MM93.

We object to the local plan on the basis that it does not include land at Occold which we consider should be allocated for housing development. The land in question is shown edged red on the attached plan. Allocation of the land in question for housing development would help to maintain a balanced community in the village. Additional housing growth within the village would help to support local services and help to maintain a balanced community.

We object to the local plan on the basis that it does not include land at Occold which we consider should be allocated for housing development. The land in question is shown edged red on the attached plan. Allocation of the land in question for housing development would help to maintain a balanced community in the village. Additional housing growth within the village would help to support local services and help to maintain a balanced community.

We understand that the most significant modification proposed to the draft Plan is the deletion of the spatial distribution of housing (MM14), and site allocations policies (MM93). This is because existing completions, sites under construction, sites with full or outline planning permission, sites with a resolution to grant planning permission subject to s106 agreement, and allocations in made Neighbourhood Plans provide for the vast majority of Babergh and Mid Suffolk’s housing requirements across the Plan period. Consequently, the current Joint Local Plan (JLP) has become the ‘Part 1' local plan. This will be followed by the preparation and adoption of a 'Part 2' local plan which will address spatial strategy matters and include housing allocations if necessary, to sufficiently provide for the housing requirements of the whole Plan period.
Although not specifically relevant to the Part 1 local plan, we would take this opportunity to remind you that we would expect Historic England to be consulted on all sites being considered for inclusion in the Part 2 Plan at the appropriate time, including those we have already provided formal comments for in order to take account of any material changes that may have occurred in the intervening time.
A case in point is the site at Brantham (LA053 - land south of Ipswich Road). Historic England has in recent months been engaging in pre-application discussions with the promoter of this site. In the interests of clarity, we thought it would be helpful to set out our current position.
As you are aware Historic England had previously objected in principle to the allocation of LA053 on the basis that development would result in harm to the significance of the Grade II* listed Church of St Michael and All Angels by introducing built development into its immediate/agricultural setting.
However, pre application discussions have since demonstrated that impacts on the significance of the church could be reduced to a moderate level of less than substantial harm by reducing the extent of built development. It is therefore feasible that the site could accommodate some built development subject to design considerations if it were to be reviewed as part of the preparation of the Part 2 Plan. Historic England will provide further advice regarding site-specific proposals as the Part 2 Plan evolves.
As you develop the Part 2 Plan spatial strategy, we would remind you that harm to the historic environment should be avoided in the first instance (remembering that significance can be harmed by development within the setting of heritage assets). An assessment of impacts upon townscape, historic landscape and historic assets should be included in any future assessment of route and infrastructure options. This may necessitate the preparation of additional Heritage Impact Assessments to understand the significance of assets and the likely impact of proposed development upon that significance.