Object

Representation ID: 410

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There is potential for redevelopment of the site although there are heritage issues with the conservation area to the north and archaeology. Further site specific development criteria should be set.

Object

Representation ID: 411

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Development constraints mention the area of archaeological importance and adjoining Central Conservation Area but might also mention proximity of Burlington Road Conservation Area and St Matthews Church (Grade II*) to the west. The site allocation will need to be justified in terms of its heritage impacts and appropriate develoment criteria set if taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 412

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

This is a very sensitive site partly in Central Conservation Area, containing Grade II listed buildings and adjoining others. Archaeological issues include the Jewish Burial Ground. There are questions about how any redevelopment would respect this asset in terms of its significance and setting. The site allocation will need to be justified in terms of its heritage impacts, and appropriate develoment criteria set if taken forward, notwithsatnding the broader develpment principles set out in Chapter 7.

Object

Representation ID: 413

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

About half the site contains a scheduled monument (part of the Saxon town) which is not mentioned as a develoment constraint even though the archaeology of the site could greatly influence its redevelopment and could extend beyond the site. There is a risk that proposals could harm the significance of the scheduled monument, which may need to be excluded from the allocation boundary. Further assessment of the archaeology is recommended, and provision of archaeological guidance. The site allocation will need to be justified in terms of all its heritage impacts and appropriate development criteria set if taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 414

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Development constraints do not mention the Grade II* listed building to the north (No 24 Fore St) or scheduled monuments (Saxon & medieval defences) to the west of the site. The archaeological potential of the site will need to be understood, along with the impact on the significance and setting of the heritage assets. The site allocation will need to be justified in terms of its heritage impacts and appropriate develoment criteria set if taken forward, notwithstanding the broader development principles set out in chapter 7.

Object

Representation ID: 415

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Very sensitive site containing built heritage, scheduled monuments and archaeological potential. Archaeology could greatly influence its redevelopment, as it may extend beyond the scheduled areas. Recognition of, and development criteria for, scheduled monuments are needed to avoid risk of harmful proposals. Monuments may need to be excluded from allocation boundary and clear archaeology guidance given. Further assessment of archaeology is strongly recommended before allocation is finalised to ensure the site is justified. The site allocation will need to be justified in terms of its potential heritage impacts, and appropriate development criteria set if it is taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 416

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There is potential for the redevelopment of this site, although there are heritage issues. The development constraints mention these issues but appropriate development criteria must be set if the site is taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 417

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There is potential for the redevelopment of this site although there are heritage issues. The development constraints mention these issues, but appropriate development criteria must be set if the site is taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 418

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

This is a sensitive site within the Central and Wet Dock Conservation areas and opposite the Grade I listed and scheduled Wolsey Gate. The development constraints mention these issues apart from the scheduled monument, but further assessment of heritage impacts will be needed to justify the site for allocation. Appropriate development criteria will need to be set if the site is taken forward.

Object

Representation ID: 419

Received: 14/03/2014

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There is potential for redevelopment of the site although there are heritage issues with it. The development constraints mention these issues apart from the nearby scheduled monument but further assessment of heritage impacts will be needed to justify the site for allocation. Appropriate development criteria will need to be set if taken forward.