Development Management Development Plan (DPD)

Comment

Representation ID: 952

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Within the Option we suggest a new topic with wording to the effect 'The appraisal of existing conservation areas and potential new designations, as well as surveys to further identify buildings and assets of local importance, with effective policies for the management of all of these assets.'

Comment

Representation ID: 953

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

We also recommend the following in the suggested option:
Point 1. Add 'The effect on undesignated heritage assets will be assessed and considered when considering development proposals' (see PPS5, policy HE8.1).
Point 2. Add 'or their settings'.
Point 3. Refer to tests in PPS5, policy HE9.2, which include the need to demonstrate substantial public benefits of change, the need to prove that reasonable uses cannot be found, or uses in the medium term to enable conservation, or grant funding or charitable/public ownership are not possible, or the harm/loss is justified by finding a new use for a site.
Point 4. Add after appearance 'or setting of that conservation area.'

Comment

Representation ID: 954

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Historic Environment - Alternative options, p31
English heritage agrees that it would be inappropriate to omit historic environment policies. PPS5 advises that local planning documents should identify a positive and pro-active strategy to protect the historic environment. In Southend the heritage assets require further assessment and appropriate protection and enhancement to ensure that they make a strong contribution in future to local townscape character.

Comment

Representation ID: 955

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Historic Environment Development Plan Policy Linkages, p31/32
There are 6 saved local plan policies relating to the historic environment which should be referred to here. These are strong policies and we would like to ensure that the policy coverage that replaces them is appropriate to the positive approach set out in PPS5.

While the East of England Plan may not continue to have relevance, for the present we suggest that the historic environment policy ENV6 should be included here.

Comment

Representation ID: 956

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Question 24 - Are there any other historical issues that the Council should consider?
English Heritage has published an advice note on seaside towns and their common issues, which you may find useful (available on the HELM website). Other issues you may wish to consider: issues relating to coastal erosion, underwater archaeology (there are over 100 known wreck sites just off the coast of Southend), protection of the Pigs Bay Cold War Defence Boom, off Shoebury Ness (Scheduled Monument 35502). Potential impacts on these assets should be considered particularly in relation to water based recreational activity.

Comment

Representation ID: 957

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Issue DM6 - Alterations and additions to existing buildings, p32

Alterations and additions- suggested option, p33
English Heritage recommends that extra specific guidance should be provided to inform those considering alterations and additions to listed and locally listed buildings, and buildings in conservation areas.

Comment

Representation ID: 958

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

SECTION 5 THE SEAFRONT

In discussing the main functions of the estuary, there is a lack of consideration given to the historic environment, for example the grazing lands to the north of Southend are an area of high historical interest.

Comment

Representation ID: 959

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Issue DM8 - Seafront Public Realm and Open Space

The introductory paragraph on page 39 should include mention of the historic environment within the identification of other environmental resources of the area. This should also be brought forward into the bullet-pointed list lower down this page. It could be incorporated into the last two points.

Comment

Representation ID: 960

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Seafront public realm - suggested option, p40
The Seafront's 'special charm' is referred to (approach field, page 40) but a specific reference is needed here, and in the bullet points, to the importance of the protection and enhancement of the historic environment. PPS5 places particular emphasis on the contribution of the historic environment to sense of place.
Point 5 (p40) identifies that seafront development should not adversely impact on the Thames Estuary or Southend's beaches. This should also consider the impact on landward views from boats.

Comment

Representation ID: 961

Received: 19/10/2010

Respondent: English Heritage

Issue DM9 - The Seafront Character Zones

English Heritage suggests that these zones may need to be defined when the Borough Wide Character Study has been completed and that similarly, the long-term outcomes should evolve from these. We urge that the question of inter-visibility between the zones is considered and the wider settings of assets such as the Pier and Clifftown. Reference could be made to policy HE10.2 of PPS5, and to English Heritage's draft guidance on the Setting of Heritage Assets (available on the English Heritage website).