maximum of two and a half storeys and which incorporates the mitigation measures described in section 5) were introduced on the Site. The cumulative effects of the masterplan as a whole within the combined Site are considered.

Landscape effects

6.2 Moderate/minor adverse effects on landscape character within the site itself arising from the introduction of residential development in an area which is currently an open valley side. Development would reflect the existing settlement pattern, and that proposed in Site LA002, and would be sensitive to the rural context and landscape character whilst seeking to optimise developable land in accordance with the NPPF.

6.3 Localised adverse effect on tree cover within the combined Site in the short term. Selective removal of vegetation, informed by an arboricultural survey, would be required to accommodate development. However, replacement planting would increase tree cover overall in the long term.

6.4 Beneficial effects arising from the provision of new public open space within areas that are not currently publically accessible. Provides opportunities for views that would contribute to place-making.

6.5 Beneficial effects arising from improved management of trees and hedgerows to improve the quality of a key characteristic of the landscape and provide ecological enhancements. The development would need to achieve biodiversity net gain which would be informed by further ecological analysis. The areas identified for public open space and green infrastructure offer opportunities for habitat creation and strengthening wildlife corridors.

6.6 Moderate/minor adverse effect on ‘LCA 15: Rolling Estate Farmlands’, reducing to minor following the establishment of landscape proposals. Effects would be limited to the immediate area around the Appraisal Site and negligible or no impact on the wider character area. Development would need to be set within a mature landscape framework to reduce the impact of change. However, due to the surrounding topography, mature vegetation and existing patterns of development within the valley landscape, effects on the wider landscape character would be limited.

6.7 Reduction in the physical separation between the settlement areas of Claydon and Barham – Sandy Lane as a result of development extending further north. Separation between the settlement areas would be maintained through the preservation of open farmland. The sense of separation would continue to be experienced in views when travelling along Norwich Road and public rights of way to the north with a clear break in settlement visible. In particular, the field to the northeast of the Site which is more prominent in views, would be maintained as open. The combination of strategic

23 planting belts that reflect the existing landscape character and framework of field patterns, and the rolling topography would create a robust settlement edge to Claydon. The resultant effect would be in keeping with the field patterns in the area and the overall landscape character.

6.8 Negligible effect on the landscape character of the adjacent Gipping Valley SLA and Shrubland Park SLA. Whilst the Proposed Development would be glimpsed from parts of these Special Landscape Areas, it would not detract from their special qualities which relate to the historic parkland characteristics, significant areas of woodland a lines of Scots Pine and the traditional grazing meadows associated with the Gipping River.

Visual effects

6.9 Effects ranging from moderate to minor adverse on views from Norwich Road with the introduction of residential development. The combined influence on views would not be more than anticipated as a result of development of Site LA002 which has greater prominence in views from the junction with Barham Church Lane. The western boundary of the Site LA001 is relatively well contained so changes would be experienced to a greater degree towards the edge of Barham – Sandy Lane. The magnitude of change to views as a result of the framework masterplan would vary due to the varied extent of existing roadside vegetation along Norwich Road.

6.10 The effect on views from the Church of St Mary, Barham Church Lane and residential areas within Claydon to the south would be negligible as a result of development being obscured by proposed built form within Site LA002 and the rolling topography of the Appraisal Site and surrounding landscape. In combination, minor adverse to negligible effects would be experienced on views from the church due to the set back of development with proposed open space.

6.11 Moderate adverse effects on views from public rights of way to the north and east. The positioning of the developable area would reduce the magnitude of change with development set on lower parts of the Site and within the existing framework of hedgerows and trees. In views from the north, residential development would push closer to the public right of way reducing the extent of open farmland in the view. Due to the rolling topography, this would not obscure long distance views and a discernible break between settlement areas would be maintained.

6.12 In views from the public rights of way to the east, the towers of the church of St Mary (grade I) and Shrubland Hall (grade II*) would be maintained. In the cross valley views looking west, some of the facing valley slopes would be obscured. Proposed open space in the foreground and a positive development frontage would introduce some beneficial changes to views. The retention of mature trees and location of development away from the public right of way set behind existing and proposed tree belts within the masterplan, would prevent development becoming overbearing and would retain a wooded horizon line in the distance. The effects on views would be softened by retained and enhanced boundary treatments.

6.13 Minor adverse effects on views experienced from localised parts of the public rights of way crossing Shrubland Hall parkland. As with the proposed development within Site

24 LA002, built form would be glimpsed to the background of the view, particularly in winter. However, the more prominent field located to the north of the Appraisal Site and the mature trees within the Site would be maintained, preserving a sense of the rural context to the parkland. The in combination effects would remain Minor adverse.

6.14 Most of the adverse effects identified above would reduce significantly over time as planting around and within the development area matures.

25 7. Summary

7.1 An Outline Landscape Appraisal has been undertaken by a chartered landscape architect from Turley Landscape and VIA in relation to draft allocation Site LA001 – ‘Land East of Norwich Road, Barham’ within the emerging Mid Suffolk and Babergh District Council Joint Local Plan. The purpose of this Outline Landscape Appraisal is to inform a revised development concept plan for LA001 informing a revised northern boundary and its integration with the illustrative layout of LA002 (‘Land North of Church Lane, Barham’).

7.2 The assessment identified that the Site is not located within or in close proximity to any landscape designations of national importance. A Special Landscape Area is located to the west of the Site, which indicates a degree of value, but the Site does not represent the special qualities of the adjacent SLA. This local landscape designation is not retained in the emerging Local Plan. The Site itself comprises an area of arable farmland and smaller field of scrub and grassland with intermittent hedgerow field boundaries and tree belts. The Appraisal Site is partially enclosed by mature vegetation and local variations in topography. There are views across the site from the local public right of way network, Norwich Road and parts of the Shrubland Hall Registered Park and Garden.

7.3 The western side of the Appraisal Site was identified as being of lower landscape and visual sensitivity than the eastern side due to its lower ground levels and reduced visual connections with Shrubland Hall and the Church of St Mary.

7.4 The key landscape opportunities and constraints of the site were identified and a Framework Masterplan (Appendix 1) and development principles were prepared to illustrate the potential of the Appraisal Site to accommodate development in combination with proposed development at Site LA002. In order to ensure a comprehensive and coherent scheme across LA001 and LA002, while accommodating the requirements of LA001 and maintaining the existing character of the area without significant adverse effects on landscape and visual receptors, the northern boundary could be amended. A robust band of planting and positive frontage with green corridor should be created to the northern edge to enclose development and create a defined edge new edge to the settlement to maintain a sense of separation between settlement areas of Claydon and Barham – Sandy Lane.

7.5 Potential landscape and visual effects arising from introduction of development within the Appraisal Site, in combination with Site LA002 were identified. These were primarily restricted to effects on the character of the site itself and the immediate adjoining area and on close proximity views. It was identified that the development would be well-contained by surrounding landform and existing and proposed planting which would largely screen the development from surrounding heritage assets and the area of higher landscape value in the Gipping Valley SLA. Whilst development would be visible from the opposite valley side, it would reflect existing patterns of development in the area located to the lower valley slopes. Development would be glimpsed in views from localised areas of Shrubland Hall parkland (as is the case with development in Site LA002), but would not detract from the foreground view of the parkland landscape and

26 would preserve more prominent open areas of its agricultural context. Mitigation measures to reduce potential adverse effects in the long term were also identified and incorporated into the layout proposals. Overall, it was concluded that there is potential to accommodate residential development within the Site as part of a coherent masterplan approach without significant adverse landscape or visual effects on the wider area.

27 Appendix 1: Framework Masterplan

Site Boundary

Public Right of Way

Proposed Settlement Boundary

5m Contours

New Homes

Pre & Primary School Site Green Infrastructure and Amenity Space Meadow Grassland

SuDS Proposed Spine Road with pedestrian/ cycle Proposed Secondary/Tertiary Streets

Indicative building frontages 1 Retained Hedgerows 1 Proposed Hedgerow Planting 1 Landscaping Belt (c.20m in 1 width)

0 metres 250

(1:5,000)

Turley Office 8th Floor Lacon House 84 Theobald’s Road London. WC1X 8NL

T 020 7851 4010

Appendix 5: Response Form for LA001: Land East of Norwich Road, Barham